Ohio is at the center of a growing national debate over the role of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) rights for young athletes - and now, some lawmakers want to shut it down at the high school level.
State Representatives Adam Bird (R-New Richmond) and Mike Odioso (R-Green Twp.) have introduced House Bill 661, a piece of legislation that would prohibit high school and middle school athletes in Ohio from profiting off their NIL. The move would reverse the state’s current policy, which allows student-athletes to engage in NIL deals - a stance Ohio shares with 44 other states.
Bird, speaking at a press conference, framed the bill as a return to what he sees as the core mission of high school sports: education and development. “The purpose in Ohio high school sports should be about a learning experience that is an extension of the classroom,” he said. “We don’t spend public taxpayer money on stadiums and on weight rooms and on gymnasiums in order for them to be able to earn employment and earn an income.”
That perspective has drawn both support and criticism. Supporters argue the bill protects the amateur nature of youth sports. Opponents say it limits opportunities for talented young athletes - especially those who could benefit financially from the platform their athletic ability provides.
Tim Stried, spokesperson for the Ohio High School Athletic Association (OHSAA), acknowledged the proposed legislation but emphasized a key distinction: “NIL at the high school level in Ohio is very different than what we see at the college level,” he said in an email. The OHSAA has been navigating the NIL landscape carefully, especially since a Franklin County judge issued a temporary restraining order in October that blocked the association from enforcing its NIL ban.
That legal challenge came after Jasmine Brown filed a lawsuit on behalf of her son, Jamier Brown - a top-ranked wide receiver and Ohio State commit from Wayne High School in Huber Heights. Jamier is transferring to Big Walnut High School in Sunbury for his senior year and, according to the lawsuit, has already lost out on over $100,000 in potential NIL deals.
In November, OHSAA member schools voted on an emergency referendum that allowed NIL deals for high school athletes. The results were clear: 447 schools voted in favor, 121 opposed, and 247 abstained. That vote signaled broad support among schools for giving student-athletes more control over their personal brand.
Still, Bird believes the legislative branch should have the final say. “We should not be making decisions in the state of Ohio based on one judge in one county,” he said during a House Education Committee meeting. “The state legislature should weigh in on decisions that they support with tax dollar revenue.”
Bird insists the bill isn’t about denying students the right to earn money. Instead, he says it’s about preserving the amateur status of high school and middle school athletes. “If a student in Ohio is so talented that they can be gainfully employed by the use of their athletic talents,” he said, “then they should leave their high school team and join a professional tour, professional league, or obtain a NCAA NIL deal.”
Odioso, a former teacher and football coach at St. Xavier High School in Cincinnati, echoed Bird’s concerns - particularly about the age and maturity of the athletes involved.
“We’re talking about seventh graders. We’re talking about eighth graders.
We’re talking about freshmen,” he said. “They are emotionally and psychologically unprepared for this.
They’re not going to be able to handle it.”
He also warned of a potential “underground transfer portal,” where wealthy alumni or outside influencers could lure young athletes to switch schools in exchange for NIL opportunities - a scenario he believes would only intensify under the current rules.
Recruiting is already happening in Ohio, Bird said, and NIL could accelerate that trend. “This NIL change will undoubtedly make it way worse,” he told the committee.
“Wealthy alumni will be the recruiting agent for their alma mater and will use the lure of NIL payments to direct students to transfer to a certain school. … This is about protecting our children from what I would believe are some predators out there that would like to take advantage of that child’s athletic ability.”
Not everyone on the committee agreed.
State Rep. Sean Brennan (D-Parma) raised a pointed question: how is this any different from a student earning money playing music on the weekends?
“Who are we as a legislature to be able to tell young people how they’re allowed to monetize their skills on their own time?” Brennan asked.
“This is outside of the school day as well. They can’t do it during the school day.”
Odioso countered with what he sees as a key distinction. “Are guitar players being recruited to go to different schools?”
he asked. “I think that’s the biggest difference I can think of.”
As the debate continues, House Bill 661 puts Ohio at a crossroads - between protecting the traditional structure of high school sports and recognizing the evolving landscape where young athletes are increasingly seen as marketable brands. The question isn’t just whether NIL belongs in high school sports. It’s whether the system can evolve to support student-athletes without compromising the values that high school athletics were built on.