Name, image and likeness implementation is the greatest thing to happen to college sports in decades. When the decision was first announced, I saw it as a win for the athletes who work so hard to perform and entertain us. The argument that they get paid with an education is outdated and often used as an excuse by universities profiting far more than many players ever will. College athletes generate massive revenue through ticket sales, television deals and merchandise, and NIL finally gives them a chance to share in the success they help create.
However, while the idea behind NIL is strong, its implementation is not, allowing money and boosters to influence where athletes play more than development or team culture. The current state of NIL is a step in the right direction but it needs reform to ensure it truly benefits athletes without damaging the balance and identity of college sports.
As it currently stands, NIL is a free-for-all. The wealthiest universities with the wealthiest donors stockpile talent, while smaller schools fall further behind. We saw the impact of NIL in last year’s NCAA men’s basketball tournament, which turned into one of the chalkiest March Madness brackets in recent memory. Upsets and Cinderellas are going to be a thing of the past before we know it, and with it, the magic of March will disappear.
That shift isn’t just happening in basketball. As someone who loves IU football, it’s been striking to see how quickly NIL has transformed the program. For most of Indiana’s history, this was a basketball school, and the money, attention and energy reflected that. NIL has flipped the script, giving football access to resources it never had before. When wealthy alumni can step in and reshape priorities almost overnight; it shows just how much power NIL puts in the hands of a small group, and how fast that power can redefine what a school values.
Beyond competitive balance, NIL is changing locker-room culture. Some argue this makes college sports more like the professional leagues and prepares athletes, but that comparison ignores a few key differences: pro teams operate under contracts, salary caps and player unions that provide a form of structure and stability. College athletes now face similar free-agency pressures without those added protections. Teammates earn vastly different amounts, making it harder to sell that “team-first” mentality.
Despite these issues, I’m still a fan of the NIL concept. It allows athletes who never make it to their sport’s pro league to earn money for the work they’ve put in for most of their lives, which makes NIL worth protecting. For a lot of players, this is the only paycheck they’ll ever get for years of sacrifices many fans will never fully understand. The NCAA found less than 2% of student-athletes play sports professionally after college.
The solution to NIL is structure. NIL deals shouldn’t be allowed to function as recruiting promises or transfer incentives. And a five-star freshman shouldn’t be making millions more dollars than the senior who’s given blood, sweat and tears to their team. If NIL is truly about name, image and likeness, athletes should earn it through exposure to their community and production on the field for that team.
Maybe there should be a tiered maximum based on class year or team contribution. For instance, a senior might have a slightly higher cap than a freshman, reflecting the service they put into the program. This cap would not include any money athletes make from outside the university.
There also needs to be real accountability, especially regarding the transfer portal. Player movement matters and has existed long before NIL, and athletes should have the right to leave bad situations. But unlimited transfers combined with unlimited NIL money have made college sports a mess. Putting reasonable limits on how many times an athlete can transfer would not keep athletes trapped, but would help restore some stability to sports.
NIL is a step in the right direction. But without rules, limits or accountability it is reshaping college sports in ways that threaten competitive balance, locker-room culture and the identity of programs. Money will become the deciding factor in who wins, who stays and who goes. It undermines what makes college sports special. If NIL is going to live up to its promise, it desperately needs a structure that protects athletes while preserving what makes college sports great.
Jack Davis (he/him) is a junior majoring in media with a sports concentration and pursuing a minor in folklore and ethnomusicology and a certificate in journalism.
