Frank N. Darras
Founding Partner
DarrasLaw
Email: frank@darraslaw.com
Western State Univ COL; Fullerton CA
Name, image and likeness (NIL) rights may have empowered college athletes to identify major earning opportunities that were not available in prior eras. At the same time, they open doors to significant risks that can threaten athletes' physical and financial well-being, in addition to the demands of their academic obligations.
Many past and present coaches and athletes, along with lawmakers and media personalities, are harking back to what they refer to as "the good old days," when college sports were less influenced by commercialization. Some are even critical of our athletes who receive compensation in the current system. Today, the modern landscape has shifted decisively toward commercialization, and even the Protect College Sports Act (PCSA), which is awaiting a vote when the Senate returns from recess, seeks to find middle ground in accommodating NIL's impact without reversing course or turning back the clock.
This article analyzes how the commercialization of college athletics through NIL and structured revenue-sharing has transformed the landscape of athlete decision-making. It will also delve into why robust legal sports and insurance guidance is now indispensable to ensure that emerging opportunities do not become vehicles for exploitation.
Football's high scores
An examination of football alone as college's highest-grossing sport illustrates the risks and rewards of the modern NIL era. Opendorse's most recent annual report, College Football Wrapped, chronicled how NIL influenced the game, how it was played and who benefited from various agreements.
According to the report, total spending tied to NIL products and services for college football players neared $1.9 billion in 2025, with nearly $297 million flowing to service providers and other industry expenses like tools and infrastructure. The remaining $1.6 billion was paid directly to athletes.
With revenue-sharing in full effect across major college sports and Division I schools, Opendorse estimated that NIL's total impact, including men's and women's basketball, reached at least $2.5 billion in 2025.
Before anyone gets the wrong idea that players have a much easier time now that they can legally earn their compensation, it is worth considering the realities they face.
Inside the mind of a NIL-valuated teenager
Sports is big business, especially in college. Most athletes approached with a legitimate NIL endorsement would take it, especially now that it is legal. We all know more problems often follow more money, and there are myriad risks associated with NIL valuations, particularly for those who play team sports.
University of Florida Gators Head Coach Jon Sumrall was quoted earlier this year responding to players who complained of certain hardships: "You make money, shut up bro." This is a sentiment shared by many stakeholders and former players who could not secure compensation during their college careers. It's also the wrong outlook.
Now, in addition to having to pass their classes and perform at their peak on the field, a recent high school graduate turned college athlete needs to consider:
While the earnings potential is substantial, the idea that college athletes don't know "how good they have it" is exaggerated when considering all these added stressors that our college athletes did not face a decade ago.
What has changed is not merely that real money is now available, but that it is available through structures cloaked in legality, collectives, conferencewide revenue sharing, and NIL agreements that may technically comply with applicable statutes yet remain exploitative in practice. The manipulation is no longer confined to scholarships and under-the-table benefits; it is embedded in clear-as-mud contract terms, reporting thresholds, caps protected by limited antitrust immunity, and even the messaging around "protecting" college sports. In that environment, the notion that athletes can rely on informal advice, or institutional goodwill is outdated and dangerous.
1. Career-ending disability insurance, in case of severe injury or sickness
2. Loss-of-value insurance, in case of an anticipated drop-in slot or draft position
3. Critical injury insurance to pay for specific knee, back, neck and shoulder injuries
4. Loss of endorsement insurance along with agent commission coverage
5. The proper representation in the form of an agent and sports insurance lawyer, to ensure contracts are drafted fairly--and honored
6. Help selecting the proper insurance and guidance on policy terms and confusing, complicated applications
7. Finding the right financial planners and tax preparation
8. A sports insurance litigator to enforce the contracts and ensure timely payments
Who will federal legislation actually 'protect'?
The Protect College Sports Act (PCSA) is the latest attempt to impose a national NIL and revenue-sharing framework on what has become a fragmented, state-by-state marketplace. In many ways, it promises exactly what anxious stakeholders say they want:
• Preemption of inconsistent state laws
• Codification of the House v. NCAA settlement's revenue-sharing model
• A clearer set of eligibility and transfer rules that apply uniformly to athletes across conferences
In print, that kind of uniformity should help lift at least part of the veil of uncertainty that currently hangs over NIL agreements, collectives, and revenue-sharing caps.
For our athletes, the PCSA's protections are not trivial: it preserves our student athletes' rights to earn NIL compensation, bars schools and governing bodies from revoking scholarships or eligibility for legitimate NIL activity, creates clear reporting thresholds for NIL deals above $600, and requires that NIL deals be tied to valid business purposes at fair market value. It also mandates and tightens agent regulation by updating federal standards and registration parameters, capping endorsement fees at 5%, and giving athletes a private right of action against agents who mislead them.
Those provisions speak directly to the Opendorse finding that athletes represented by agents and lawyers earned more than twice as much as their unrepresented peers in 2025; if implemented effectively, these changes could reduce some of the worst information asymmetries in the current market.
Unfortunately, the same bill that promises clarity also entrenches new structural limits and power dynamics that may hinder long-term athlete leverage. By giving the NCAA and conferences a limited antitrust exemption to enforce compensation caps, transfer rules and guardrails on third-party NIL deals, the PCSA effectively freezes the House revenue-sharing ceiling and makes any future upward adjustment dependent on a political rather than purely economic process.
Preemption of state law and federal antitrust protection also risks silencing state-level experimentation and collective bargaining efforts that could have expanded our athletes' rights, a concern already flagged by labor advocates and some athlete groups.
The bill's silence on employment status further prolongs the uncertainty over whether our high-revenue athletes will ever be treated as workers entitled to traditional labor and workers' compensation, along with health insurance protection. These are the sorts of reasons that our student athletes need experienced sports and insurance counsel to help wade through the confusion, instead of merely being expected to 'take the money and keep quiet."
Preparing for the 2026-27 season and possible 'protection'
Our college athletes now live in an environment rich with opportunity and equally saturated with intense pressure, conflicting incentives, and sophisticated efforts to influence their decisions. As Tony Soprano memorably said: "Remember whens are the lowest form of conversation." The same is true against the backdrop of sports. Not only does it miss the point, but it also risks trivializing the complexity of the modern NIL and the revenue-sharing marketplace and, in doing so, underserves both our athletes and the sport itself.
Even if passed as written, the Protect College Sports Act will not return the system to pre-2021 norms and pretending otherwise only delays the serious day-to-day guidance our athletes need.
Sports and college athletics insurance counsel are essential to navigating this evolving terrain. Lawyers can help athletes and their families separate legitimate opportunity from predatory structure, stress-test NIL and revenue-sharing agreements against evolving federal and conference rules and push back when "compliance" becomes a pretext for suppressing compensation or mobility. They also play a critical role in advising schools, conferences and policymakers to ensure that the pursuit of stability does not come at the expense of our athletes' rights or long-term health and welfare.