From Education to Entertainment: NIL and its Impact on Collegiate Sports

College sports have always been far more than entertainment. Collegiate athletics is intertwined with a righteous love for competition, open self-expression, the promotion of education, the aspiration of equality, and the pursuit of self-improvement for passion’s sake. These Ideals have been the force behind college sports, unlike the primary motivator of professional athletics and the entertainment industry—money. The premise of a kid attending a Friday lecture, and the next day playing football in front of 80,000 live fans, just to return to the classroom on Monday, is something comical and entertaining. Surely, if you ask that athlete why they are making such personal commitments, they will likely tell you that they are motivated by some combination of the Ideals mentioned above; these Ideals add sincerity to the entertainment value of college sports which makes it so special.

The Books

College sports are thriving financially. In 2024, the NCAA posted approximately $1.4 billion in revenue alone—a $91 million increase from 2023.[1] Simultaneously, the NCAA boasted a budget surplus of over $160 million in 2024.[2] Their revenue and budget surplus are already at multi-decade highs, even accounting for inflation.[3] 2025 looks to be another record-breaking year; consider three indicators: the viewership numbers for both 2025 March Madness Basketball Tournaments;[4] the strong annual viewership increases for college baseball, softball, and their respective World Series tournaments;[5] in addition to the record setting viewership numbers secured by week one of the 2025 college football season.[6] The entertainment value is being well-received; and, though the college sports industry is evidently growing, it also faces unprecedented complications. Much of college athletics’ inherent entertainment value is attributable to the grand set of Ideals above, but they are currently being threatened by several institutional developments.  

NIL Gets Swampy

In NCAA v. Alston, the Supreme Court’s unanimous 2021 decision permitted student-athletes to finally be compensated for their Name, Image, and Likeness (“NIL”). With this decision, the Ideals that make college sports special have taken a back seat to the infectious influence of money and politics.[7] NIL allows student-athletes to sign sponsorship deals and to use their likeness for profit, usually through a sponsorship partner or a university’s NIL collective, which functions roughly like a sports-focused endowment without the tax-exemptions. NIL has dramatically changed college athletics. College athletics’ feel-good emphasis on studiousness, hometowns, and college culture became dwarfed by the opportunity to make money in a free market. Student-athletes were persuaded by a school’s rich boosters and their NIL collective’s funds, rather than the intimate considerations that have historically guided an athlete’s decision to commit.[8] Perhaps the most illustrative instance of this seismic change is the saga of Jaden Rashada.

Initially committed to the University of Miami, Rashada—a top high school football prospect and 2023 graduate—was promised $9.5 million to play there.[9] On signing day, he flipped to the University of Florida (“UF”).[10] This was likely a result of the university promising to pay Rashada $13.85 million.[11] In any event, when the UF collective failed to raise Rashada’s promised funds, he was able to secure a release from his letter of intent. He then enrolled at Arizona State University for a season before transferring to the University of Georgia for a season.[12] Today, he is a member of Sacramento State’s football team who, coincidentally, boasts an impressive $35 million NIL collective.[13] Rashada’s story does not end there, though; he is currently suing UF over their illusory promises.[14]

This debacle illustrates not only the power of money in college sports, but also the need to scrutinize the flow of money, so that college athletes are not promised things that do not materialize. Fortunately, in the wake of the recent NCAA House settlement, a cap system (“the cap”) will be implemented; schools can pay athletes directly rather than having to rely on third-party collectives, which should help prevent situations like Rashada’s from occurring.[15] The annual cap, starting in the 2025-26 athletic year, is poised to allow schools to spend up to $20.5 million from their athletic department’s funds.[16] The cap will increase by an estimated 4% annually over the next decade, and it will continue to allow third-party NIL deals, just with more oversight.[17]

This cap system should be a good thing. The onus will be on universities to pay their athletes, rather than dubious third-party collectives. In theory, the cap helps maintain that amateur feel and unpredictability of the sport, bringing the universities closer to the financial transactions which now dominate recruiting, while also helping to ensure that the entities paying the athletes are reliable or, at least, publicly accountable. This dynamic highlights the intrinsic educational Ideals bound to collegiate sports. Much of college sports’ amateur feel is directly tied to education—picking the right environment to learn and grow. Nevertheless, the imposition of a market economy seems to conflict with the greater Ideals underlying college sports. Money will be a primary consideration when committing to college, and with that, some of the fabled glamour of college sports dies.

