Testimony highlights from Illinois AD Josh Whitman on paying players

College athletics are in a weird place right now, but that doesn’t necessarily mean a bad place.

Universities like Illinois are going through changes. At one time in history, coaches were given bans and players suspended for selling some of their memorabilia. Now, there are websites set up for that type of thing, and there are Name, Image, and Likeness collectives that can funnel money to players for one reason or another.

Times are changing rapidly, and Illinois athletic director Josh Whitman wants to throw his voice into the mix.

On Monday, Whitman was in Washington D.C., to present his testimony to the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee, Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade. The hearing was on NIL and the reshaping of college athletics.

Whitman went over his background and why he is giving his testimony on the state of college athletics. There are also some important bulletins in this testimony.

Key points from Illinois athletic director Josh Whitman to Congress

• Josh Whitman is embracing change

While I would think most athletic directors want things to go back to the old ways, Whitman does not. He even goes as far as saying, “…you will not hear me defend the outdated virtues of amateurism…” That is a pretty big statement that you don’t hear often.

"Despite being a product myself of our collegiate athletics system and an unabashed advocate for the continued intersection of education and sport, you will not hear me
defend the outdated virtues of amateurism, a concept with an ever-evolving definition that has outlived its useful purpose."

Josh Whitman, Page 3

• The House settlement lawsuit numbers laid out

Whitman talked with more detail about the House settlement lawsuit that is coming down the pipeline. Some big numbers that piqued my interest were 22% of average commercial revenue can be distributed to student-athletes. He also gives the number of $20.5 million in the first year per school.

"Under the terms of the House settlement, schools will have the option, but not the requirement, to distribute to student-athletes an amount equal to 22% of the average commercial revenues (e.g., sponsorship, ticket sales, and media revenues) at approximately 70 of the nation’s most highly resourced athletics programs, including ours at Illinois. In the 2025-2026 academic year, the House settlement’s first year of anticipated implementation, that figure will be $20.5 million per school, with built-in growth during the ensuing years."

Whitman, Page 6

• Uniform legislation is a goal

From my understanding, Whitman doesn’t want this to be a state-by-state case. He wants uniform legislation so there isn’t a competitive imbalance with states that prop up NIL and states that don’t.

"Such laws began by allowing student-athletes to take full advantage of NIL opportunities and have evolved to restrict the NCAA and conferences from enforcing rules. We cannot compete on a national stage with such divergent laws benefiting certain members while disadvantaging others."

Whitman, Page 8

• Pro paying athletes doesn’t mean make them employees

While Whitman is for paying athletes through a revenue sharing model, he still doesn’t want the student-athletes to be considered employees. His reasoning is that the smaller schools have less resources and therefore, it would be bad for them because they would have to put more resources into athletes. This would likely eliminate opportunities for athletes in smaller sports at these schools.

"At the same time, the intensifying clamor for student-athlete employment would be catastrophic for the vast majority of the NCAA’s membership, most of which are not resourced at the level of Illinois and our Autonomy 4 brethren, likely resulting in thousands of lost opportunities for student-athletes."

Whitman, Page 7