Last week, Vice had a report on what , a charity which was going to crowdfund pay-for-play college athletics. Two problems though. First, is not a charity, it is a for-profit company. And second, it was not the NCAA attacking FanPay directly for their busine s model, but schools and conferences objecting to the use of student-athlete names, imagesand likene ses.Yesterday, the NCAA addre sed FanPay directly in an . Officially, the NCAA says crowdfunding to pay a student-athlete is impermi sible. But right within the Educational Column, the NCAA reveals why it might be powerle s to stop FanPay Daniel Munyer Jersey and similar campaigns.MORE: | The basic idea behind FanPay is that fans, alumni, family, and friends will pledge money to a student-athlete who can receive that money after graduation. Previously, you could sign up for FanPay and pledge fake money to athletes as FanPay tests the site. What prompted the backlash from schools was the use of student-athlete names, imagesand likene ses. That is reiterated in the NCAAs crowdfunding Q&A:Question No. 2: Is a student-athlete permitted to use his or her name or picture to advertise or promote a for-profit crowdfunding service?Answer: No. A student-athlete is not permitted to use his or her name or picture to advertise, recommend or promote directly the sale or use of a commercial product or service of any kind including a crowdfunding entity. A promotion would include a student-athletes name or picture appearing on a Eddie George Jersey commercial product or service of any kind including a crowdfunding entity.Question No. 3: Is a student-athlete ineligible for intercollegiate competition if his or her name, picture or likene s appears on a crowdfunding website?Answer: No, a student-athletes eligibility would not be impacted until he or she is aware that his or her name or picture appears on a crowdfunding website. Once the student-athlete or the institution become aware that the student-athletes name or picture is being used to promote a crowdfunding entity, the student-athlete (or the institution acting on behalf of the student-athlete) is required to take steps to stop such an activity (e.g., send a cease and desist letter) in order to retain his or her eligibility for intercollegiate athletics. If a student-athlete knowingly permits a crowdfunding entity to use his or her name or picture to promote the sale of a commercial product or service, the student-athlete shall not be eligible for participation in intercollegiate athletics based on current NCAA legislation.What happened with FanPay is no different than what happens to a T-shirt shop that tries to use a student-athletes name or nickname. The school sends cease and desist letters and threatens legal action until the busine s complies. FanPay has decided to by removing student-athlete names and likene ses and opening the service to all college students while removing student-athletes for the time being.But what about the core idea itself? Lets imagine that we could wish away all the NIL (name, image, likene s) i sues and were left with just the core question: can a site run crowdfunding campaigns to pay student-athletes? The NCAAs short answer is no:Question No. 4: Even if a student-athletes name, picture or likene s is D'Onta Foreman Jersey not being used to promote a crowdfunding entity, is a crowdfunding entity permitted to offer a student-athlete compensation for his or her participation in intercollegiate athletics?Answer: No. A student-athlete who uses his or her athletics skill (directly or indirectly) in a sport for any form of pay loses amateur status and is not eligible for intercollegiate competition in that sport.But the longer answer starts to get more complicated.Question No. 5: Is a student-athletes eligibility affected if a crowdfunding entity solicits funds during the student-athletes collegiate enrollment that are earmarked for the student-athlete upon graduation or exhaustion of athletics eligibility?Answer: Once the student-athlete accepts the promise of pay, the student-athlete has jeopardized his or her eligibility for intercollegiate athletics, even if the funds will not be disbursed until after completion of his or her intercollegiate athletics participation. (emphasis added)The NCAA requires an affirmative action from the Austin Fort Jersey student-athlete before the crowdfunding campaign makes them ineligible. So if a crowdfunding campaign was run totally independently of the student-athlete, the institution, and anyone connected to either (family, friends, or boosters), theoretically the campaign does not jeopardize the student-athletes eligibility. Even if the NCAA prohibited student-athletes from accepting the funds after graduation, in our idealized scenario there is no person or entity the NCAA could reasonably punish once the student-athlete has graduated.Getting rid of the name, image, likene s i sues might be easier than it appears. FanPay or any other company does not need an NCAA rule change or court decision that allows athletes to profit off their NILs. All they need is a court decision that says only the student-athlete may enforce or protect their NIL rights. To keep the status quo would then require the NCAA to make one of two highly unpoplar changes: either to require institution to unambigiously acquire a sweeping license to their student-athletes NILs or to require that student-athletes themselves police unauthorized use of their NIL.After such a decision and a suming no change in NCAA policy, institutions could send whatever cease and desist letters they want but it would be much more difficult to threaten actual legal action. A crowdfunding site might then be able to use student-athletes names, images, and likene ses to run campaigns with impunity. So long as student-athletes do not even acknowledge the campaign, it is hard to picture how the NCAA would punish a student-athlete or Teair Tart Jersey institution when the former athlete requests the money after graduation.What is needed then is a version of FanPay with the will and the war chest nece sary to stand up to the NCAA and institutions and say they cannot enforce student-athlete name, image, and likene s rights. And what should be most troubling for the NCAA in a time where legal and political opinion may be swinging away from them is that technology may trump it all and make NCAA amateurism even le s enforceable than it is today.