The Sky Is Not Falling: Why Name, Image, and Likeness Legislation Does Not Violate Title IX and Could Narrow the Publicity Gap Between Men’s Sport and Women’s Sport Athletes

For decades, the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s (“NCAA”) amateurism rules have largely prevented NCAA athletes from commercializing their names, images, and likenesses (“NIL”). The right to license and profit from one’s own image, often referred to as the “Right of Publicity,” is explicitly recognized by statute or common law in 35 states. No federal Right of Publicity statute exists, but in 1977, the United States Supreme Court recognized the right. However, until 2021, NCAA athletes were precluded from benefiting from this right, as under the NCAA’s amateurism principle, “An individual loses amateur status and thus shall not be eligible for intercollegiate competition in a particular sport ...” if he “[u]ses athletics skill (directly or indirectly) for pay in any form in that sport.” Until July 1, 2021, by becoming an NCAA athlete and complying with the NCAA’s Bylaws to maintain eligibility, NCAA athletes gave up their right to benefit from their NIL while competing in NCAA athletics. This relinquishment put full commercial marketing control of the athlete, their team, and the college sport in the NCAA’s hands. Research shows that despite the application of Title IX to sport in 1975, NCAA women’s sports have not been commercially marketed in parity with NCAA men’s sports, with NCAA men’s sports experiencing significant publicity and sponsorship windfalls. This article examines the recent decision by the NCAA to allow NCAA athletes to benefit from their NIL, the potential Title IX implications of the decision, and how the decision could narrow the publicity gap between NCAA men’s and women’s sport athletes in furtherance of the plain language and intent of Title IX.

Epidemiology of NCAA Bone Stress Injuries: A Comparison of Athletes in Divisions I, II, and III

Background: Bone stress injuries (BSIs) are a major source of functional impairment in athletes of all sports, with many risk factors, including athlete characteristics and type of sport. In National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) athletics, the stratification of programs into divisions with different characteristics and makeup has been identified as increasing the risk for certain kinds of injuries, but there have been no studies on the difference of BSI rates and characteristics between athletes in Division I (DI) and those in Divisions II and III (DII and DIII). Purpose/Hypothesis: To characterize the BSI rates in each division and compare the incidence and characteristics of BSIs within divisions. Our hypothesis was that BSI rates would be higher in DII and DIII athletes as compared with DI athletes. Study Design: Descriptive epidemiology study. Methods: Five years of recorded BSI data in collegiate athletes via the NCAA Injury Surveillance Program were examined for the academic years 2009-2010 to 2013-2014. BSI rates per 100,000 athlete-exposures (AEs) were compared for DI versus DII and DIII athletes using risk ratios and 95% CIs. Time lost to injury, time of season of injury, and class composition of injured athletes were also compared between divisions. Results: Over the 5 years studied, DII and DIII programs reported 252 BSIs more than 1,793,777 AEs (14.05 per 100,000 AEs), and DI programs reported 235 BSIs over 2,022,592 AEs (11.62 per 100,000 AEs). The risk ratio was significant for D1 versus DII and DIII (1.21; 95% CI, 1.01-1.44). There was a significant difference in time lost to injury in DI versus DII and DIII, χ2(5, n = 449) = 16.54; P = .006. When data were stratified by individual sport, there were no significant divisional differences in high-risk sports. Conclusion: In the current study, NCAA DII and DIII athletes had higher rates of BSI than their DI counterparts. As compared with DII and DIII athletes, the DI athletes had a significantly greater proportion of BSIs that did not result in absence from participation in sport.

Epilogue

The epilogue turns its attention to Host’s perception of current events and issues about which he is passionate. He addresses problems that are keeping Kentucky from making greater progress, as well as his role in Shaping Our Appalachian Region (SOAR), Kentucky Wired, and the Lexington Urban League. Host expresses his desire for the commonwealth to provide greater support to the University of Kentucky, with a view to making it an elite research university. He also shares his opinions on the current state of NCAA athletics and its governance structure and voices his support for student athletes’ right to control their own likenesses and promote commercial products. Host argues that this would encourage student athletes to stay in school rather than leaving college to become professional athletes. Host concludes the epilogue by thanking the many individuals who have played an important role in his life and professional career.

