NIL and the Amateur Player

[Tom Bacsanyi]

Help me understand something.


I just saw Gordon Sargent on a FootJoy commercial. His ability to be a college golfer but also be sponsored by FootJoy is due to the newish NCAA rules around "Name, Image, and Likeness" or NIL.


My question is, how can he play in a USGA event as an amateur, yet be sponsored by Footjoy and be compensated based on his golf abilities. Shouldn't he be considered a professional under USGA rules?


If Gordon Sargent can be sponsored by Footjoy yet retain amateur status, why can't career amateurs such as Stewart Hagestad be sponsored/endorsed?


I guess I don't get it? Lawyers of GCA (actual and clubhouse) please help me out.

[Matt_Cohn]

I believed the USGA changed their rules when the NCAA did so that there would not be a conflict between the two sets of rules. Amateur golfers of any age can receive NIL compensation.


With that in mind, my direct messages are open. 

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I believed the USGA changed their rules when the NCAA did so that there would not be a conflict between the two sets of rules. Amateur golfers of any age can receive NIL compensation.

Correct. NIL isn't just an NCAA thing. That's just where most will have the opportunity to see it happening.

There are still things you can't do: accept prize money (over a certain amount), call yourself a pro, be paid for a lesson, enter the PGA program (exceptions for PGM students at accredited PGM programs/colleges)… etc.

[Paul Jones]

A collegiate golfer will remain an amateur golfer provided all three of the following apply:

• The NIL-related actions are allowed under the NCAA’s interim policy,

• He or she remains on a team roster while the NIL-related activities take place, and

• There are no other breaches of the Rules of Amateur Status in connection with the NIL activities. An example of this would be providing golf instruction, which while ok per the NCAA is not allowed under the Rules of Amateur Status.

[/list]

[Daryl David]

 I assume Stewart Hagestad could profit over the NIL as much as he would want if he found someone that wanted to pay.

[Jeff Evagues]

I assume Stewart Hagestad could profit over the NIL as much as he would want if he found someone that wanted to pay.

It appears under the previous post he has to be on an NCAA team.

[Tom Bacsanyi]

I assume Stewart Hagestad could profit over the NIL as much as he would want if he found someone that wanted to pay.

It appears under the previous post he has to be on an NCAA team.

So Stew is out of luck. Guess he'll have to remain buried in spreadsheets!


If it is true that an amateur has to be on a college team to get NIL money, then it seems that any career amateur that no longer has any NCAA eligibility is getting screwed.


I will cry no tears for the career amateur, but the whole thing just seems like nonsense. I think the notion of what constitutes a professional should be anyone that profits directly from their golfing ability, above a certain threshold. Whether that is prize money, lessons, or simply FootJoy contracts. It shouldn't matter.

[Matt_Cohn]

No, those are the rules for collegiate golfers. If you’re not a collegiate golfer, your actions don’t have to comply with NCAA rules. All amateur golfers can accept NIL deals.


http://www.golfdigest.com/story/usga-ra-amateurs-rules-change-2021/amp

[Erik J. Barzeski]

No, those are the rules for collegiate golfers. If you’re not a collegiate golfer, your actions don’t have to comply with NCAA rules. All amateur golfers can accept NIL deals.

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/usga-ra-amateurs-rules-change-2021/amp

Thank you for posting that. I was certain when I posted above and back in 2021/2022 that it wasn't just for college students, but then earlier this morning I started to wonder if I hadn't been wrong as almost every article you'll find talks about college golfers only… but, yeah, it covers players outside of college, too.

Thanks.

[JohnVDB]

You can be paid for advertising anything.  As of 2022 you are an amateur golf unless you do one of the following:


All golfers are amateurs unless they:
[/color]Accept a prize that is not allowed under Rule 3: Prizes,
[/font][/size]

• Play in a golf competition as a professional,

• Accept payment or compensation for giving instruction that is not allowed under Rule 4: Instruction,[/font][/size]

• Are employed (including being self-employed) as a golf club or driving range professional, or

• Hold membership of an association for professional golfers.

• [/color]
  An amateur who takes any of these actions becomes a non-amateur and remains a non-amateur until being reinstated as an amateur (see Rule 5: Reinstatement as an Amateur Golfer).[/font][/size]

[Steve Lang]

    So anyone can market their NIL, a certain subset of amateur players can maintain their status following the rules, and if I understood Phil, the PGA Tour players can't use the NIL from PGA Tour play... are the "kids" being taught tax filing requirements?

[Wayne_Kozun]

So you could make tens of millions for NIL by doing ads, etc.  But teach a lesson for $50 any you lose amateur status?
Does that make sense?
They should get rid of the whole amateur - pro thing.  It is a 19th century class artifact that no longer makes any sense.  The big Am competitions should then become U22 competitions, which they pretty much are anyway.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

So you could make tens of millions for NIL by doing ads, etc.  But teach a lesson for $50 any you lose amateur status?
Does that make sense?

It does to me.

