Ohio High School Athletic Association (OHSAA) Executive Director Doug Ute recently spoke to the Ohio House Education Committee about name, image, and likeness (NIL) in high school sports.
This conversation comes after NIL became allowed in Ohio high schools in November 2025.
Ute’s testimony shed some light on how NIL is affecting student-athletes right now, and what House Bill 661 might mean for them.
The bill aims to ban NIL compensation for middle and high school athletes in Ohio.
Understanding NIL in Ohio High School Sports
Since NIL rules took effect, the OHSAA has seen just 32 NIL agreements among around 350,000 student-athletes.
Most of these deals are small—think commission-based promos shared on social media, nothing flashy.
They’re usually worth less than $1,000, giving students a chance to try out business skills within some clear boundaries.
The Debate Over House Bill 661
House Bill 661, brought forward by State Representatives Adam Bird and Mike Odioso, would ban NIL compensation for student-athletes in Ohio’s middle and high schools.
Bird voiced worries that Ohio schools don’t want to follow the NIL route, mentioning Florida’s messy experience as a warning.
Odioso agreed, referencing a Florida high school basketball coach who called the state’s NIL rollout a “huge mess.”
Testimonies and Perspectives
At the second hearing for the bill, seven people testified, including Ute and Ronald Sayers, OHSAA Senior Manager of Eligibility and Technology, who spoke as interested parties.
Five others, like Columbus attorney Luke Fedlam, opposed the bill.
Fedlam, who represented high school wide receiver Jamier Brown in a lawsuit against the OHSAA, argued that regulation, education, and enforcement work better than just banning NIL outright.
OHSAA’s Approach to NIL
After a membership vote against NIL in 2022, the OHSAA kept talking with school leaders and looking at what’s working across the country.
In November 2024, they put together a committee of 25 school administrators to review policy options, which led to the current setup:
- Prohibiting collectives
- Requiring disclosure to the OHSAA office
- Protecting school intellectual property
- Limiting compensation to legitimate personal branding activities
Ute pointed out that these rules aim to stop recruiting, pay-for-play, and turning high school sports into a business, all while keeping the spirit of interscholastic athletics intact.
Impact on OHSAA Operations
Asked about how House Bill 661 would affect the OHSAA, Ute said it’d have little operational impact since so few NIL deals exist.
He also addressed concerns about more students transferring, noting the OHSAA already deals with 1,100 to 1,400 transfers each year and doesn’t expect NIL to make that worse.
National Context and Future Directions
Ohio ranks third in high school sports participation across the country, just behind Texas and California. As more states allow NIL, Ute thinks Ohio’s current rules find a decent middle ground.
He believes they’re protecting student-athletes while still keeping high school sports fair. Ute emphasized the need for ongoing talks with school leaders and legal experts as things keep changing nationwide.
If you’re curious about Doug Ute’s testimony or want to dive deeper into the NIL debate in Ohio high school sports, check out the full article here.
- Schools Covered
- College Football Articles
- Men's College Basketball Articles
- Men's College Soccer Articles
- Women's College Basketball Articles
- Olympic Athlete Articles
- Men's College Baseball Articles
- College Sports Media Professionals Articles
- Hall of Fame Member Articles
- Former College Player Articles
- Game Previews
