Monday is the final day that the 817 member schools of the OHSAA will have the opportunity to vote on the approval of a Name, Image, and Likeness proposal that mirrors changes made at the collegiate level in the last year.

If the proposal passes, Ohio could be the 10th state to approve NIL regulations.

The proposed addition would allow student-athletes to sign endorsement agreements so long as their teams, schools and/or the OHSAA logo are not used and provided there are no endorsements with companies that do not support the mission of education-based athletics (casinos, gambling, alcohol, drugs, tobacco).

I see where this idea is coming from. With how college athletes have benefitted at the next level, it is only natural to see this trickle down to high school athletics.

But, let’s be honest, is it really needed?

To my knowledge, there are only a few high school athletes in recent history that a rule like this could really apply to — think 5-star basketball recruit Mikey Williams from San Diego, Zion Williamson, current UConn star Paige Bueckers or even LaMelo Ball in their high school days. They were kids that were known across the country.

Outside of superstar athletes like these four benefitting from their social media status, which is becoming more and more prevalent these days, there aren’t many high school athletes that would benefit from Name, Image and Likeness. I believe it would be more of a tool for high schools to bring in talent and bolster athletic programs.

Look at the college level right now. There are athletes transferring left and right looking for their next opportunity to make a paycheck, which I don’t think we can blame them for. At that level, primetime athletes are bringing in crowds and revenue for programs and they are truly deserving of it, but I don’t think it’s the same at the high school level. In college you see the rich get richer and a rule like this could muddle the waters even more at the high school level.

In the middle of April, our very own Steve Ruman checked in with coaches and athletic directors from around the Mahoning Valley and the response to the proposal possibly being passed was mainly negative. One response from Warren G. Harding athletic director Bill Nicholson stuck out to me the most.

“I’m old-school,” Nicholson said. “I just think you play for the love of the game at the high school level. I just don’t see any good coming from this.”

The part that sticks out to me the most is “You play for the love of the game at the high school level,” and it’s honestly the truest part of this whole ordeal.

For most athletes, high school is the last time they’ll have an opportunity to play any sport in a competitive atmosphere. Some will go on to play at the next level, but at that point athletics become more of a job, and most college athletes can probably attest to that. High school athletics are the last place where kids can take the field with their childhood friends and enjoy the sport that they love together. Simply put, let kids be kids.

So why ruin that with a proposal that could change the landscape of high school sports as we know it?

Although it’s changed things at the next level, with the amount of revenue that college athletes bring into their programs, it’s almost deserved. But, at the high school level it’s a completely different story.

For most small schools in our area, not much would change, but when you look into the bigger cities, where bigger programs have bigger booster programs, a lot could change and it might not be for the better.

gmacafee@tribtoday.com