re: Are NIL deals structured like common employment agreements?

quote:

---

How’s that work

---

Because you are paying for use of the athlete's Name, Image, and/or Likeness, which they personally own regardless of where they play ball (or it they play at all)...not their performance. A contract in exchange for specific performance is akin to an employment contract. Which is unauthorized in college sports. The players aren't "employees."

For example, if you (car dealership owner) signs a player to a contract that allows you to use the player's NIL to promote your business, that player still owns his NIL whether he plays for LSU, Alabama, Texas, USC, etc. So if you are locked into, say, a 3 year contract with the player and he decides to transfer to a different school they dealership owner would still be obligated to abide by the contract even though the player is no longer at the dealer's preferred school. But if you put in terms that ties the contract to the player playing for a specific school, it could be looked upon as an unauthorized "pay for play" contract. That's why most NIL deals are very short in duration (6 months to 1 year). No one wants to be forced to pay a guy who transferred and is now playing for your rival school.

Now, we all know in practice it is a pay-for-play agreement. But the terms of the contract can't be structured as such. Why? Because college players aren't, and can't be "employees"