A Benford Analysis of National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I Finance Data

The Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act (EADA) database and the USA Today NCAA athletics department finance database are two of the most commonly used databases for scholars, policy makers, and other constituents interested in studying the economics of college athletics. Many in the higher education community, however, question the validity of these databases. This study used Benford’s Law of First Digits as a tool for spotting irregularities in EADA and USA Today college athletics financial data. After reviewing 5 years of data, the findings show that while there was some slight deviation from Benford’s Law, EADA and USA Today data largely conformed to the expectations of Benford’s Law.

Student Athlete Compensation: An Alternative Compensation Model for All Athletes Competing in NCAA Athletics

The Ed O’Bannon (O’Bannon v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, 2015) case has brought student athlete compensation to the national spotlight. While the NCAA continues to defend its policy of amateurism, the time for college athlete compensation may soon become a reality. College athlete compensation models have previously included a revenue sharing model similar to that of professional sports leagues. While this model was worthwhile, it only took into account basketball and football. The current paper will argue for a market-economy based compensation model. This model takes into account the revenues generated by each university team, while also accounting for a player and team’s performance. Justifications for this model will be explored, as this model will allows for various options for athlete compensation. This paper will conclude with an example of the model’s utility through using publically accessible data for a major Division-1 college program.

Epidemiology of Quadriceps Strains in National Collegiate Athletic Association Athletes, 2009–2010 Through 2014–2015

Context: Few researchers have examined the rates and patterns of quadriceps strains in student-athletes in the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA).Objective: To describe the epidemiology of quadriceps strains in 25 NCAA sports during the 2009–2010 through 2014–2015 academic years.Design: Descriptive epidemiology study.Setting: Convenience sample of NCAA programs from 25 sports during the 2009–2010 through 2014–2015 academic years.Patients or Other Particpants: Collegiate student-athletes participating in men's and women's NCAA athletics during the 2009–2010 through 2014–2015 academic years.Main Outcome Measure(s): Aggregate quadriceps strain injury and exposure data from the NCAA Injury Surveillance Program during the 2009–2010 through 2014–2015 academic years were analyzed. Quadriceps strain injury rates and injury rate ratios (IRRs) were reported with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).Results: Overall, 517 quadriceps strains were reported, resulting in an injury rate of 1.07/10 000 athlete-exposures (AEs). The sports with the highest overall quadriceps strain rates were women's soccer (5.61/10 000 AEs), men's soccer (2.52/10 000 AEs), women's indoor track (2.24/10 000 AEs), and women's softball (2.15/10 000 AEs). Across sex-comparable sports, women had a higher rate of quadriceps strains than men overall (1.97 versus 0.65/10 000 AEs; IRR = 3.03; 95% CI = 2.45, 3.76). The majority of quadriceps strains were sustained during practice (77.8%). However, the quadriceps strain rate was higher during competition than during practice (1.29 versus 1.02/10 000 AEs; IRR = 1.27; 95% CI = 1.03, 1.56). Most quadriceps strains occurred in the preseason (57.8%), and rates were higher during the preseason compared with the regular season (2.29 versus 0.63/10 000 AEs; IRR = 3.60; 95% CI = 3.02, 4.30). Common injury mechanisms were noncontact (63.2%) and overuse (21.9%). Most quadriceps strains restricted participation by less than 1 week (79.3%).Conclusions: Across 25 sports, higher quadriceps strain rates were found in women versus men, in competitions versus practices, and in the preseason versus the regular season. Most quadriceps strains were minor in severity, although further surveillance is needed to better examine the risk factors associated with incidence and severity.