U.S. College Athletics:Balancing Tradition, Commercialization, and Athlete Empowerment in the Next Era of College Sports

Introduction

At the center of this structure is the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), which regulates competition across more than 1,000 colleges and universities divided into three tiers: Division I, Division II, and Division III.

• Division I is home to the nation’s largest athletic programs, with the most scholarships, resources, and national media exposure. It includes the Power Five conferences (SEC, Big Ten, ACC, Big 12, Pac-12), which dominate college sports revenues through massive broadcasting deals.

• Division II balances athletic competition with academics, providing partial scholarships and fostering regional rivalries.

• Division III emphasizes participation and student experience, representing the largest number of institutions but prohibiting athletic scholarships.

In 2024, NCAA data shows that 20,453 sports teams were sponsored across all divisions, supporting nearly 550,000 student-athletes nationwide. This scale underscores how deeply athletics is woven into the fabric of American higher education.

The Economics of College Athletics

College athletics is not just about competition and school spirit — it is a multi-billion-dollar industry. The financial value of athletic departments at top universities rivals that of professional sports franchises, driven largely by football and men’s basketball revenues, along with lucrative media rights deals.

According to 2024 valuations, the top programs in U.S. college sports are worth well over $900 million, with some surpassing the $1 billion mark. Leading the way is Ohio State University, valued at $1.32 billion with $280 million in annual revenue. Close behind are the University of Texas at Austin ($1.28B, $271M revenue) and Texas A&M University ($1.26B, $279M revenue) — underscoring the strength of programs in the Big Ten and SEC, the two most powerful conferences in college sports.

Other universities rounding out the top tier include:

• University of Michigan ($1.06B, $230M revenue) – anchoring the Big Ten.

• University of Alabama ($978M, $200M revenue) – a perennial SEC powerhouse.

• University of Notre Dame ($969M, $224M revenue) – notable as the only private institution in the top 10, competing independently in football while aligned with the ACC for other sports.

• University of Georgia, Nebraska, Tennessee, and Oklahoma – all valued at or near the $900M threshold, reflecting the commercial strength of southern football-driven programs.

• The average valuation among the top 10 exceeds $1 billion.

• 8 of the top 10 programs are in the SEC or Big Ten, highlighting the financial gap with other conferences.

• Revenue concentration remains football-heavy, with basketball contributing significantly at select schools like Michigan and North Carolina (outside the top 10 list).

The dominance of the SEC and Big Ten is clear — together they account for the majority of the top-earning athletic departments. This financial muscle explains their negotiating power in media rights, realignment, and playoff structures, setting them apart from mid-major and Group of Five programs.

Media Rights & Broadcasting in College Athletics

One of the defining financial engines of college sports is the sale of television broadcast rights and licensing agreements. These deals not only drive the NCAA’s revenues but also fuel the financial strength of conferences and member schools.

The chart above shows that NCAA revenues from television and licensing rights have steadily increased over the past decade, with only minor fluctuations. In 2012, broadcast rights generated $666 million, a figure that has grown to $873 million in 2023. Projections suggest that by 2027, revenues will surpass $1 billion annually ($1.05B).

This growth reflects the increasing importance of live sports as premium entertainment content in a fragmented media environment. Even as streaming reshapes consumer viewing habits, college football and basketball continue to deliver massive audiences, securing long-term commitments from broadcasters.

Key drivers behind this rise include:

• Conference Media Rights Deals: The SEC, Big Ten, and other Power Five conferences have signed multi-billion-dollar agreements with ESPN, Fox, CBS, and streaming platforms, ensuring national coverage and inflating school revenues.

• March Madness: The NCAA men’s basketball tournament remains one of the most valuable properties in U.S. sports, generating over $900 million annually on its own through a long-term deal with CBS and Turner Sports.

• Playoff Expansion: The expansion of the College Football Playoff (CFP) is expected to further raise rights values, especially with streaming players like Amazon and Apple showing interest.

• Revenue grew from $666M (2012) → $873M (2023) → projected $1.05B (2027).

• Future growth aligns with new expanded playoff formats and conference realignments that concentrate power in the Big Ten and SEC.

The implications are clear: media rights dictate the power balance in college athletics. Schools in conferences with the richest broadcast deals can invest more heavily in facilities, coaching, and recruiting, widening the gap between the Power Five and other conferences. This trend raises questions about the long-term sustainability and competitive balance of the NCAA model.

Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL): A New Era in College Athletics

While universities and conferences secured billion-dollar revenues from broadcasting and media rights, the athletes who fueled that success were excluded from the financial upside. For decades, college players occupied a paradoxical position in U.S. sports: they were central to sold-out stadiums, lucrative sponsorships, and nationally televised games, yet the NCAA’s strict amateurism rules prohibited them from receiving compensation beyond scholarships and limited stipends.

