Players are going to receive monetary compensation for their NIL deals. In our futureworld where the NCAA has either finally fully folded or simply stepped far back in control, player compensation will come from both NIL and Direct Pay sources. Direct pay will come from team affiliates or from the teams themselves.
In a deregulated player compensation environment, the better players on the more valuable teams will collect the most total compensation.
I have been thinking about what some of these players might be able to earn. I have looked at the NBA pay model and at the Forbes/WSJ valuations of teams. I focus on Men's Basketball, as I believe players in that sport will receive the highest average compensation nationwide.
The contractual union-management rule in the NBA is that players receive an aggregate of 50% of total team revenue, which includes ticket sales and media revenue.
For college teams the application of this rule would mean that 13 scholarship players (my arbitrary limit) would share in about 50% of total team revenue.
The college teams with the top average revenue for the last 3 seasons (2020-21 season data is not available ... and is not relevant):
https://www.forbes.com/sites/christ...ble-teams-ncaa-march-madness/?sh=785b17f4285d:
1. Kentucky $56m
2. Louisville $54m
3. Indiana $38m
4. Duke $35m
5. Kansas $34m
6. Syracuse $32m
7. Ohio State $30m
8. North Carolina $30m
9. Michigan State $29m
10. Illinois $28m
I will use Louisville as the example.
50% of total Louisville MBB revenue would equal $27m.
Dividing that up among 13 players yields $2 million per player per season.
I believe such a $2m per season number represents today's highest-end limit of what an average Louisville MBB player would receive. But that's today. Using the NBA pay to revenue relationship rules.
Use any NBA-to-NCAA de-rating factor you wish. Use any age-experience de-rating multiplier you wish. But the player comp number is still going to be pretty significant. And I don't think the NCAA or anyone else is going to step in to limit it. Not in our environment.
In a deregulated player compensation environment, the better players on the more valuable teams will collect the most total compensation.
I have been thinking about what some of these players might be able to earn. I have looked at the NBA pay model and at the Forbes/WSJ valuations of teams. I focus on Men's Basketball, as I believe players in that sport will receive the highest average compensation nationwide.
The contractual union-management rule in the NBA is that players receive an aggregate of 50% of total team revenue, which includes ticket sales and media revenue.
For college teams the application of this rule would mean that 13 scholarship players (my arbitrary limit) would share in about 50% of total team revenue.
The college teams with the top average revenue for the last 3 seasons (2020-21 season data is not available ... and is not relevant):
https://www.forbes.com/sites/christ...ble-teams-ncaa-march-madness/?sh=785b17f4285d:
1. Kentucky $56m
2. Louisville $54m
3. Indiana $38m
4. Duke $35m
5. Kansas $34m
6. Syracuse $32m
7. Ohio State $30m
8. North Carolina $30m
9. Michigan State $29m
10. Illinois $28m
I will use Louisville as the example.
50% of total Louisville MBB revenue would equal $27m.
Dividing that up among 13 players yields $2 million per player per season.
I believe such a $2m per season number represents today's highest-end limit of what an average Louisville MBB player would receive. But that's today. Using the NBA pay to revenue relationship rules.
Use any NBA-to-NCAA de-rating factor you wish. Use any age-experience de-rating multiplier you wish. But the player comp number is still going to be pretty significant. And I don't think the NCAA or anyone else is going to step in to limit it. Not in our environment.
Last edited:
