Ohio lawmakers are wrestling with two clashing Republican bills about name, image, and likeness (NIL) deals for high school athletes. Ohio House Bill 661 aims to ban these deals outright.
Meanwhile, Ohio House Bill 745 would set up rules to let student-athletes earn money under certain conditions. This is all happening as part of a bigger national debate—Ohio is one of 45 states where high school athletes can make NIL deals.
Whatever happens here could shape the future of high school sports in Ohio, for better or worse.
Ohio House Bill 661: The Case for a Ban on NIL Deals
Ohio House Bill 661, brought forward by State Reps. Adam Bird and Mike Odioso, would completely ban NIL deals for high school and even middle school athletes. The bill’s already seen six hearings in the Ohio House Education Committee.
Supporters think this would let Ohio set a strong example for the rest of the country. They want to put student protection and education first, and maybe they’ve got a point.
Arguments in Favor of the Ban
Mason City Schools Superintendent Jonathan Cooper testified that the bill could help Ohio build a model that puts student-athletes and their education ahead of everything else. Ohio House Speaker Matt Huffman agrees that NIL deals are a problem for high schoolers, though he’s not pretending it’s simple.
He admits it’s tough to draw clear lines. There’s a lot of gray area here.
Not long ago, a Franklin County judge blocked the Ohio High School Athletic Association (OHSAA) from enforcing its NIL ban. This was after Jasmine Brown sued on behalf of her son, Jamier Brown, a top-ranked wide receiver and Ohio State Buckeyes commit.
The lawsuit argued that Jamier missed out on more than $100,000 because of the ban. That’s a staggering number for a high schooler.
Ohio House Bill 745: Establishing Guardrails for NIL Deals
On the flip side, Ohio House Bill 745—introduced by State Reps. Tex Fischer and Phil Plummer—would let high school athletes earn money from NIL deals, but only if they follow certain rules. This bill hasn’t had any hearings yet, but it’s on the schedule for when the House meets in May.
Provisions of Ohio House Bill 745
Here’s what House Bill 745 would require for NIL deals:
- Written Contract: Athletes need a written contract that matches fair market value.
- Parental Consent: If the athlete’s under 18, a parent has to sign off.
- Prohibited Situations: The bill bans NIL money in cases like:
- Getting paid for a specific athletic performance or achievement.
- Trying to lure a student-athlete to a particular high school.
- When someone other than the athlete would benefit.
- Giving perks straight to the athlete’s school or team.
- Deals that mess with required classroom time.
- Anything clashing with the school’s mission or code of conduct.
- Anyone from the school being involved in the deal.
- Promoting stuff like alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, gambling, adult entertainment, or firearms.
Rep. Tex Fischer says most NIL deals in Ohio aren’t exactly raking in big bucks. Usually, it’s less than $1,000.
He mentioned examples like a student-athlete getting $150 for a donut named after them at a local shop, or a football team scoring free pizza for posing on a flyer. Not exactly life-changing, but maybe meaningful to those kids.
The Broader Impact and Future Considerations
This NIL debate isn’t just an Ohio thing. Since Ohio allows these deals, whatever lawmakers decide could ripple across the country.
The OHSAA says that out of 350,000 student-athletes, only 32 NIL deals have actually happened. Maybe this whole thing isn’t as widespread as some people worry.
National Implications
Former state Rep. Eugene Miller, who’s running for Ohio House District 20, thinks high school athletes shouldn’t be penalized just because they’re marketable. He points out that other students can make money at part-time jobs—why not athletes?
A lot of folks agree that NIL deals are a fair way for student-athletes to benefit from their own talents. Still, there’s plenty of uncertainty.
Ohio House Speaker Matt Huffman says the issue is complicated and wants the OHSAA to lay out some clearer rules. He’s not wrong—finding the right balance is tricky.
The OHSAA knows about both bills but hasn’t said much else. Guess we’ll have to wait and see what happens next.
Conclusion
The debate about NIL deals for high school athletes in Ohio is getting complicated. Lawmakers are trying to figure out how to balance money-making opportunities with the importance of school.
Ohio House Bill 661 would ban NIL deals altogether. Meanwhile, Ohio House Bill 745 wants to set up some rules, letting student-athletes benefit but only in certain situations.
The Ohio House is set to meet again in May. Whatever happens next could set the tone for other states facing the same questions.
If you want to dig deeper, check out the full article at the Ohio Capital Journal.
- 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
