How NIL created winners and losers in college sports

NIL formally began in July 2021, when athletes gained the right to earn money from their name, image, and likeness. The 2025 House v. NCAA settlement then let schools pay athletes directly. Athletes deserve a share of the money they generate, yet the system built around that pay has flaws, and coaches saw the first one early. Nick Saban warned that the NIL model is getting out of hand and lets schools buy players. Mike Leach agreed, saying NIL and the portal in their current state are the same. Rules ban pay for play, but recruits still compare offers before they pick a school. Schools with rich donors win, and schools without them fall behind.

The second flaw is that players now leave teams for more money. Players move using the transfer portal, and a better offer pulls them away. Kind of like the NFL free agency. Dabo Swinney called the portal “total chaos,” and he warned that many players would not graduate. Coaches now rebuild rosters every year instead of developing players over four seasons. Fans lose ties to athletes they watch grow, and teams lose their competitiveness.

The third flaw is the loss of funding for smaller sports and women’s sports. More than 415 programs have shut down or consolidated since May 2024 as schools have to find the funds to keep their programs up. Football and men’s basketball get paid first, and other teams absorb the cost. Stanford won 25 straight Director’s Cups. The Director’s Cup is based on overall performance across all sports; it accumulates National and Conference championships. Even with winning 25 straight, Stanford still cut programs due to their money problems.

The fourth flaw is the college’s money risk affecting players, while also affecting the competition around them. A few stars earn large sums, and most athletes earn little. Many sign short deals with no legal or tax advice, and some have missed promised payments. Fans see the problems. An Emerson poll found 47% of Americans think NIL makes college sports less fair, while 27% think it makes them more fair. The same poll shows 55% of former college athletes believe NIL gives richer programs an unfair advantage. Ipsos also found that support for NIL pay has softened since last September.

Grayson LaFon is a Sophomore Member of the Multimedia Journalism Class.

About the Author

Grayson LaFon

Author

View All Posts