NIL Revenue Sharing — The $20 Million Shift
The New Golden Age (or Minefield?): How Colleges Are Scrambling to Pay Athletes in the NIL Era
The Bloomberg feature on Ohio State’s latest financial maneuvers makes one thing crystal clear: the NIL revolution has matured into something much bigger. The days of booster collectives quietly funding star recruits are fading. Now, institutions themselves are on the hook to pay athletes directly — and that changes everything.
When NIL rights first opened in 2021, the market looked like the Wild West. Some athletes landed six-figure brand deals, while others got free sandwiches. Schools mostly let booster-led collectives oversee their NIL programs, staying one step removed from direct payments.
But that is no longer the case. After the House v. NCAA settlement, schools can now share up to $20.5 million annually(2025–26) with athletes, with caps projected to rise toward $33 million over time (Jackson Lewis).
A new College Sports Commission (CSC) is tasked with monitoring these payments, ensuring NIL deals reflect fair market value, and keeping the system from collapsing into disguised pay-for-play (NBC Sports) – but as I wrote about in the BNP Blog about NIL collectives going rogue earlier this week, the system is collapsing anyway.
Ohio State illustrates the stakes. According to the Bloomberg piece and local reporting, the Buckeyes will direct roughly $18 million of their $20.5M cap to just four sports: football, men’s basketball, women’s basketball, and women’s volleyball (The Columbus Dispatch).
Why so concentrated? Because those programs drive ticket sales, media rights, and national brand recognition. Spreading the pool evenly across 36 varsity sports would dilute the impact and potentially bankrupt the department.
The message is blunt: revenue-producing sports will carry the load, while other programs remain scholarship-only.
This new system creates serious challenges:
Revenue Pressure: Most athletic departments already operate near break-even. To pay athletes, schools will need fresh income streams — media rights, naming deals, donor pushes, even LLC-style restructures like Kentucky Athletics just attempted (AP News).
Transparency: Few schools are disclosing payout structures, fueling suspicion about favoritism and inequity (CBS Sports).
Title IX Risks: Revenue sharing may trigger equal-treatment obligations under federal law, setting up potential legal fights if women’s sports are shortchanged (Hallett Philanthropy).
Workarounds: Schools are already probing ways to skirt the cap — enhanced benefits, outside partnerships, “non-countable” perks (Front Office Sports).
For athletes: hopefully, you can expect more stability from schools themselves, not just side hustles through collectives.
For schools: the arms race has escalated. Competing means finding new money fast — or risking irrelevance in recruiting wars.
For the system: lawsuits, legislation, and regulatory oversight are inevitable. The House settlement included a $2.8 billion backpay fund for athletes dating back to 2016 (ESPN), proving the courts will not shy away from calling out inequity.
We may be headed toward a world where only “super schools” with massive donor bases can sustain full participation – and that is unfortunate (and I predict will ultimately run afoul of Title IX). Congress may eventually step in with the SCORE Act or similar bills to standardize athlete compensation, but if you have read the SCORE Act – well, many of us believe it is just a thinly veiled legislative attempt by the NCAA, via lobbyists, to maintain control of collegiate sports and the money. And mark my words, the debate over whether athletes are employees — not just scholarship recipients — is far from over as well.
What you can be certain of is this: the ground under college athletics is moving. Universities are no longer just stewards of tradition. They are full-scale financial players in a billion-dollar talent marketplace – and that changes everything.
I suppose the question that is most pressing now is whether all of the above leads us into the golden age of athlete empowerment — or onto a minefield that breaks the collegiate athlete model and ruins college sports and/or destroys the collegiate/amateur athlete model that funnels athletes onto our Team USA Olympic teams – but that is a discussion for another day.
SEE MICHAEL’S FAST BREAK HERE: https://youtube.com/shorts/sI5NImvd8Ik?feature=share
