
Argument over 'valid business purpose' for NIL collectives threatens college sports settlement
Less than two weeks after terms of a multibillion-dollar college sports settlement went into effect, friction erupted over the definition of a 'valid business purpose' that collectives making name, image and likeness payments to players are supposed to have.
The new College Sports Commission sent a letter to athletic directors last week saying it was rejecting deals in which players were receiving money from collectives that were created solely to pay them and don't provide goods or services to the general public for profit.
A lead attorney for the players responded by saying those instructions went against settlement terms and asking the CSC to rescind the guidance.
'This process is undermined when the CSC goes off the reservation and issues directions to the schools that are not consistent with the Settlement Agreement terms,' attorney Jeffrey Kessler wrote to NCAA outside counsel Rakesh Kilaru in a letter obtained by The Associated Press.
Yahoo Sports first reported details of the letter, in which Kessler threatens to take the issue to a judge assigned with resolving disputes involved in the settlement.
Kessler told the AP that his firm was not commenting on the contents of the letter, and Kilaru did not immediately respond to the AP's request for comment.
Yahoo quoted a CSC spokesman as saying the parties are working to resolve differences and that "the guidance issued by the College Sports Commission ... is entirely consistent with the House settlement and the rules that have been agreed upon with class counsel.'
When NIL payments became allowed in 2021, boosters formed so-called collectives that were closely tied to universities to work out contracts with the players, who still weren't allowed to be paid directly by the schools.
Terms of the House settlement allow schools to make the payments now but keep the idea of outside payments from collectives, which have to be approved by the CSC if they are worth $600 or more.
The CSC, in its letter last week, explained that if a collective reaches a deal, for instance, for an athlete to appear on behalf of the collective, which charges an admission fee, that collective does not have a 'valid business purpose' because the purpose of the event is to raise money to pay athletes, not to provide goods or services available to the general public for profit.
Another example of a disallowed deal was one an athlete makes to sell merchandise to raise money to pay that player because, the CSC guidance said, the purpose of 'selling merchandise is to raise money to pay that student-athlete and potentially other student-athletes at a particular school or schools, which is not a valid business purpose."
Kessler's letter notes that the 'valid business purpose' rule was designed to ensure athletes were not simply being paid to play, and did not prohibit NIL collectives from paying athletes for the type of deals described above.
To prevent those payments 'would be to create a new prohibition on payments by a NIL collective that is not provided for or contemplated by the Settlement Agreement, causing injury to the class members who should be free to receive those payments," Kessler wrote.
___
AP college sports: https://apnews.com/hub/college-sports
recommended
Item 1 of 3
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Republicans declared it 'crypto' week in the House. It's not going as planned
WASHINGTON (AP) — A trio of cryptocurrency bills that had been expected to pass the House this week stalled on Tuesday after a bloc of Republicans unexpectedly joined with Democrats to prevent the legislation from coming up for debate and votes. The procedural snafu brought the House's so-called 'crypto week' to a standstill — and dealt a blow to President Donald Trump, who had strongly urged Republicans to pass the bills as part of his push to make the U.S. the ' crypto capital of the world.' A group of 13 Republicans joined all Democrats in opposition to a procedural vote needed to bring the crypto bills to the floor. Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters it was just part of 'legislative process' and that negotiations were underway between the House, Senate and White House. He suggested they could try again Tuesday evening. 'We expected there might be some 'no' votes, but we thought it was important to put it on the floor to advance it because time's of the essence on this,' Johnson said. 