Citing Boise State, Idaho Legislature urges Congress to create NIL ‘consistency’
The Idaho Legislature introduced a joint memorial on Wednesday urging Congress to take immediate federal action to provide clarity and consistency in college athletics surrounding Name, Image and Likeness, and revenue sharing.
The joint memorial, sponsored by Sen. Ben Adams, R-Nampa, and Rep. Brent Crane, R-Nampa, explicitly mentions the economic impacts of Boise State athletics on the state and how BSU is being left out of important discussions surrounding NIL by the “Power Two” and “Power Four” institutions.
The Power Four conferences are the SEC, Big Ten, Big 12 and ACC. The “Power Two” mentioned likely refers to the SEC and Big Ten, which have taken steps to consolidate power in recent years because of their football success.
Boise State will be competing in the revived Pac-12 starting in July, a conference attempting to be reborn after most of its members disbanded in 2024, marking an end to what was a power conference.
Adams, who went to BSU, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The memorial cites President Donald Trump’s 2025 Saving College Sports executive order, which aims to limit third-party “pay-for-play” NIL deals, create fair-market NIL payments, and protect women’s and Olympic sports.
More than 30 states, not including Idaho, have introduced laws regulating NIL, creating a “patchwork” network across the country.
The memorial asks that Congress “establishes a single, uniform national framework for NIL and revenue sharing that preempts conflicting state laws and allows universities to operate under clear, predictable rules rather than through an ever-expanding patchwork of mandates and litigation.”
The memorial, which serves as a message and carries no legal weight, also mentions the impact Boise State has.
Nationally, it includes the Boise State football team’s top-five national win percentage since 1996, the football team’s longest active streak of winning seasons (28), and the program’s 63 conference championships among women’s sports.
On the state level, the memorial notes that Boise State brings in “an annual cumulative economic impact of $350 million” and that Boise State home events had “485,000 attendees” in 2025, enhancing tourism, hospitality and small-business revenue.
The memorial also mentions that for every $1 invested into Boise State athletics, an estimated $2 is returned through “added economic activity, tax revenues, and public sector savings.”
The memorial does not mention the University of Idaho or Idaho State, which compete at the FCS level in football.
“This Joint Memorial highlights how institutions like Boise State represent something bigger than ourselves, but operate in an industry that lacks consistency and stability. We cannot choose to live in insanity,” Boise State Athletic Director Jeramiah Dickey told the Statesman in a statement.
The Boise State football team has lost key contributors in recent years to Power Four programs, including punter James Ferguson-Reynolds (Oregon), wide receiver Prince Strachan (USC), linebacker Andrew Simpson (North Carolina) and All-Mountain West safety Ty Benefield (LSU).
It’s not certain NIL benefits are the only reason those players departed, but there’s no doubt that schools such as Boise State are at a disadvantage, even though they have sustained success outside of the Power Four structure.
Under the NCAA’s revenue-sharing model, which allows schools to make direct payments for players up to $20.5 million per year, it’s estimated that so-called Group of Six schools — which include Boise State — averaged payments of $3.2 million in the 2025-26 academic year.
For Power Four programs, it’s estimated that all schools reached the $20.5 million cap.
Additionally, these revenue-sharing numbers don’t include third-party NIL payments, which can provide a significant advantage to schools with a large alumni base — or with wealthy benefactors, which has been the case at Oregon (Phil Knight) and Indiana (Mark Cuban), for instance.
“We stand to create a system that creates a path of opportunity for schools that choose to invest, maintain a high level of competitive excellence, and serve the institutions and communities we are a part of,” Dickey said. “As an industry, we need a clear set of federal rules to clarify how we can operate and help us continue to better the lives of our student-athletes.”