This imbalance became increasingly difficult to defend in a marketplace where college sports often rivaled professional leagues in popularity and revenue. Pressure mounted from lawmakers, courts, and public opinion, all challenging the notion that athletes should generate billions of dollars in value without direct participation in the rewards.

The breakthrough came on July 1, 2021, when the NCAA implemented an interim policy allowing student-athletes to earn money from their Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL). This landmark decision fundamentally reshaped the economics of college athletics by granting athletes the right to sign endorsement deals, monetize their social media presence, launch personal businesses, and profit from activities such as camps or autograph sessions.

Since then, the NIL market has rapidly expanded, bringing new players into the college sports ecosystem. Brands ranging from local businesses to Fortune 500 companies have entered the space, targeting athletes not only from high-revenue sports like football and basketball but also from women’s athletics, where strong community engagement and digital influence have proven highly valuable.

The implications are profound:

• Athlete Empowerment: Students now act as entrepreneurs, leveraging personal branding skills that extend far beyond the playing field.

• Recruiting Dynamics: NIL opportunities influence athlete decisions about where to attend college, adding a new competitive dimension to recruiting.

• Market Growth: Analysts estimate that NIL deals exceeded $1 billion annually by 2023, and the market continues to scale.

• Regulatory Complexity: With no federal standard, state laws and school policies create a patchwork of rules that complicate compliance.

NIL has opened a new chapter in the ongoing professionalization of college sports. Once defined solely by institutional revenues and media rights, the business of college athletics now increasingly revolves around the athletes themselves—setting the stage for continued transformation.

The State of NIL in 2024–25

College sports changed forever on July 1, 2021, when the NCAA lifted restrictions and allowed student-athletes to profit from their Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL). What began as an experimental policy quickly became one of the most transformative shifts in the history of collegiate athletics. Over just a few years, the NIL market has grown from modest beginnings into a multi-billion-dollar ecosystem, reshaping the balance of power among athletes, universities, brands, and collectives.

In its first year (2021–22), the NIL market was valued at $917 million. By 2024–25, it is projected to surpass $1.67 billion, nearly doubling in scale within three years. This acceleration reflects both the maturation of commercial endorsement opportunities and the rise of NIL collectives—donor- and alumni-funded organizations that pool resources to create compensation packages for athletes.

Yet, the biggest shift is still ahead. In 2025–26, the NCAA and its Power Five conferences are preparing to implement a landmark settlement of the House, Hubbard, and Carter cases, introducing a revenue-sharing model that will allow universities to directly pay athletes. Projections suggest this change could push the NIL market beyond $2.5 billion in its first year of implementation.

Key dynamics shaping the NIL market today:

• Collectives in Transition: While early years were dominated by collective-driven deals, many schools are now moving toward in-house NIL operations or partnering with professional marketing agencies.

• Commercial NIL Growth: Beyond donor-driven payments, corporate sponsorships and social media-driven campaigns are expanding rapidly, diversifying athlete income streams.

• Budgeting and Compliance: Universities are beginning to introduce budget caps and tools to evaluate fair market value, ensuring sustainability as NIL becomes integrated into athletic department finances.

• Athlete Leverage: Athletes are no longer just participants in a system—they are stakeholders with bargaining power, shaping recruiting decisions, competitive balance, and public narratives.

The trajectory of NIL underscores a simple reality: college athletics is moving closer to professional sports models. The combination of direct revenue sharing and continued commercial growth ensures that the financial role of athletes will only expand, raising critical questions about equity, governance, and the future identity of collegiate athletics.

Market Overview: Normalizing NIL Behavior

While the growth of the NIL market has been dramatic, the composition of compensation reveals the real power dynamics behind college athlete payments. As of 2024, NIL collectives—organizations funded largely by donors and alumni—still account for over 80% of the total market, making them the central actors in athlete recruitment and retention.

By contrast, commercial compensation—deals with brands, sponsors, and companies—represents less than 20% of the overall NIL ecosystem. However, commercial NIL is expanding and diversifying, opening opportunities across a wider set of sports and athletes, including the rise of women’s basketball, which recently surpassed men’s basketball in NIL activity share for the first time.

Breakdown by activity:

• Appearances: Collectives dominate this space (30.4%), compared to just 10.5% from commercial deals, highlighting their use in structured, often donor-driven events.

• Social Media Posts: Both collectives (47.2%) and commercial brands (31.4%) rely on social platforms as a key vehicle, but brands are especially invested in athlete influence for digital marketing.

