Photo courtesy of Buisness Insider
The Dangers of NIL in College Sports
By: Brynn B. ‘26
One of the most controversial topics in college athletics is the Name, Image, and Likeness policy, also referred to as NIL, which was first instituted in July of 2021. This rule was originally created by the NCAA with the intention of giving college athletes the ability to profit off of their own image, since previously, if their names were used, they received no compensation. While this does seem like a positive change in sports, the absence of regulations within NIL has led to damaging effects on the student-athlete experience, making college athletics into an even higher-pressure environment.
While there have been benefits, like allowing athletes to learn to manage their own money and navigate deals with companies, the damage caused has been overwhelming. Part of the reason NIL deals are so sought after is because athletes can use them as proof of their accomplishments in their sport, and also as a marker of their eminence or sometimes even fame. Athletes who are able to sign big NIL deals are sometimes even viewed as celebrities within their sport, or can be made into the face of a program. They are at high risk of rushing into a deal with unfair or unreasonable conditions because their decisions can easily be driven by the excitement of having money and stardom offered to them. The fact that most student-athletes have little to no experience handling business deals makes them easily susceptible to exploitation by big brands. An article from The Gist notes that “most schools don’t offer enough educational resources on how to land and manage NIL contracts.” It is important to keep in mind that the people signing NIL deals are usually college students, and in some cases, high school students who go into these business interactions blind because of their limited financial literacy. Many of these athletes would jump at the opportunity to make extra money without really thinking it through or consulting someone with more business expertise first. Check out this ESPN article to read more about an example of a company that targets young athletes to exploit through NIL: https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/41664466/nilly-nil-company-college-athletes-kendrick-perkins-consumer-protection-experts
One of the other most apparent issues caused by this policy is the unfair advantages created by NIL collectives. These collectives are organizations that gather money from the fans, alumni, and boosters of a college to give to recruits as NIL deals. This is a loophole for players to get paid for committing to a college, since according to NCAA rules, it is considered bribery if they are paid directly by the school. These collectives have led to unfair advantages in recruiting because the schools with aid from better-funded collectives have the resources to consistently bring in top recruits. At the University of Texas at Austin, an organization known as The Pancake Factory, which is funded by boosters of the football program, promises 50,000 dollars in NIL money every year to offensive linemen. Over time, the differences in recruiting abilities caused by the disparity in NIL collective funds will create a clear divide between college programs, specifically in high-revenue sports like football and basketball. In order to stay competitive, schools have to utilize NIL collectives because if they don’t, then they fall behind those who do. If rules are not put into place to limit this, college recruiting will become completely dependent on how much money a school’s NIL collective fund has available. The colleges that already have successful athletic programs and therefore generous donors will essentially have their pick of players, especially because with NIL, how much scholarship money a recruit receives does not carry nearly as much weight.
I do not believe that NIL is entirely bad or does not have the potential to become a positive part of college athletics, but I think it is undeniable that the lack of regulations on NIL deals has caused it to morph into an uncontrolled and precarious situation. If in the future, rules are created to limit the impact of NIL collectives on recruiting and colleges provide more resources to better their student-athletes’ understanding of business deals, then it could become a very beneficial policy. NIL has not solely had negative impacts on college sports. Some athletes are tempted to stay in college longer because they no longer have to enter professional leagues to profit off of their sport. Student-athletes struggling with the cost of tuition now have a new way to potentially earn extra money, and it can help teach them how to manage their own brands. The NIL policy could develop into a great tool for student-athletes, but currently it is doing about as much harm as it is good because of side effects that were overlooked or unpredicted during its creation.