The NIL Divide: How College Sports Are Splitting Into Powerhouse and Underserved Programs

When Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) rights became a reality in 2021, they were hailed as a long-overdue victory for college athletes. Profiting off personal branding provided a much-needed financial lifeline, especially for athletes in high-revenue sports like football and basketball. However, an unintended consequence is becoming clear three years into the NIL era. While some athletes are cashing in, others are being left behind, widening the gap between college sports’ “haves“ and “underserved programs.”

The Power Sports Boom

Football and men’s basketball have always been the revenue kings of college athletics, and NIL has only reinforced that dominance. With multi-million dollar collectives, lucrative endorsement deals, and booster-backed partnerships, top players at powerhouse programs now command six- and even seven-figure sums. At schools like Alabama, Ohio State, and Texas, NIL collectives have become quasi-salary caps, offering recruits and transfer financial incentives that resemble professional contracts.

Women’s basketball is also seeing a financial renaissance, thanks partly to marketable stars like Caitlin Clark, Angel Reese, and Paige Bueckers. The WNBA pipeline has given female basketball players a clear professional pathway, drawing more investment from brands and donors.

But while NIL has elevated top-tier athletes, it’s also created an ever-growing financial disparity for the rest of college athletics.

The NIL Leftovers: The “Underserved“ Sports

The NIL money is nearly nonexistent for sports that don’t generate significant TV ratings or have strong professional leagues. Baseball, softball, track and field, wrestling, and most Olympic sports operate in an entirely different economic reality. Athletes in these programs often struggle to land sponsorships beyond the occasional local business deal, and collective money is funneled toward football and basketball players.

“We’re not seeing much NIL trickle down to our athletes,“ says a Division I baseball coach at a mid-major school. “Even when our players get something, it’s pennies compared to what’s happening in football.”

Wrestling, for example, has seen top programs like Stanford and Fresno State cut in recent years despite passionate fan bases. Track and field athletes, despite representing their schools at national and Olympic levels, receive a fraction of NIL support compared to football players who may never start a game.

The Impact on Recruiting and Program Survival

As NIL money consolidates around revenue sports, lower-tier programs are feeling the squeeze. Some schools are being forced to reallocate resources, and non-revenue sports are at risk of being cut altogether.

“If you’re a five-star football recruit, schools are throwing NIL deals at you left and right. If you’re a world-class swimmer, you might get a free swimsuit,“ says one Olympic sport athlete. “The difference is staggering.”

This imbalance is beginning to reshape recruiting. High school athletes in non-revenue sports must now consider scholarship opportunities and whether a school’s NIL structure will offer any financial backing. Walk-ons, once an essential part of many programs, are increasingly rare as schools focus their NIL budgets on retaining key football and basketball talent.

The Traps of NIL: Financial Pitfalls and Unintended Consequences

While NIL deals provide opportunities, they also come with challenges that many athletes are unprepared to navigate. Financial mismanagement is a growing concern, as young athletes—many without proper financial literacy—suddenly receive large sums of money without guidance on taxes, investments, or savings. Some athletes have fallen victim to predatory agents or exploitative contracts, locking them into unfavorable deals that limit their future earning potential.

Additionally, NIL has led to locker-room tensions, as disparities in earnings create rifts between teammates. A star quarterback landing a six-figure deal while an offensive lineman struggles to secure even minor endorsements can cause friction within a program. In some cases, pursuing NIL money has distracted athletes from their academic and athletic responsibilities, raising concerns about long-term player development.

The Future: Solutions or Further Division?

While some suggest capping NIL money or redistributing funds across all sports, the reality is that NIL is market-driven—brands will invest where they see value. However, creative solutions could help bridge the gap. Some universities are exploring school-wide NIL initiatives that offer every athlete at least a baseline income, while others are pushing for Olympic sports to build their collectives.

If left unchecked, the current NIL model threatens to deepen the divide between sports that thrive and those that merely survive. For now, the NIL era has made one thing clear: in college athletics, not all sports are created equal.