Following Indiana’s victory in the 2025 CFP, the conversation around the transfer portal and “pay-for-play” has become impossible to ignore. The Hoosiers’ 22-man starting lineup featured 14 transfers, the most of any national champion in the playoff era.
For some, that looks like buying a championship. For others, it reflects a long-overdue shift that allows athletes to maximize their limited eligibility.
Wherever the opinion falls, understanding the rise of NIL is essential to understanding the current state of college football. While it may feel like a sudden change, NIL has been building for years and is now a permanent part of the sport.
NIL, short for name, image, and likeness, refers to an athlete’s ability to profit from their personal brand. Prior to 2021, college athletes were largely restricted from doing so, even as schools and conferences generated significant revenue using their names and performances. That imbalance created growing tension across the sport, ultimately leading to a system designed to give players more control over how their image is used and how they are compensated.
Origins
Although discussion around NIL had circulated for years, the issue gained real traction in 2019 when California passed the first state law addressing it.
The Fair Pay to Play Act prohibited schools from punishing athletes for earning sponsorship money or hiring agents, marking a massive shift in how player compensation was viewed. Soon after, Florida became the first state to enact NIL legislation with an effective date of July 1, 2021, triggering a domino effect as other states rushed to pass similar laws to protect the competitiveness of their athletic programs.
Momentum accelerated further when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously in NCAA v. Alston on June 21, 2021. While the decision focused on limits to education-related benefits, it undermined the NCAA’s broader compensation model and reshaped the landscape around athlete rights.
Although the ruling did not directly legalize payments tied to name, image, and likeness, it served as the catalyst for NIL’s rapid expansion across college athletics.
Impact
NIL legislation has fundamentally changed how college football operates, both on and off the field, most notably by shifting power toward the athletes.
With that shift has come increased leverage. Players now have far greater negotiating power, which has driven a significant rise in transfer portal activity. What was once primarily a tool for athletes seeking better situations, whether due to coaching changes, playing time, or personal reasons, has evolved into something more transactional.
The transfer portal is now, in many cases, a marketplace where players explore opportunities tied directly to NIL compensation. That reality is reflected in the numbers. Former Alabama quarterback Ty Simpson was reportedly offered $6.5 million in NIL deals from the Miami Hurricanes to transfer rather than enter the 2026 draft.
Figures like that are difficult to ignore. For many athletes, particularly those looking to support themselves and their families, opportunities of that scale are not just appealing, they are transformative.
Future Outlook
One of the most common criticisms of NIL is that it has created an environment similar to professional free agency, where players can prioritize the most advantageous opportunities rather than long-term ties to a single program.
At the same time, NIL has provided clear benefits. Athletes now have meaningful control over their image and earning potential, allowing them to make decisions that better align with their personal and financial goals. In some cases, that has led players to remain in college longer rather than entering the draft immediately. For example, LSU quarterback Garrett Nussmeier reportedly accepted a $3.6 million NIL deal instead of declaring for the 2025 NFL Draft.
NIL has also introduced a layer of financial education that was previously missing. Many programs now require athletes to complete business or financial literacy training before participating in endorsement deals, helping prepare them for long-term financial decision-making.
That preparation could prove vital. A report from Sports Illustrated found that 78% of former NFL players experience serious financial difficulties, including bankruptcy, within two years of retirement. With increased financial education tied to NIL opportunities, there is reason to believe those outcomes could improve over time.
The Bigger Picture
NIL is often viewed through a glass-half-full or glass-half-empty lens.
On one hand, allowing athletes to profit from their own image represents a level of freedom long supported by players, fans, and even programs themselves.
On the other, NIL has made it easier for powerhouse programs to attract talent with substantial financial incentives. Traditional blue bloods like Alabama, Michigan, and Texas have donor bases and collectives capable of outspending much of the country.
In an effort to create more competitive balance, the NCAA has introduced a $20.5 million salary cap per Division I program. However, that figure only applies to money paid directly by schools, leaving big questions around enforcement as outside collectives and sponsorships continue to play a major role.
How those gaps are addressed will go a long way in determining what college football looks like over the next decade. What is clear is that the current model is still taking shape, change is inevitable, and the way the game was once played is now firmly in the rearview mirror.
If this was your kind of read, you’ll like what’s next. Get The Sandman Ticket, our free, weekly newsletter with picks, insights, and a little bit of everything we love about sports.
