The new constitution draft released Tuesday loosened the definition of acceptable athlete compensation.

The governing body didn’t give much of an explanation for the edit, saying in a letter to members that it “allows for evolution while still prohibiting pay-for-play.”

At first glance, the change itself may seem small. But it could open the door for a shift in the definition of amateurism.

• The draft’s original language prohibiting salaries stayed the same. It reads, “student-athletes may not be compensated by a member institution for participating in a sport.”
• The original draft allowed for only two exceptions: educational benefits and NIL. 
• But the new draft broadened the language, and took out the specification of NIL altogether. Now, it only says athletes “may receive educational and other benefits.”

The most likely motivation is seeking legal cover by using the broadest possible language to limit athlete compensation — a potential necessity in the wake of the Alston decision.

The NCAA most definitely will never allow players to receive direct salaries, unless it’s forced by Congress, the courts, or the NLRB. But the change could give divisions more freedom than ever to get creative about player compensation. 

Of course, there’s no guarantee that divisions will take this opportunity to institute more radical compensation reform.

The first draft asked that divisions write consistent NIL “regulations.” But that may not be possible.

The new draft tempered the language, asking divisions to provide only suggestions. It states: “Each division shall establish guidelines regarding student-athlete benefits, including commercialization of name, image or likeness.”

As usual, the change is necessary in order to keep the NCAA from baiting a lawsuit.

• The Alston decision implied it would be illegal for the NCAA to institute association-wide NIL rules. That also might apply to the division level. 
• Both legal experts and NCAA members have acknowledged this roadblock.
• In a press conference after the Constitutional Convention, NCAA President Mark Emmert said that the members would have to make sure that every aspect of the constitution “comports” with the Alston decision. 

And even if division-specific NIL regulations were legal, they still might not make sense logistically.

During the Constitutional Convention, at least two Power 5 conference executives noted that different NIL state laws would make it impossible to create blanket regulations for schools in different states.

Now, the governing body is back to square one. It’ll have to wait for Congress to pass a federal law.