NIL Has Changed the Game — But Has It Changed the Student-Athlete?

March Madness has a way of making you pause and reflect on how dramatically college sports have changed.

If you're part of today's generation, you already know about name, image and likeness agreements. You know that college athletes can become millionaires before they ever leave campus.

But if you've been around for a while, you remember a very different world — one where student-athletes weren't making money or endorsing products. In fact, they were near the bottom of the financial spectrum. Most were on athletic scholarships alone, though stories about money exchanged "under the table" weren't hard to find. We've all read some of those accounts.

Coaches were paid well. The athletes they recruited were not. That was the reality on college campuses across America.

Back then, coaches would come to your home, sit across from you and your parents, and make their pitch — the school, the program, the future. I know this firsthand. Coaches came to my house to recruit me, and I say that humbly. Those were defining moments in my life.

Fast forward to the NIL era, and the dynamic has fundamentally shifted.

Name, image and likeness agreements are now at the forefront of every recruiting conversation. For many prospects, it's the first question on the table. This has created a genuine challenge for coaches and athletic departments alike.

Many schools have responded by hiring general managers specifically to coordinate NIL activities — raising money, managing deals, and ensuring compliance. It is a daunting task given today's athletic landscape. NIL is the leverage athletes use, and coaches know it.

If you're recruiting a prospect and all you're bringing to the table is a traditional scholarship, you're already behind. Millions of dollars are now embedded in athletic budgets, NIL resources included. Recruits arrive with agents and advisors. They sign agreements with specific terms and conditions. They are, in many respects, in control — and that's a new reality coaches must navigate.

It's also worth noting the connection between NIL resources and on-court results. Look no further than the teams competing in March Madness. Schools with sizable NIL money tend to win more games than they lose.

The proliferation of NIL does raise the obvious question of legislation and enforcement. So far, meaningful regulation hasn't materialized. At some point, the NCAA or a congressional committee will need to step in. We'll see.

In the meantime, a quieter question lingers: do student-athletes still value the scholarship? Is graduating from college still the priority, or has NIL become the whole point?

I'm on the outside looking in, but I hope they're being encouraged to finish their degrees.

Is that an idealistic view? Maybe. But a college degree still matters. And the data is encouraging: student-athletes at the Division I level post a 90% graduation rate. Thirty-nine percent go on to earn graduate degrees while still competing. In 2024 alone, 3,568 student-athletes had already earned their undergraduate degrees and were enrolled in graduate programs. That suggests many are taking full advantage of both the academic opportunity and their NIL agreements. That is genuinely good news.

Still, the NIL model will continue to generate debate about where it is and where it's headed.

Bryan Seeley, CEO of the College Sports Commission, stated: "I think it's fair to say that the NIL market in college sports is not a normal organic market. It's a market in which schools are manufacturing NIL for their student-athletes."

Loyalty to a single school isn't what it once was — and I won't pretend otherwise. For those of us from an older generation, pride in your school, your program, your teammates was the whole thing. Now it's a new day with a new story. Whether that story ends well remains to be seen.

Dr. James Ewers is a contributing columnist for HBCU Legends on SI.