Take J.R. Smith, for example. He could make a bunch of money on endorsement deals… while still not having done anything of note to be a "professional golfer" or a "golf professional." Or look at some of the golf influencers: should they be classified as pros?

The dividing line is what you're making your money from. You can't make your money directly from golf (as in prize money, or teaching a lesson), but if you're just "famous" or "attractive" or whatever, and you happen to also play golf, then you're being paid for being famous/attractive/whatever with golf as the background. In J.R. Smith's case, it's barely even that.

They should get rid of the whole amateur - pro thing.  It is a 19th century class artifact that no longer makes any sense.  The big Am competitions should then become U22 competitions, which they pretty much are anyway.

And the mid-am? There are also plenty of state and city/local amateur championships. Should local PGA pros and mini-tour players and so on be eligible for them, too? Don't you think participation by actual amateurs might decline if that was the case?

[Rob Marshall]

How is playing in the US Am getting paid $100,000 to use a bag with Boeing on it not making money from playing golf? It makes no sense to me.

[Wayne_Kozun]

So you could make tens of millions for NIL by doing ads, etc.  But teach a lesson for $50 any you lose amateur status?
Does that make sense?

It does to me.

Take J.R. Smith, for example. He could make a bunch of money on endorsement deals… while still not having done anything of note to be a "professional golfer" or a "golf professional." Or look at some of the golf influencers: should they be classified as pros?

The dividing line is what you're making your money from. You can't make your money directly from golf (as in prize money, or teaching a lesson), but if you're just "famous" or "attractive" or whatever, and you happen to also play golf, then you're being paid for being famous/attractive/whatever with golf as the background. In J.R. Smith's case, it's barely even that.

They should get rid of the whole amateur - pro thing.  It is a 19th century class artifact that no longer makes any sense.  The big Am competitions should then become U22 competitions, which they pretty much are anyway.

And the mid-am? There are also plenty of state and city/local amateur championships. Should local PGA pros and mini-tour players and so on be eligible for them, too? Don't you think participation by actual amateurs might decline if that was the case?

I am fine with PGA pros and mini-tour players playing in Mid-Am events.  Many PGA teaching pros are not as good as top level amateurs.  I have played in Pro-Am events at my club where the Pros were local club pros, often assistant or associate pros, where several of them would shoot in the mid 80s.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I am fine with PGA pros and mini-tour players playing in Mid-Am events.  Many PGA teaching pros are not as good as top level amateurs.  I have played in Pro-Am events at my club where the Pros were local club pros, often assistant or associate pros, where several of them would shoot in the mid 80s.

Your area isn't representative of the rest of the country. I'm not in support of your position on this at all.

[RKoehn]

My opinion only.  OEM support (free equipment, heavily discounted equipment) and NIL (actual cash payment) is fantastic for the game of golf for numerous reasons:

• It grows the game. Junior golf, college golf and amateur golf are extremely expensive to play, particularly at the highest levels that require high entry fees, air travel, hotels, rental cars.  Easily can cost $25-50k/year, depending on which tournaments are played and where the player is located.  For parents of juniors who cannot work from the road, the missed work is a huge additional expense.
• Major golf OEMs began supporting highly ranked junior golfers over a decade ago, and that dynamic has accelerated in recent years with all major OEMs sending reps to bigger junior tournaments.  Heavily discounted and/or free equipment is extremely helpful to families, particularly as juniors and college players need to update their equipment often as they develop, grow, get stronger.  For high level amateurs, the retail cost of a premium driver with a Ventus shaft is about $950 - that is a single club in the bag.  Premium irons are $200 per club.  Putters can be $300+ each.  Golf balls are $50-60/dz.  Gloves are $25 each.  Shoes are $150 per pair.  Range balls at a public course can be $10 per bucket.  Green fees, membership dues are prohibitive for many families.
• When junior, collegiate and amateur players align themselves with equipment companies, they have extra incentive to conduct themselves well as they are representing a brand.  This adds to maturity and responsibility.
• When it comes to NIL, there is a big difference between being a star college football player on TV every weekend to being a top college golfer with minimal recognition.  There may be exceptions for the top 1 or 2 professional golf prospects, but these dollars are fairly small.  If you're in college and have to play 5-7 big independent amateur events every year, how are they supposed to pay for this?  Usually it is the parents still helping out.  From what I understand, very, very few amateur golfers receive actual cash payments right now, and those that do are relatively small dollars.

The USGA is beginning a program for juniors called the U.S. National Development Program to help provide access and financial support to top young players.  This is a fantastic idea, and should be great for the game of golf. https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/usndp-home-page.html

In a world where the lines are already blurred between amateur and professional (what % of this week's US Mid Am field are reinstated pros? what % of international athletes attending U.S. colleges receive support from their home countries?), providing the ability for top players to offset enormous costs to play the game seems like a very healthy step, particularly if we can all agree that growing the game as widely as possible should be the goal.

Just one opinion, I know many others will disagree.

