NIL Branding Opportunities: Context Is Key

A recent article by Josh Astin and Andrew Nevill in The Indiana Lawyer offers a timely reminder for anyone advising in the name, image, and likeness (NIL) space: opportunity is abundant, but it is not without constraint.

While NIL rights have expanded rapidly since 2021, the authors underscore that where and how branding appears remains heavily regulated. In particular, NCAA rules continue to limit third-party commercial visibility during competition, drawing a sharp distinction between permissible manufacturer logos and restricted sponsor branding.

Just as important, the article highlights a layer that is often overlooked in deal structuring—institutional apparel agreements. These contracts can effectively override athlete-level NIL arrangements, requiring the use of specific brands during competition and limiting conflicting endorsements.

For practitioners, the takeaway is practical: NIL deals must be evaluated against a hierarchy of obligations that includes NCAA rules, conference guidance, and school-level contracts. The most effective strategies account for these constraints upfront and shift value creation to non-competition settings, where athletes retain greater flexibility.

Astin and Nevill’s piece is a useful, concise guide to the evolving NIL landscape—and a reminder that successful branding strategies depend not just on the deal itself, but on the context in which it operates. To read the full article, visit The Indiana Lawyer