Congress Takes a Knee (Cap)?

As a result of the salary cap, the NCAA may be forced to ask Congress for two things: to exclude NCAA athletes from the statutory definition of “employee” and, also, for an antitrust exemption.[18]

Firstly, Salary Caps in professional leagues are installable because athletes are deemed employees; the employee designation enables athletes to unionize and form collective bargaining agreements with league owners.[19] Collective bargaining agreements, which unionized professional athletes negotiate and agree to, keep the imposed pay caps legal.[20] Secondly, if it were not for the collective bargaining process, professional sports leagues would be in violation of antitrust laws.[21] However, the NCAA has long argued that if college athletes became legally recognized as employees, and could unionize, universities would be unable to pay their athletes; universities may have to close or limit their athletic departments.[22] Regardless of the merits of the NCAA’s position, asking Congress for an antitrust waiver will not be a simple process. Sensational litigation is bound to follow.  

Deloitte Meets Dollar Shave Club and Decoldest

In addition to the creation of the cap, the settlement also inspired the establishment of the College Sports Commission to serve various, but necessary, purposes. Its primary function will be to track and investigate any third-party athlete sponsorships, anything more than $600, to ensure that these sponsorships are not just pay-for-play schemes, but actual sponsorship deals.[23] Initially, when NIL was promulgated, there was a brief charm and sincerity to its function. Basketball players with eccentric facial hair styles were being sponsored by Dollar Shave Club; a football player named Decoldest signed a deal with an HVAC company; gymnasts were doing deals with makeup brands; waterboys with water bottles; and even bench riders with mattress manufacturers.[24] Shortly thereafter, NIL deals devolved largely into payments that practically bought recruits.

To the Commission’s credit, it did get straight to work in overseeing the highlighted NIL transactions. According to an initial report prepared with the help of Deloitte, the Commission cleared nearly $80 million in NIL deals, in compliance with NCAA rules.[25] The Commission was proud to assert that it took roughly a week to clear each NIL deal.[26] Though a day later, the Commission reported that its initial report was off by roughly $45 million.[27] Over 2,000 separate NIL deals were overestimated; in reality, the commission vetted and cleared $35.5 million in NIL deals.[28] These initial reporting errors do not inspire confidence in the Commission’s oversight capabilities. Considering that the Commission’s function is vital to competitive parity and fairness in college sports, this dismal start, even if more embarrassing than damning, is concerning.

Cost-Benefit Analysis, Not So Simple

Individual universities are also facing difficult decisions pertaining to scholarship allocation because of the settlement. According to the NCAA, Division I & II schools pay over $3.6 billion in scholarships annually.[29] This pays for the education of over 180,000 student-athletes and is something worth celebrating.[30] This relationship between education and entertainment has, in part, proliferated an educated society; the opportunity to gain a scholarship for one’s passions has allowed countless kids to transcend socioeconomic barriers. The House settlement dramatically changes this relationship. One of the biggest changes is a limit on roster size.[31] Alternatively, scholarship restrictions are being relaxed, allowing most sports to offer more scholarships.[32] This dichotomy creates concerns about fairness.

Under the impending cap system, schools are implicitly encouraged to focus on revenue sports. The natural result in a market economy will be a greater focus on football and basketball, as they are revenue generating sources—either by endowing certain sports teams with greater cap capacity or slimming rosters while infusing more scholarships. Schools that wish to remain competitive and maximize fiscal returns are going to make difficult decisions. Such decisions could involve cutting Olympic sports and decreasing the athlete pool. While the $3.6 billion scholarship figure will continue increasing, unfortunately, that 180,000 athlete-figure will likely decrease. This change is further evidence of a shift away from some of the commanding Ideals that make college sports great. Such changes will lead to less opportunity for self-expression, less unique competition, and could emphatically undermine equality in sports.

