A groundbreaking new study published in Management Science is rewriting our understanding of the effects of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) policies on college football. Conducted by esteemed researchers Tim Derdenger of Carnegie Mellon University’s Tepper School of Business and Ivan Li from the Naveen Jindal School of Management at the University of Texas at Dallas, this research challenges the prevailing narrative that NIL simply benefits already dominant programs. Instead, the findings reveal that NIL has substantially increased competitive balance and expanded opportunities for athletes across the collegiate landscape.
Historically, college football recruitment has been characterized by a concentration of elite talent within a select group of powerhouse programs, driving a “rich get richer” phenomenon. However, by analyzing recruitment data before and after the introduction of NIL, the researchers uncovered a notable dispersion of top-tier talent, including 3, 4, and 5-star recruits. This dispersion disrupts entrenched hierarchies by enabling programs that were previously unable to compete financially or brand-wise to attract higher-caliber athletes. The implications for the sport’s competitive equilibrium and athlete empowerment are profound.
The study delves into recruitment patterns, leveraging comprehensive data sets that encapsulate multiple variables such as recruits’ star rankings, athletic performance metrics, institutional attributes, and subsequent team outcomes. By comparing pre-NIL and post-NIL periods, the researchers quantitatively demonstrate how NIL-driven personalized pricing mechanisms have altered the dynamics of athlete decision-making and institutional recruitment strategies. These shifts reflect an emerging ecosystem where financial incentives tied to individual brand valuation directly influence the distribution of athletic talent.
Contrary to the common presumption that NIL benefits predominantly the highest-ranked programs by amplifying their recruiting advantages, the study’s statistical models indicate that lower-ranked and mid-tier programs now command greater leverage in attracting elite recruits, particularly at the 5-star level and among lower-ranked 4-star athletes. This changing landscape allows these institutions to enhance their competitive profiles by capitalizing on the financial and branding opportunities that NIL affords. The result is a more level playing field where athletes gain from increased bargaining power, and schools acquire the ability to offer attractive, holistic opportunities beyond mere athletic prestige.
Ivan Li, coauthor of the study, emphasizes, “Our findings clearly show that NIL is not just about the top institutions; it’s empowering a broader range of schools to compete for elite talent, directly benefiting more student-athletes.” This statement underscores a pivotal transformation in the economics of college athletics—a redistribution of agency from institutions toward athletes themselves, who now weigh financial opportunities alongside athletic goals when selecting schools.
From a competitive balance standpoint, the research presents compelling evidence that NIL has enhanced parity in college football matchups. By incorporating factors such as talent levels, team performance metrics, and transfer portal activity, the team analyzed sportsbook point spreads as an objective proxy for competitive uncertainty. The data reveal a significant narrowing of predicted game point differentials post-NIL, signaling more closely contested games. This evolution suggests NIL fosters an environment where competitive unpredictability and engagement for fans are heightened.
Tim Derdenger highlights, “We’ve observed a tangible shift in competitive dynamics. These data speak volumes: NIL makes college football a more exciting and less predictable sport, which is a win for everyone involved.” Such insights nod toward cultural and commercial benefits that extend beyond raw athletic performance, potentially influencing viewership, fan loyalty, and athlete development opportunities.
Beyond on-field outcomes, the study probes the nuanced impacts of NIL on athletes’ educational and career considerations. It exposes a marked trend among 3-star recruits, who increasingly privilege potential NIL earnings over traditional academic metrics such as the average SAT scores or the typical mid-career salaries of a college’s graduates. This signals a strategic recalibration in athlete decision-making, where immediate financial returns serve as a prioritized factor, contrasting with prior paradigms centered predominantly on educational institution prestige.
This shift further reflects the complex interplay between short-term economic incentives and longer-term career trajectories, posing new questions for policymakers and educators about how best to support student-athletes holistically. The trend emphasizes heightened athlete agency, illustrating how NIL policies enable personalized career and educational strategies that align with individual aspirations and financial necessities.
In light of these findings, the authors recommend proactive policy frameworks that encourage widespread NIL adoption across collegiate programs. Crucially, the study advocates for legally binding regulations targeting NIL collectives, including mandatory registration systems and transparent disclosure of NIL arrangements to safeguard equity and competitive integrity. Such measures are posited as essential to balancing market freedom with accountability in this rapidly evolving ecosystem.
In addition to regulatory recommendations, the researchers stress the importance of comprehensive athlete education regarding NIL contracts. NIL counseling programs and monitoring mechanisms for contract obligations aim to empower athletes with the knowledge to navigate complex endorsement landscapes responsibly. Continuous research and dynamic policy adjustments are necessary to gauge long-term NIL impacts and ensure the sustenance of a fair, competitive collegiate athletic environment.
Beyond the analytical contributions, this study exemplifies the ways in which personalized pricing models—from economics to sports—can yield broader societal and competitive benefits when thoughtfully implemented. By linking athlete brand value directly to recruitment and competitive strategies, NIL creates a multidimensional marketplace fostering dynamism and decentralization within college football.
As college athletics continues to evolve in an increasingly commercialized digital age, this rigorous empirical work offers critical insights into how economic incentives reshape not only talent distribution but also the underpinning structures governing athlete welfare, institutional competition, and fan engagement. The implications extend beyond sports economics into the realms of education, marketing, and social equity, positioning NIL as a transformative policy with widespread reverberations.
Ultimately, this research signals a paradigmatic shift—one where the empowerment of student-athletes through economic personalization redefines collegiate football. The intricate balance between financial opportunity, athletic ambition, and academic choice reflects the complex realities of modern student-athlete experiences. The study’s compelling evidence and thoughtful policy prescriptions pave the way for a reimagined era of college sports characterized by fairness, competition, and opportunity for all stakeholders.
Subject of Research: Effects of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) policies on competitive balance and athlete empowerment in college football.
Article Title: Does Personalized Pricing Increase Competition? Evidence from NIL in College Football
News Publication Date: 8-Sep-2025
Web References:
Management Science Article DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2024.06423
References: Not provided in the content.
Image Credits: Not provided in the content.
Keywords: Sports, Marketing, Mass media, Corporations, Economics, Educational attainment, Educational levels, Educational programs, Students, Academic job market, Learning
