There’s no need to rush on the House v. NCAA arrangement: Universities in California may now instantly compensate their athletes. That’s the siren call of an opened letter released Wednesday by California state Legislators Nancy Skinner and Steven Bradford, the cooperative writers of the Fair Pay to Play Act, the nation’s second NIL act. As part of expenses, which was enacted in September 2019, California schools can instantly provide into NIL talks with their players and recruits, without the need for a third-party shared. But, that feature seems to have flown under the radar, according to the politicians. “We are … writing this letter because California colleges and universities do not appear to be maximizing this aspect of SB 206, ” Skinner and Bradford wrote. The text was co-signed by Ramogi Huma, senior director of the National College Players Association, and competitive analyst Andy Schwarz, both of whom were driving forces behind the policy. The NIL direct-pay delivery within the act became a moving point during the legislative procedure again in 2019. Unfortunately, a bargain was struck, allowing primary NIL payments to university athletes simply once they became enrolled in a school. Skinner and Bradford wrote that the precise timing of their available text corresponds to the impending nationwide recruiting periods on Nov. 13 ( for all sports besides football ) and Dec. 4 ( football only ). Meanwhile, Virginia ( April ), Illinois ( August ) and Georgia ( last month ) have enacted targeted legislation that specifically allow their schools to enter into direct NL deals with players while forbidding the NCAA or conferences to punish them for doing so. But according to Skinner and Bradford, California was first to the blow. To date, there are to no publicly known cases of any school engaging an athlete in such an arrangement, suggesting that the hang-ups for institutions go beyond having their says ’ agreement. However, Huma sees the beginnings of a similar, state-by-state ripple effect for immediate athlete give related to what transpired five years ago with NIL, upon SB 206 being signed into law. “Any state that does n’t have a similar law is putting their colleges at a severe disadvantage in recruiting and retaining their athletes, ” Huma said in a statement. Since passing the nation’s first NIL law, California has seen its forerunner status slip, as the House settlement and other states have advanced the pay-to-play ball beyond the NIL. This past summer, a college athlete revenue-sharing bill, proposed by Assemblymember Chris Holden, met its legislative demise. Skinner is due to retire from her Senate seat in early December, when her current term ends, while Bradford is currently running for lieutenant governor. In August, the California legislature overwhelmingly approved an NIL transparency bill put forward by the duo, which would require schools in the state to publicize each year anonymized, aggregated data of their athletes ’ NIL deals by sport and gender.