[Mike_Trenham]

You can be paid for advertising anything.  As of 2022 you are an amateur golf unless you do one of the following:


All golfers are amateurs unless they:
Accept a prize that is not allowed under Rule 3: Prizes,

• Play in a golf competition as a professional,

• Accept payment or compensation for giving instruction that is not allowed under Rule 4: Instruction,

• Are employed (including being self-employed) as a golf club or driving range professional, or

• Hold membership of an association for professional golfers.

• 
  An amateur who takes any of these actions becomes a non-amateur and remains a non-amateur until being reinstated as an amateur (see Rule 5: Reinstatement as an Amateur Golfer).

Bullet point three above seems very difficult to define and I can think of a few high profile mid-ams in history that would clearly be in the gray area on this short definition.

[Peter Flory]

I think they are a bit antiquated still on the teaching pro angle.  I don't mind playing in an amateur tournament against a teaching professional who has never played in a professional tournament for prize money.  I think they have a carve out for Golf Tech employees or something- gray lines there. 


It used to be that caddies and club makers were deemed professionals too, which made no sense. 

[John Kavanaugh]

Where does the anger come from?

[Mike Wagner]

Help me understand something.


I just saw Gordon Sargent on a FootJoy commercial. His ability to be a college golfer but also be sponsored by FootJoy is due to the newish NCAA rules around "Name, Image, and Likeness" or NIL.


My question is, how can he play in a USGA event as an amateur, yet be sponsored by Footjoy and be compensated based on his golf abilities. Shouldn't he be considered a professional under USGA rules?


If Gordon Sargent can be sponsored by Footjoy yet retain amateur status, why can't career amateurs such as Stewart Hagestad be sponsored/endorsed?


I guess I don't get it? Lawyers of GCA (actual and clubhouse) please help me out.

The USGA reminds me a lot of the CDC.

[Wayne_Kozun]

It used to be that caddies and club makers were deemed professionals too, which made no sense.

Also Architects.  I believe Tillinghast had a fight with the USGA over this issue.

[Sean_A]

My opinion only.  OEM support (free equipment, heavily discounted equipment) and NIL (actual cash payment) is fantastic for the game of golf for numerous reasons:

• It grows the game. Junior golf, college golf and amateur golf are extremely expensive to play, particularly at the highest levels that require high entry fees, air travel, hotels, rental cars.  Easily can cost $25-50k/year, depending on which tournaments are played and where the player is located.  For parents of juniors who cannot work from the road, the missed work is a huge additional expense.
• Major golf OEMs began supporting highly ranked junior golfers over a decade ago, and that dynamic has accelerated in recent years with all major OEMs sending reps to bigger junior tournaments.  Heavily discounted and/or free equipment is extremely helpful to families, particularly as juniors and college players need to update their equipment often as they develop, grow, get stronger.  For high level amateurs, the retail cost of a premium driver with a Ventus shaft is about $950 - that is a single club in the bag.  Premium irons are $200 per club.  Putters can be $300+ each.  Golf balls are $50-60/dz.  Gloves are $25 each.  Shoes are $150 per pair.  Range balls at a public course can be $10 per bucket.  Green fees, membership dues are prohibitive for many families.
• When junior, collegiate and amateur players align themselves with equipment companies, they have extra incentive to conduct themselves well as they are representing a brand.  This adds to maturity and responsibility.
• When it comes to NIL, there is a big difference between being a star college football player on TV every weekend to being a top college golfer with minimal recognition.  There may be exceptions for the top 1 or 2 professional golf prospects, but these dollars are fairly small.  If you're in college and have to play 5-7 big independent amateur events every year, how are they supposed to pay for this?  Usually it is the parents still helping out.  From what I understand, very, very few amateur golfers receive actual cash payments right now, and those that do are relatively small dollars.

The USGA is beginning a program for juniors called the U.S. National Development Program to help provide access and financial support to top young players.  This is a fantastic idea, and should be great for the game of golf. https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/usndp-home-page.html

In a world where the lines are already blurred between amateur and professional (what % of this week's US Mid Am field are reinstated pros? what % of international athletes attending U.S. colleges receive support from their home countries?), providing the ability for top players to offset enormous costs to play the game seems like a very healthy step, particularly if we can all agree that growing the game as widely as possible should be the goal.

Just one opinion, I know many others will disagree.

Grow the game? Isn't that just playing? Do we need to give money to kids to play? I hardly ever buy the grow the game argument. Besides, we don't know if NIL grows the game or how to measure that growth assuming it does exist.

Ciao

[Jason Topp]

While I somewhat agree with the grow the game skepticism, I do like the potential for a middle class talented kid to get the resources to compete at a high level without significantly stressing the family finances. 

[Tim Gavrich]

The thing that confuses me is how there are college head and assistant coaches who are able to retain amateur status while, as previously mentioned, someone who gives a $50 putting lesson is a professional. College coaches are giving instruction - a form of professional advice - to golfers for a salary.


Plus, those who think that some pros should be allowed in mid-amateur events and the like should take comfort in the fact that the mid-am ranks are increasingly full of reinstated professional golfers, some of whom made hundreds of thousands of dollars playing the game in their careers.