Talent Acquisition: A Professional Challenge

NIL has turned the NCAA from a stepping-stone to the professional into a professional competitor. Founded in 2020, the NBA’s G League Ignite was established to attract high school prospects away from college and into the NBA’s farm league; now, after four short years, it has been terminated.[33] Today, high school prospects can make better money through a traditional, developmental route in the NCAA.[34] NBA Draft participation is also down with college basketball players. Last May, 106 participants declared for the NBA draft via the early invitation.[35] This marks a significant decrease from the 353 players who accepted their early invite in 2021, just months before NIL became available.[36] Save for the handful of elite prospects that each college season produces, most prospective athletes can make comparable or better money in college, with the added security of being able to control where they play.[37]

Simultaneously, in the NFL, rookies are leveraging their college earnings to secure better contracts. This past NFL draft, the first two picks of the second-round signed fully guaranteed contracts for the first time in league history.[38] Subsequent picks in the second-round did not sign fully guaranteed deals, but they did receive increased money guarantees.[39] This year, several drafted rookies even threatened to return to college because of contractual guarantees, and these threats were heard; the players eventually got what they were negotiating for.[40]

An Unconclusive Conclusion

College sports are at a vulnerable crossroads, wherein their financial success does not tell the entire story. The identity of college sports is under fire. Student-athletes deserve and have long deserved compensation. At the same time, the inspirational Ideals which college sports have stood for should not be haphazardly sacrificed in the interest of money. NIL policies should empower student-athletes, encourage principles of equality, and promote educational institutions as beacons of societal and personal progress. Currently, these policies fall short of doing so. Until revenue sharing is balanced against these principles, the future of college sports, as historically cherished, is under threat.

[1] Steve Berkowitz, NCAA shows revenue increase to $1.4 billion and $166 million surplus in 2024 fiscal year, USA Today (February 27, 2025), https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2025/02/27/ncaa-financial-report-revenue-surplus/80733616007/.

[2] Id.

[3] Id.

[4] Corbin McGuire, Record crowds, rising ratings and resurgent champions highlight 2025 NCAA basketball championships, NCAA (April 11, 2025), https://www.ncaa.org/news/2025/4/11/media-center-record-crowds-rising-ratings-and-resurgent-champions-highlight-2025-ncaa-basketball-championships.aspx.

[5] Ben Portnoy, New Opendorse report highlights growing interest in softball, Sports Bus. J. (June 17, 2025), https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2025/06/17/new-opendorse-report-highlights-growing-interest-in-softball/; Spenser Davis, LSU’s College World Series win earned historic TV ratings, Saturday Down South (June 24, 2025), https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/news/college-baseball/lsus-college-world-series-win-earned-historic-tv-ratings/.

[6] Loree Seitz, ABC Scores Best College Football Opening Weekend With 8.6 Million Viewers Across 4 Games, The Wrap (September 3, 2025), https://www.thewrap.com/abc-college-football-week-opening-weekend-ratings/; Most-Watched Week 1 CFB Game in History: Texas-OSU Has 16.6 Million Viewers, Fox Sports (September 3, 2025), https://www.foxsports.com/stories/college-football/most-watched-week-1-cfb-game-history-texas-osu-has-16-6-million-viewers.

[7] Amy Howe, In Unanimous Ruling, Court Agrees with Athletes that NCAA Violated Antitrust Laws, SCOTUSblog (June 21, 2021), https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/06/in-unanimous-ruling-court-agrees-with-athletes-that-ncaa-violated-antitrust-laws/.

[8] Jake Fischer, ‘It’s the Wild, Wild West’: NIL Turning College Hoops Business Upside Down, Bleacher Report (March 25, 2022), https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10030809-its-the-wild-wild-west-nil-turning-college-hoops-business-upside-down.

[9] Jeff Borzello, What’s Next for Jaden Rashada’s Lawsuit Against Florida Gators over NIL Deal, ESPN (June 19, 2024), https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/40190447/jaden-rashada-florida-gators-nil-lawsuit-next.

[10] Id.

[11] Id.

[12] Id.

[13] Pete Nakos, Sacramento State's Pac-12 Committee Raises $35 Million for NIL Funds, On3 (Sept. 30, 2024), https://www.on3.com/nil/news/sacramento-state-hornets-pac-12-committee-raises-35-million-nil-funds/.

