NIL, revenue sharing: How did college sports get here? (2024)

Today's college football is not the college football that most people reading this grew up with. That isn't easy for everyone to accept.

Legendary coach Nick Saban, who retired this offseason after five decades and seven national championships, implied the changes prompted his exit. When speaking on the ability of college athletes to make money off of their name, image, and likeness (NIL) following a July 2021 Supreme Court ruling, Saban pointed out what he thought was a crass turn in sports culture.

"All the things that I believed in, for all these years, 50 years of coaching, no longer exist in college athletics," Saban said at a Capitol Hill roundtable. "It was always about developing players, it was always about helping people be more successful in life. ... (My wife) said, 'All they care about is how much you're gonna pay (players), they don't care about how much you're gonna develop them, which is what we've always done, so why are we doing this?'"

Others see athletes finally getting the compensation they deserve. NIL money is also not the only way college athletes are likely to be paid in the future. The NCAA and its member institutions are staring profit sharing in the face.

Roster caps and scholarship limits in each sport could set the stage for fixed amounts of money to be evenly distributed to each NCAA athlete in their respective sports — almost like a salary cap for each participating athletics program in the NCAA. New Arizona State Athletic Director Graham Rossini said discussions with each of the NCAA's member institutions are progressing so rapidly that revenue sharing for the athletes could take effect as early as 2025.

Regardless of which side a fan or coach is on, NIL money (and likely revenue sharing) has undoubtedly created a completely different landscape within athletics.

Sam Keller and the case that started it all

The release of EA Sports College Football 25 on July 19 closed a loop in the college sports.

The video game franchise remained in demand 11 years after it was discontinued. It only found its way back onto the shelves thanks to college athletes now being able to be compensated for their name, image, and likeness.

As soon as the Supreme Court ruled for player compensation in the NCAA v. Alston case, college sports video games were back in play. Former Arizona State football quarterback Sam Keller's famed court case, Keller v. Electronic Arts Inc. (2013), was the case that led to EA having to quit making the game.

The court's decision ruled that player's likenesses being incorporated into the video games without compensation for those athletes violated the rights of Keller and all other players represented in the game. Since compensating players violated NCAA rules, EA's hands were tied and the game franchise was put on pause for more than a decade.

Robert Carey, Keller's attorney for the case, said fans were upset that one of their favorite yearly games was taken away, but noticed less anger over time as fans learned more about NIL.

“When it started, it was very much a hostile reaction. ... There’s some athletes out there that make huge money, outrageous money (through NIL) — but for the most part it’s very small numbers to just a ton of student-athletes who were struggling to get by," Carey said. "And in our view, they shouldn’t have been struggling because they were the bedrock of the whole amateur sports enterprise. So, it’s been easier lately.”

NIL expanded and is here to stay

Video games are still only a small fraction of the NIL landscape. Players are making money through commercials, local business deals, hosting camps, jersey sales and more.

ASU boosters have jumped into the fray with the Sun Angel Collective, an organization whose stated mission "is to support youth service non-profits in Arizona by helping Sun Devil student-athletes monetize their name, image, and likeness (NIL)." Even the collective's president, Jeff Burg, understands why many fans oppose players being compensated through NIL.

“I certainly believe that there was probably a better framework that could have been put together and I think that most people believe that also," Burg said. "But based on certain court decisions, we are where we are. … But it’s a situation where you’re either going to agree to participate and help us move forward in the way that everything is operating right now, or you’re going to choose to sit on the sidelines.”

Whether fans like it or not, NIL collectives are here to stay. NIL has become a force that has driven recruiting and transfer decisions. In the first year of the NIL era, Division I athletes in the NCAA averaged $3,711 in earnings, according to reports from Inside Higher Ed.

The top 100 college athletes in On3's NIL valuation all have an earning power of $621,000 or more. Executive Director of the Sun Angel Collective, Brittani Willett, likens the situation to student-athletes having the same rights other students do.

“I think sometimes people kind of miss the mark of like, if I am a non-athlete student and I play the piano, I can go out and provide my services to someone and charge for piano lessons," Willett said. "Pre-NIL, an athlete could not go run a camp. They couldn’t sign autographs and be compensated for that. I think it’s really just kind of giving the athlete some of their rights back to things that were being restricted before.”

Related: College football's next big problem: Parity

The lawsuits aren't over with revenue sharing

A settlement was reached in House v. NCAA, which is a step toward student-athletes receiving backpay for money they could have made through their NIL prior to its legalization in July of 2021. Grant House, a former ASU swimmer, is the named party. The $2.75 billion payout will be made by the NCAA and the five autonomy conferences.

Carey's firm handled the House case as well. While he was unsure of whether there was a specific connection between Keller and House both being ASU athletes in their quests for collegiate athletes' compensation, Carey himself did attend ASU. In addition, his firm had an ASU swimmer as an intern at its Phoenix office and Carey has worked with many other ASU swimmers, too.

"We just had a lot going on with ASU," Carey said. "People from ASU watched those cases with interest. ... I just think there was so much going on with ASU at that time that Grant House just reached out, or he had somebody reach out, to our person and asked if anybody was interested in this issue."

Carey added after the Keller verdict was issued, many athletes reached out to his firm.

The House settlement has led to future revenue sharing for athletes. As it stands in the agreement, 22% of the average power conference school’s annual revenue would be directed to athletes.

Burg urges fans to understand that they are not directly paying the student-athlete if they choose to donate to NIL collectives.

"I think a lot of folks think, ‘I’m being asked to contribute some amount of money so we can pay a student-athlete,'" Burg said. "I guess they need to understand that it’s really about kind of creating opportunities for student-athletes. … The most challenging thing has been to communicate to folks why they need to care, why they need to participate, and what their participation ultimately means to the student-athlete in a meaningful way.”