THE BOOSTER’S DILEMMA — WHEN LOYALTY MEETS LEGALITY
With the rise of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) regulations, the role of boosters in college sports has become both more transparent and more legally complex—boosters can now openly support athletes through collectives and endorsements, but any payment tied to recruiting or commitments remains a violation. The new landscape requires boosters to avoid promises to recruits, ensure all support is well-documented and channeled through legitimate means, and focus on genuine marketing value rather than incentives for enrollment. Regulatory scrutiny is higher than ever, and those unwilling to adapt to the new rules face significant legal risk, while those who act transparently can continue to support their teams within the bounds of the law.
Boosters have always been a cornerstone of college sports culture, providing essential funding for stadiums, scholarships, and well-timed charity events that often align with recruiting weekends. Their support has long fueled athletic programs, but with the introduction of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) regulations, the distinction between genuine support and potential violations has grown increasingly narrow and legally risky.
Historically, most booster actions operated in the shadows, with widespread understanding of their influence and the NCAA occasionally turning a blind eye. The legalization of NIL was intended to bring transparency to booster contributions, moving these activities into the open. However, the reality is that only the paperwork has changed; boosters now direct funds to collectives, sponsor athlete appearances, or invest in athlete brands. Despite these surface changes, the underlying intent remains critical—if NIL funds are used to entice enrollment, the action remains illegal.
The College Sports Commission (CSC) and NCAA have now established clear boundaries: boosters are permitted to support current athletes, but not recruits. Any payment tied to signing, transferring, or committing constitutes a violation. With the CSC’s introduction of a tip line, reporting violations has become easier and can be done anonymously by anyone, including players, staff, or rival fans. The NIL era, therefore, features a whistleblower mechanism that adds a new layer of scrutiny.
This evolving landscape pushes boosters to act more like investors, prioritizing legitimate marketing value through endorsements, appearances, and charity campaigns rather than offering financial incentives for commitments. Athletic programs across the country are adjusting their donor interactions, establishing clear boundaries between school personnel and collective funds, and sometimes even requiring legal pre-approval for NIL payments. When regulatory bodies come calling, ignorance of the rules is no longer a viable defense.
For boosters, transparency is the smartest approach. Support should be channeled through recognized collectives, with clear contracts, proper tax documentation, and concrete marketing plans. Promises made during recruiting must be avoided, and casual assurances like “We’ll take care of you” in text messages can create legal headaches, as such statements are easily documented.
Loyalty remains the foundation of college sports, but NIL regulations have rewritten the rules for booster involvement. Boosters can continue to support their teams, provided they do so transparently, with proper documentation, and within the bounds of the law. Those who adapt will thrive, while those who ignore the new regulations will face increased legal challenges. The essence of the game endures, even as the rulebook expands.