[14] Borzello, supra note 9.

[15] Dan Murphy, Judge OK’s $2.8B Settlement, Paving Way for Colleges to Pay Athletes, ESPN (June 6, 2025), https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/45467505/judge-grants-final-approval-house-v-ncaa-settlement.

[16] Mike Griffith, Understanding New Collegiate Sports Model After House vs. NCAA Settlement, DawgNation (June 8, 2025), https://www.dawgnation.com/football/around-the-sec/understanding-new-college-model-after-house-vs-ncaa-settlement/BXBNLMBSJBENJECRC3LADP3BXI/.

[17] Id.

[18] Murphy, supra note 15.

[19] Id.

[20] Antitrust and Labor Law Issues in Sports, USLegal, https://sportslaw.uslegal.com/antitrust-and-labor-law-issues-in-sports/.

[21] Id.

[22] Murphy, supra note 15.

[23] Eddie Pells, College Sports Commission Reveals It Mistakenly Overstated Worth of Approved NIL Deals by $40M-Plus, AP (September 5, 2025), https://apnews.com/article/nil-csc-mistake-college-contract-aeed3abf43649787a0663c627b98ce33.

[24] Mike D. Sykes, II, A definitive list of the 16 most fun (and kind of weird!) NIL deals signed by college athletes, USA TODAY Sports (March 24, 2022), https://ftw.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2022/03/24/nil-college-basketball-football-best-weirdest-deals/81374143007/; Adam Echelman and Erica Yee, College athletes can now make millions off sponsorship deals. Here’s the first look at California’s numbers, KPBS (March 7, 2025), https://www.kpbs.org/news/economy/2025/03/07/how-much-money-nil-college-athletes-california; Tom VanHaaren, Nebraska Cornhuskers WR Decoldest Crawford’s air conditioning commercial has become a viral NIL hit, ESPN (August 17, 2022), https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/34414699/nebraska-cornhuskers-wr-decoldest-crawford-air-conditioning-commercial-become-viral-nil-hit.

[25] Pells, supra note 23.

[26] Id.

[27] Id.

[28] Id.

[29] Pete Iacobelli, Big changes for NCAA likely to upend scholarship limits and roster sizes across college sports, Associated Press (May 28, 2024), https://apnews.com/article/ncaa-settlement-scholarships-8a355a1274f2cef644449833b4099d21.

[30] Id.

[31] Question and Answer: Implementation of the House Settlement, NCAA (June 13, 2025), https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/governance/d1/legislation/2024-25/June2025D1Gov_PhaseThreeInstSetQuestionandAnswer.pdf.

[32] House v. NCAA Settlement Explained: Impacts on Scholarship Limits, Athlete Pay & Recruiting, NCSA Recruiting (June 2025), https://www.ncsasports.org/blog/ncaa-scholarship-roster-limits-2024.

[33] Jeff Zillgitt, Why the NBA’s G League Ignite will shut down after 2023-24 season, USA Today (March 22, 2024), https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/2024/03/22/nba-g-league-ignite-shutting-down-why/73065462007/.

[34] Id.

[35] Ravi Shankar, Historic Low NBA Draft Early Entrants in 2025: How It Happened and Why It Matters, College Sports Network (May 5, 2025), https://collegefootballnetwork.com/mens-college-basketball/historic-low-nba-draft-early-entrants-how-why/.

[36] Id.

[37] Id.

[38] Michael David Smith, 30 second-round picks are unsigned after top two got fully guaranteed contracts, NBC Sports (May 27, 2025), https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/30-second-round-picks-are-unsigned-after-top-two-got-fully-guaranteed-contracts.

[39] Jeremy Fowler, Why the spike in NFL second-round guaranteed money matters, ESPN (August 21, 2025), https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/46038140/nfl-rookie-contracts-second-round-picks-guaranteed-money-holdouts-2025.

[40] Michael Gallagher, Browns’ Quinshon Judkins Could Exploit NFL Loophole to Return to College, Newsweek (August 25, 2025), https://www.newsweek.com/sports/nfl/browns-quinshon-judkins-could-exploit-nfl-loophole-return-college-2118915.