I have argued that the state minimum should be the floor, not the goal. That idea does not stop at grades, eligibility, or school systems. It also applies to how Idaho should think about NIL.

If the next phase of athletics is going to involve more money, more visibility, and more pressure, then opportunity by itself cannot be the mission. Preparation, guardrails, and student protection have to come first.

That matters because the national NIL era is not settled. It is still being fought over, reshaped, and challenged in real time. President Trump’s April 3 executive order on college sports addressed pay-for-play schemes, transfers, eligibility, and federal pressure on schools. Whatever people think of the order politically, it makes one thing clear: this is no longer just a branding conversation. It is now a policy and student-protection issue.

That should get Idaho’s attention.

At the high school level, Idaho still has a guardrail. Under current IHSAA rules, a student forfeits amateur status by receiving money, compensation, endorsements, or gifts tied to the student’s school team, school, league, district, or the IHSAA. The same rules also say this is not meant to ban a commercial endorsement with no school, team, district, league, or IHSAA affiliation. In plain language, school-connected high school NIL is effectively barred today, even though unrelated commercial activity is not automatically banned.

That distinction matters because this should not turn into a lazy “NIL is bad” argument. Athletes should be able to benefit from their value. College sports have already moved into a new financial era after the House settlement, which permits schools to share revenue directly with athletes up to an annual cap of $20.5 million in 2025-26. But the same settlement also opened the door to more uncertainty, including conflicts with state NIL laws and likely new litigation.

That litigation is not hypothetical. AP reported in February that there appears to be no end in sight for lawsuits over athlete compensation, player contracts, and eligibility. The article pointed to transfer-related contract fights and repeated legal challenges to NCAA eligibility rules, with one sports-law professor calling the expectation of post-settlement stability “a spectacular miscalculation.”

That is why Idaho should not wait until the pressure gets louder to decide what it stands for.

Idaho lawmakers seem to understand that this issue is bigger than one school or one headline. Senate Joint Memorial 114 urges Congress to create a national framework for NIL and revenue sharing. The memorial argues that the current system creates uncertainty, imbalance, and financial risk, and it cites Boise State athletics as generating an annual economic impact of $350 million for Idaho.

So the real question is not whether NIL exists. The real question is whether Idaho is going to learn from the national mess before importing the wrong parts of it.

If this state ever moves toward broader athlete-compensation opportunities, especially at younger levels, it should not begin with deals. It should begin with guardrails: contract literacy, financial literacy, tax awareness, agent and advisor oversight, clear lines between legitimate opportunity and disguised recruiting inducement, and clear protections against adults using young athletes as leverage, marketing tools, or quick-profit projects before they are ready.

It should also include adult education, not just student education. Parents need to understand what they are signing. Coaches need to know what they can and cannot touch. Schools need compliance systems before public pressure grows louder. Communities need to understand the difference between helping students and commercializing them too early.

That is where the national conversation has often gone wrong. Money moved faster than standards. Opportunity moved faster than education. Attention moved faster than infrastructure.

Idaho does not need to chase the loudest version of NIL. It needs to build the smartest one.

Because the state minimum should be the floor, not the goal. In this era, opportunity without guardrails is just another way to leave young people exposed instead of prepared.

If Idaho is going to step further into this conversation, it should do it the same way it should approach student readiness everywhere else: with higher standards, stronger support, and a system built to protect the future before it tries to profit from the moment.

Alex Moore is a coach, father, and founder of Knox•Moor Institute / Diamond Cutz Academy. He writes from personal experience in athletics and youth development and is focused on helping student-athletes build stronger habits in the classroom, in competition, and in life.