I’m skeptical of how much Name-Image-Likeness is going to change the power dynamic between teams in college sports. My best guess is that it won’t change it at all—the big programs will have systems in place to help athletes maximize their value, the small programs will have the opportunity to effectively buy recruits with lucrative, one-off sponsorship offers, those things should theoretically even out since the value’s been coming through in some form anyway, just with blockades at the end stopping it from getting to athletes directly—but I could be wrong on that, and it might work differently than that big program/small program dichotomy implies.
I’m excited, though, for what this does for college athletes, who suddenly are able to capitalize financially on themselves while in college for the first time. A few benefits:
- Athletes will be better-set for life after college.
- Athletes’ families will, if desired and supported by the market, have a source of income from their athlete relative while that athlete is in school.
- Athletes, based on the two bullets above, should have fewer pressures to leave school early, or to give up sports in the first place to focus on providing.
- The relationship between fans of a school and their athletes will be deeper than before, with a new financial incentive attached to social media. This could permeate to greater interest in traditionally lower-money sports, something already seemingly on the rise thanks to ESPN’s approach to streaming.
It’s a gold mine for athletes, and it figures to be wonderful for college sports, and the more I sit on it, the more I wonder why exactly the NCAA feels so threatened by it. What is the NCAA gaining from athletes not making money in this way? Maybe there’s something I’m missing. Maybe another shoe will drop. But what a seemingly great situation for everyone involved, the NCAA included.
