As I stirred mashed potatoes over Thanksgiving break, an avid reader of “Full Court Press” (and, coincidentally, a family friend) approached me, asking my opinion on the name, image and likeness phenomenon that has taken over college sports in recent years. One week earlier, superstar high school quarterback Bryce Underwood flipped his commitment from Louisiana State University to Michigan State University in one of NIL’s wildest stories yet: one that involved billionaire Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison, Barstool Sports founder Dave Portnoy and what even conservative estimates say will be a fat $10 million paycheck.
Dumbfounded and underinformed on the topic, I spit out a vague answer that was surely unsatisfying to my family’s dinner guest. However, over the past week — especially with the NIL-fueled frenzy that started this past Wednesday as college football’s early signing period opened — I’ve had the opportunity to give the topic further thought. And though my answer remains incomplete, I hope it’ll be sufficient, at least for that reader.
To understand what NIL is — and how it ballooned into a system by which teenagers are paid millions of dollars — we first have to look back to 2019 and 2021, when two major decisions were made that would ultimately shape the landscape of college athletics. First, on Sept. 30, 2019, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the Fair Pay to Play Act into law, making his state the first to allow collegiate athletes to profit off their names, images and likenesses. Then, on June 21, 2021, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of student-athletes in NCAA v. Alston, deciding that the NCAA’s rules restricting student compensation violated antitrust laws.
And that was when college sports changed forever.
Now, we live in a world where Colorado quarterback Shedeur Sanders’ NIL valuation is reported at $6.2 million. That’s double the average NFL salary and 42 times the average WNBA salary. With figures continuously rising — Ohio State Athletic Director Ross Bjork claimed that the school’s 2024 football team cost about $20 million — college football can only head in one direction: one of higher and higher dollar amounts.
At some point, fans’ pride in supporting their alma maters and whatever rivalries are left after realignment will be the only aspects separating college football from the NFL. If the NCAA’s proposed settlement — allowing schools an annual budget of approximately $20 million to pay athletes directly — gains court approval, NIL collectives will lose influence. College athletics would closely mirror professional leagues, with teams operating under salary cap restrictions for player compensation.
But is there any other way? Though increased regulations for player compensation may mean the loss of many of college sports’ more traditional and beloved qualities, it’s better than the alternative of giving players nothing. It’s been well documented that the pre-NIL NCAA was entirely monopolistic and unfair towards its players; even now, athletes like Sanders are likely only earning a fraction of what their schools are making from their abilities.
It’s a classic American story: one of greed and power struggles, where the pursuit of profit overshadows the game itself. Once networks, universities and the NCAA understood the potential in their sports — specifically football — they set off on an irreversible path that landed us in the NIL era.
Still, we’re only in the early stages, and plenty has yet to be determined. Perhaps the NIL boom will lead to the best era of college sports yet, where compensation yields a better, more authentic product. However, one thing is clear: whether it’s Michigan, Kennesaw State or even Tufts, the power always lies with the highest bidder.