Diadora and Marathon Sports to Award $40,000 to First HS Athletes to Break 4:00 and 4:35 Mile

All the back and forth, but this !

Do any of the top returners already have deals? Two of the top 5 returners are from Iowa. How is this possible?

You think anyone in the NCAA would want to go to court over some high school NIL deal given their recent history is losing?

Again all NIL are for past athletic performance. How is this any different? Because the numbers were made public? If we look at the discussions about who is let into the Nike elite program, if anyone says he ran 4:02 isn't that the exact same thing? Or are we going to pretend Nike, new balance and the rest aren't picking people based on performance .

Lawyer is likely right. Nevertheless, GREAT marketing as at least the high school kids are talking about a brand that is not as well known.

So who has the best chances to beat those times first?

TOP RETURNERS:

GIRLS:
1 4:34.87 Elin Latta
2 4:35.64 Braelyn Combe
3 4:35.78 Lily Alder
4 4:37.08 Chiara Dailey
5 4:37.65 Paige Sheppard
6 4:37.75 Ellery Lincoln
7 4:37.99 Blair Bartlett
8 4:41.00 Ryin Miller
9 4:41.36 Gianna Rahmer
10 4:41.74 Mary Nesmith

BOYS:
1 3:57.28 Quentin Nauman
2 4:00.97 Jackson Spencer
3 4:01.19 Benjamin Adams
4 4:01.44 Caleb Ten Pas
5 4:01.54 Carter Smith
6 4:01.79 Grady Lenn
7 4:02.24 Rocco Culpepper
8 4:02.41 Caden Leonard
9 4:02.60 Noah Bontrager
10 4:02.74 Brian Burns

You don’t “go to court” if you do this, the NCAA simply makes the athlete ineligible. Court only comes after, when the athlete is trying to fight their way back to eligibility. That’s the difference people keep missing. The NCAA doesn’t need to win a lawsuit to create consequences, they just enforce eligibility rules and let the athlete deal with the fallout.
And no, not all NIL is “for past performance.” Brands absolutely select athletes based on performance, but the payment cannot be triggered by it. Nike, New Balance, etc. pick fast kids, then pay them for NIL activities regardless of what happens next. Publicly tying money to a specific result crosses that line and puts the risk squarely on the athlete. That’s not a gray area, it’s an unnecessary gamble, and not an ideal situation for a high school kid.

Does it matter that the athletes haven’t signed a contract though? It is clearly against the rules to have an NIL deal that says “if you run sub-4:00, we will pay you $40,000”.

But this is not a contract with any athlete, just a noncontractual promise to sign a deal with an athlete who breaks 4. The actual contract will just be a standard NIL deal with nothing about performance. More succinctly, how can this be an NIL violation when no NIL deal has been signed?

Does this make a difference? (Serious question)

This thread is classic letsrun

Someone (lawyer) weighs in with their expertise as though Diadora doesn't have lawyers on staff and didn't think about whether this NIL deal was going to break rules. Then continues to post over and over again as though he's ready to go to court over it himself. Constant attitude of "you can't do that!" and ignorance of the fact that a kid can just do that and cash the check. Reminds me of people who rage out at me when they hear my kid runs more than 50 miles a week.

Other people fretting over whether some kid will lose their HS eligibility. If I'm in HS and can make $40k for running sub 4, I'm taking the $40k. What is the value of the HS eligibility? I run sub 4 and I'm now going to any college I want to on a full ride, and I have no significant competition in HS. I'm not losing anything by losing my HS eligibility.

Why do we care if kids make money with their talent? It happens in music, acting, other sports, business, YouTube influencers, etc.

No, calling it a “non-contractual promise” does not fix the problem.
Yes, it can still be an NIL violation, even if no NIL contract has been signed yet.
Here’s why, legally:
1. NIL violations are about inducement and eligibility, not contract formation.
The NCAA does not need a signed contract to act. If a public offer induces or rewards athletic performance, that alone can trigger an eligibility issue. The rule enforcement happens before courts ever get involved.
2. Public promises can be evidence of pay-for-play.
A public statement saying “the first athlete to break 4:00 will get a $40k NIL deal” functions as a performance bounty, even if the later contract paper is “clean.” Regulators look at substance and intent, not just the final document.
3. You can’t launder performance pay through a later NIL contract.
Writing a standard NIL contract after the fact does not cure the defect if:
the athlete was selected only because of the performance, and
the compensation would not exist but for that performance.
Lawyers call this but-for causation. If the deal doesn’t exist without the time result, it’s performance based.
4. Eligibility decisions don’t require litigation.
This is the key misunderstanding. The NCAA doesn’t need to “go to court” to enforce anything. They simply declare the athlete ineligible under NIL/extra-benefits rules.
Court only happens later if the athlete tries to regain eligibility.
5. This is different from Nike / NB selection practices.
Brands absolutely select athletes based on performance, but they do not publicly promise money contingent on a result. Selection criteria are allowed; conditional compensation is not. That distinction is central and well established.

we want the kids to make money, just not lost their eligibility.

The Diadora marketing team has everyone talking, and that part is undeniably genius 🤠

Langon doesn't even wear these spikes himself. He wore dragonflys for his recent workout vid and the BU 5k. Why isn't Diadora paying him to wear them? He's their athlete.

Thanks for the response. But isn’t breaking 4 a “selection criterion”?

The reason this NIL is different and wrong is that Diadora is requiring the runner to wear Diadora prior to receiving the NIL (the NIL is explicit payment for a specific performance in diadora shoes). Kids accepted into the Nike elite program weren't all wearing Nike prior to acceptance. If a kid breaks four in high school, he is receiving NIL offers from multiple shoe companies, not just the one he broke four in.

Breaking News: Elite high schoolers are able to put a lot of money into a sport...

Dude this is nothing. $260 for a pair of shoes is nothing compared to the money many of these kids, kids from all kinds of sports, put towards coaching and specialized training camps.

Sorry but if Joe from Poor Bumf*** family cannot afford elite soccer camps in high school he won't be a great high school soccer player...

And if you're a talent who even has a chance at a 4 minute mile, odds are you come from money period so it is going to be self selecting. A kid who is at the cusp of a sub 4 mile has had years of consistent training and a healthy diet, diet out of the reach from Tom whose household family income is probably 50K combined for both parents.

That's just the way things are. To be great you have to invest.

Lets be real... if a HS kid is so good that they're a real threat to break 4:00 early in the season, someone will spot him the pair of spikes.

It's just a fact of life that those born into money will have an easier path towards success than those who didn't. That's why historically women were pushed towards "marrying into money". It gives her offspring the best chances of a successful life.