• “Other” Activities: Commercial NIL leads significantly (54.3%), with deals including ambassador programs, product testing, merchandising, and podcast appearances.

• Shoutouts & Autographs: These remain smaller portions of the market overall, but are relatively balanced between collective and commercial.

This distribution underscores two critical insights:

1. Collectives remain the dominant NIL force, often functioning as quasi-payroll structures designed to attract and retain talent in football and basketball.

2. Commercial NIL is where long-term sustainability lies. As brands continue to embrace athlete marketing, their share is expected to expand, particularly in sports with growing visibility like women’s basketball and Olympic sports.

The normalization of NIL behavior means student-athletes are no longer just engaging in one-off sponsorships—they are entering multi-faceted partnerships with both collectives and brands. Over time, the balance between donor-driven funding and commercial opportunities will shape the future equity and competitiveness of college athletics.

NIL by Sport: Where the Money Flows

A closer look at NIL compensation by sport reveals the entrenched dominance of football and men’s basketball, but also highlights the rising influence of women’s basketball in the commercial space.

• Collectives (81.6% of all NIL compensation):

  • Football commands the lion’s share, absorbing 72.2% of all collective NIL dollars.

  • Men’s basketball follows with 21.2%, while all other sports combined account for less than 7% of collective deals.

  • Women’s sports remain marginal in collective funding, with women’s basketball at just 2.3% and volleyball at 0.8%.
    

• Commercial NIL Deals:

  • Football still leads with 76.6%, reflecting its unmatched visibility and brand reach.

  • However, women’s basketball emerges as a major player, capturing 10.2% of commercial NIL deals — surpassing men’s basketball (8.6%) for the first time.

  • Other women’s sports, like volleyball (2.9%) and track & field/cross country (1.6%), are starting to gain traction with brands, signaling a broader diversification.

Key Insights

1. Football remains the economic engine of college athletics, dominating both collective and commercial NIL.

2. Men’s basketball still thrives in collective support, but women’s basketball is becoming a commercial powerhouse, thanks to star athletes, growing fan engagement, and media visibility.

3. The rise of women’s sports in commercial NIL suggests that brands are seeking new markets and audiences, especially as women’s basketball continues to break viewership and attendance records.

This shift signals a dual-track NIL market: donor-driven collectives remain concentrated in football and men’s basketball, while commercial deals are increasingly broadening opportunities across women’s sports.

Conclusion: The Future of College Athletics

College athletics in the United States stands at a crossroads. What began as a tradition of amateur competition woven into campus life has grown into a multi-billion-dollar enterprise fueled by media rights, alumni passion, and national visibility. The NCAA’s structure—with its divisions, conferences, and long history of regulation—still frames the system, but the forces reshaping it are increasingly financial and commercial.

The rise of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) has accelerated this transformation by shifting power toward athletes themselves. No longer limited to scholarships, student-athletes are now stakeholders in the economics of college sports, leveraging personal brands and commanding significant market value. This evolution has expanded opportunities across both men’s and women’s sports, while also introducing new challenges around regulation, recruiting dynamics, and competitive balance.

At the same time, the dominance of football and men’s basketball, coupled with the negotiating strength of the SEC and Big Ten, ensures that revenue concentration will remain a defining feature of the landscape. The impending move toward revenue-sharing agreements between universities and athletes will only deepen the parallels between collegiate and professional sports, raising critical questions about governance, equity, and the mission of higher education.

Looking ahead, the future of college athletics will hinge on balancing these competing pressures: tradition versus commercialization, institutional control versus athlete empowerment, and national spectacle versus academic mission. Whether this balance strengthens the fabric of higher education or accelerates its commercialization will depend on the decisions made by the NCAA, conferences, and universities in the years ahead.

One thing, however, is clear: college athletics is no longer just about the games played on Saturdays and during March Madness—it has become one of the most dynamic and influential sectors of the U.S. sports and business ecosystem, with its evolution being watched closely by athletes, institutions, brands, and fans alike.

Sources & References

CNBC — “College Sports Programs Valuations (CNBC)

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/12/19/college-sports-programs-valuations.html

NCAA — “NCAA Sports Sponsorship & Participation Rates Database”

https://www.ncaa.org/sports/2018/10/10/ncaa-sports-sponsorship-and-participation-rates-database.aspx

Opendorse — “The Annual Opendorse Report: NIL 2024-2025

https://calmatters.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/The_Annual_Opendorse_Report_-Version-2.pdf

Statista — “NCAA College Sports Dossier”

https://www.statista.com/study/14402/ncaa-college-sports-statista-dossier/