NIL: It’s for the better!

For the first time, college athletes are reaping the benefits of what they’ve longed for – fairness through representation. 

Name, image and likeness – universally known as “NIL” – has been adopted in NCAA athletics as a way for athletes to bring in revenue for representing their university. There are endless amounts of discourse surrounding this topic, including opponents of it – whose points will be shot down in this column – claiming that NIL is “ruining” collegiate athletics; when in reality, they’re simply upset about athletes being fairly paid. 

Those critics often mention that NIL can be harmful to a player’s performance, as they may show a decline in effort after receiving a substantial amount of money. However, the opposite has proven to be true. According to a 2026 study done by ZipDo, athletes who participated in 10 or more NIL activities per month had a 12% higher game performance rating than those with fewer deals (Krause, 2026). This debunks the common argument from opponents of NIL, proving the contrary.

On the positive side, the most notable aspect of NIL is the fact that it has given college athletes a chance to build their personal and/or professional brands before they even leave college. Take Caitlin Clark for example, who quickly rose to fame as a prominent figure in women’s college basketball during the 2023-24 season. Her dominant on-court presence as a guard for Iowa allowed for an extensive sponsorship portfolio with multiple different brands, which increased her visibility throughout digital platforms. Clark made an estimated $3 million during her time at Iowa, allowing her to cash in on a variety of opportunities. 

She didn’t stop reaping the benefits after leaving Iowa in February of 2024. The brand that she built in college served her extremely well after taking the professional route, as Clark continued to sign endorsement deals and build on her image while in the WNBA. She made headlines after signing a historic eight-year, $28 million deal with Nike in April of 2024 – one that included a signature shoe, set to release not too long from now. It is the largest deal ever for a women’s basketball player, underlining the impact of Clark’s expansive NIL portfolio and personal image. 

Clark was able to develop a lucrative and credible NIL portfolio through deals with companies such as Nike, State Farm, Gatorade and more. She made herself a brand, and capitalized on it by delivering big on-court performances that turned marketable. 

It’s not just about the fame, either — NIL also gives college athletes a sense of financial stability. 

Before it was legalized on July 1, 2021, college athletes were not able to capitalize on their marketability – they represented an entire university yet were unable to profit off of it. The only avenues in which they gained money included scholarships and stipends, rendering them essentially unable to build their personal/professional brand through extracurriculars. 

That has all changed in today’s era of NIL, though, and for the better. Competitors are not “unpaid laborers” anymore – they now assist in developing their university’s image and can take advantage of that simple fact. College athletes that make the most off of NIL – including personnel such as Arch Manning, AJ Dybantsa and Jeremiah Smith – are set up for life due to the fact that they have taken advantage of their marketability. All three of those earners, and others that rank near the top of NIL deals, have delivered in competition, making them marketable to all audiences. 

Furthermore, the benefits of NIL aren’t just hitting major sports like football and basketball, either. According to the same ZipDo study, 71% of athletes who compete in non-revenue sports, such as tennis and golf, utilize money from NIL to cover living expenses. (Krause, 2026). This highlights how beneficial NIL money can be for athletes in sports that don’t typically generate significant income compared to others, as it helps the competitors cover basic necessities without the burdens of financial stress.

At the end of the day, NIL doesn’t ruin college sports – and it never will – it has simply exposed the unfairness from before.