Syracuse Orange: Other ACC athletics directors miss the mark on NIL

Syracuse Orange athletics director John Wildhack has said he supports name, image and likeness options. Other athletics directors should, too.

Last year, Syracuse Orange athletics director John Wildhack went on the record in saying that he supports name, image and likeness (“NIL”) rights for student-athletes.

I applaud Wildhack for this. While the NIL issue is a complex one, student-athletes absolutely, positively must have the ability to earn endorsement income from their own name, image or likeness. They should have possessed this option a long, long time ago.

Particularly as it pertains to college football and basketball, head coaches and assistant coaches make enormous salaries. Athletics directors at Power Five conferences, including the Atlantic Coast Conference, where the ‘Cuse is a member, command substantial salaries, too.

These coaches and ADs are collecting massive incomes mainly because of the revenue that arrives from these student-athletes – again, primarily in collegiate football and hoops – playing their respective sports year after year and receiving no compensation for their efforts.

Yes, the bulk of student-athletes receive a valuable scholarship and perhaps other stipends, but as far as the millions upon millions of dollars that flow to coaches, administrators and others, the players don’t get squat. It’s unfair, a bunch of non-sense, and utter exploitation.

So here we are, and the NCAA is working to have NIL legislation in place for the 2021-22 academic year, although details still have to get ironed out. What’s more, commissioners of the Power Five conferences are reportedly asking federal lawmakers to not wait for the NCAA’s process to play out before passing a national NIL law.

Syracuse Orange athletics director John Wildhack supports NIL options, but other ACC athletics directors are voicing concerns.

Earlier this week, Duke athletics director Kevin White put out a tone-deaf statement, saying he is “deeply concerned about the potential consequences of legislation permitting student-athletes to profit from the use of their name, image, and likeness.”

White, in his statement, cites “the potential for abuse of NIL legislation.” He references the NCAA Student-Athlete Advisory Committee, which he says has expressed its concern over NIL legislation having “potential unintended consequences,” such as “unfair recruiting and competitive advantages, difficulty monitoring compensation and ethics, unequal treatment of female athletes, and exploiting of athletes.”

Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion, but it’s astonishing to me that White actually had the audacity to bring up the exploitation of student-athletes in his statement, when he makes a ton of money at the expense of football and basketball players, among other student-athletes, who get nothing.

I’m not demeaning the importance of a scholarship, but major colleges and universities rake in millions of dollars annually due to the talents of their players. The student-athletes see none of this money, so at a minimum, they should be able to earn endorsement income.

Bubba Cunningham, athletics director at another big-name ACC school, North Carolina, has expressed his own concerns over NIL legislation, and Cunningham is mentioned in White’s statement.

Late last year, when the NCAA’s board of governors unanimously voted to start the process to enhance NIL opportunities, Wildhack put out a statement at the time that said in part, “We appreciate and support the NCAA Board of Governors’ recent action that paves the way for student-athletes to benefit from the use of their name, image and likeness in a manner consistent with the collegiate model.”

Hopefully, Wildhack continues to maintain this perspective. Some of his athletic-director colleagues in the ACC, however, need to rethink their points of view.