“I like NIL,” says athletic director Nina King. “True, pure NIL – what it was supposed to be: Athletes having an opportunity to profit off their own name, learn how to build their brands. To market themselves, make money, pay taxes, sign contracts. All those things.”
Of course, she says, pure NIL zipped past in seconds: “College athletics, its nature is we are always trying to get one up on each other. Right? How are we going to figure out how to use the rules to our advantage and beat the other school?” And so the search for that competitive advantage “morphed into collectives, boosters paying student athletes, and really, now it is just trying to keep up.”
She felt she was actually keeping up with NIL, but then came the settlement of the House v. NCAA case in May, which took the final step toward athletics programs paying college athletes. Part of that settlement involves each school being allowed to spend up to $20 million per year sharing revenue with athletes.
Great! So who gets what? Football, basketball, track, rowing – each sport has claims and desires. Toss Title IX – which prohibits discrimination based on gender – into the mix and try to figure out how to fairly spread the wealth. Where will those 20 million extra dollars come from, and how will she distribute them?
As answer she flashes a smile. “Uh-huh,” she nods brightly. “How do you put that in quotes?”
It’s a time of chaos and uncertainty – this she comfortably admits. To feel her way forward, she says, she reverts to Duke principles.
“We are recruiting athletes based on the whole package,” she says. “We’re not bringing them here because of NIL, because of Aaron Dinin’s class, because of Cameron. We’re preparing you for life after Duke. That includes how to fuel your mind and your body, as an athlete, as a student. How to prepare for life.”