'So stay tuned. We'll have lots of discussions over the next few hours.' But just hours later, House leadership canceled votes for the remainder of the day, potentially throwing the crypto bills into limbo. The stalled legislation includes a Senate-passed bill to regulate a form of cryptocurrency known as stablecoins, along with far more sweeping measures aiming to address cryptocurrency market structure. Another bill would prohibit the Federal Reserve from issuing a central bank digital currency. The disagreement blocking the bills from advancing centers on how the three bills would be passed. Johnson explained that 'some of these guys insist that it needs to be all in one package.' Packaging the bills would require them to be sent back to the Senate, since the chamber has only taken up one of the three bills so far. Rep. Glenn Thompson of Pennsylvania, a Republican co-sponsor of one of the cryptocurrency bills, told reporters that some of the Republicans wanted to package the bills together due to them 'not having a lot of faith in the Senate moving our legislation.' Trump and Republican leaders have called on the House to pass the bills individually, so that the stablecoin legislation can get to Trump's desk for his signature before an August recess. The stablecoin legislation took the Senate nearly a month and half to pass, and the more sweeping market structure legislation is expected to take even longer. In a post Tuesday morning on social media, Trump called on Republicans to advance the crypto bills that afternoon, saying that 'all Republicans should vote 'yes.'' Asked Tuesday evening about the stalled legislation, Trump told reporters that Republicans who voted against it wanted it to be 'stronger.' Trump has pushed hard for the passage of the stablecoin legislation, with him and his family standing to profit from a boost to stablecoins. They hold a significant stake in World Liberty Financial, a crypto project that recently launched its own stablecoin, USD1. The stablecoin legislation passed by the Senate includes a provision that bars members of Congress and their families from profiting off stablecoins. But notably, that prohibition does not apply to the president or his family, even as Trump builds what some are calling a crypto empire from the White House. The cryptocurrency industry hopes the bills as a whole will aid in their push for legitimacy and increasing consumer trust. And road bumps like those seen Tuesday may not have been expected after spending heavily in the 2024 election to elect a large number of crypto-friendly lawmakers. Faryar Shirzad, chief policy officer of Coinbase, the nation's largest cryptocurrency exchange, said in a statement after the failed procedural vote that 'every few steps forward there's inevitably a step back.' 'It's in these moments we'll see who is trying to get pro-crypto legislation done and who is not,' Shirzad said on social media. Passage of the bills could have implications on the 2026 midterm races. Fairshake, a crypto super political action committee, said that it and its affiliated organizations already have more than $140 million in the bank ready to spend on midterm races. 'The voters last year were clear — Congress needs to stop playing politics with crypto and finally pass responsible regulation,' said Josh Vlasto, spokesperson for Fairshake. 'We are building an aggressive, targeted strategy for next year to ensure that pro-crypto voices are heard in key races across the country.'


Hamilton Spectator
2 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Wimbledon men's final between Sinner and Alcaraz on ESPN draws most viewers since 2019
BRISTOL, Conn. (AP) — Jannik Sinner's victory over Carlos Alcaraz was the most-viewed Wimbledon men's final since Novak Djokovic edged Roger Federer in a five-set thriller in 2019. ESPN said Sunday's match averaged 2.9 million viewers, a 31% increase over last year's final and its best performance since about 3.8 million watched Djokovic win a fifth-set tiebreaker in a match between two of tennis' greatest champions. The network also said Tuesday that ratings were up for the both the men's and women's semifinals. The women's semis, which included American Amanda Anisimova upsetting No. 1 Aryna Sabalenka , averaged 897,000 viewers, the most since 2015, when Serena Williams was part of the final four. The men's average of 1.31 million was the highest since 2019. ___ AP tennis:


San Francisco Chronicle
2 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Wimbledon men's final between Sinner and Alcaraz on ESPN draws most viewers since 2019
BRISTOL, Conn. (AP) — Jannik Sinner's victory over Carlos Alcaraz was the most-viewed Wimbledon men's final since Novak Djokovic edged Roger Federer in a five-set thriller in 2019. ESPN said Sunday's match averaged 2.9 million viewers, a 31% increase over last year's final and its best performance since about 3.8 million watched Djokovic win a fifth-set tiebreaker in a match between two of tennis' greatest champions. The network also said Tuesday that ratings were up for the both the men's and women's semifinals. The women's semis, which included American Amanda Anisimova upsetting No. 1 Aryna Sabalenka, averaged 897,000 viewers, the most since 2015, when Serena Williams was part of the final four. The men's average of 1.31 million was the highest since 2019. ___