Social Impact

Race

NIL has opened new financial doors for Black student-athletes, particularly in revenue-heavy sports like football and men’s basketball. These athletes have long generated immense value for their institutions without compensation. Now, these athletes can begin to profit from the cultural capital they bring to the game. This shift is significant, especially given the NCAA’s long history of profiting from Black labor while offering little institutional support beyond the field. From a performance studies lens, college sports have long acted as a stage where Black athletes perform excellence under white institutional control, often while being denied roles behind the scenes.

Yet despite these new opportunities, racial inequities remain deeply embedded in the system. Predominantly white institutions with deeper pockets and stronger media infrastructures offer more robust branding support and access to lucrative sponsorships. Racial bias also shapes who is seen as “marketable”—privileging certain aesthetics or personas and reinforcing damaging stereotypes. As one analysis points out, “Black athletes, regardless of how their expectations align with white athletes, may be differentially treated when approaching deal opportunities even if they approach the deal in the same manner a white athlete would.” Again, this may impact compensation outcomes not based on skill or effort, but on race and perception.

Again, this may impact compensation outcomes not based on skill or effort, but on race and perception.

Meanwhile, Black athletes continue to be underrepresented in positions of power within collegiate athletics. Black coaches held only 9% of head positions at the Division I level, which was the same as last year—a statistic that underscores how slowly structural change is happening off the field. If NIL ends up reinforcing the dominance of already-powerful programs that lack diversity in leadership, it risks deepening these systemic disparities rather than challenging them.

Gender

The NIL era has put a spotlight on existing gender inequalities in college athletics—and in some cases, made them even more visible. While a few high-profile women athletes in sports like gymnastics, basketball, and volleyball have landed major NIL deals thanks to strong social media presence or marketable personas, the broader picture reveals a steep imbalance.

Data from Opendorse, a prominent NIL platform, indicates that more than 60% of all NIL agreements are obtained by male athletes. This mirrors longstanding disparities in sports marketing and media attention, where men’s sports—especially football and basketball—dominate airtime, sponsorship dollars, and public interest.

As a result, women athletes often face a dual pressure: they must not only excel in their sport but also craft and maintain a personal brand to stay competitive in the NIL space. This labor—curating content, promoting lifestyle aesthetics, engaging with fans—adds a layer of expectation that goes far beyond performance on the field or court. From a performance studies perspective, this demand reinforces the idea that female athletes must perform femininity, marketability, and relatability alongside athletic skill to be seen as valuable.

Moreover, the gender gap in coaching and leadership roles compounds these disparities. Women coaches remain underrepresented, particularly in women’s sports, where male leadership still dominates. Without gender-diverse voices shaping athletic policy, promotion, and NIL strategy, these gaps are likely to persist or even widen under the new system.

Nationality / International Students

International student-athletes occupy an even more precarious position. Due to F-1 visa restrictions, they are typically barred from earning income in the U.S. beyond very narrow on-campus employment rules. That means NIL deals, which their U.S.-born teammates can freely pursue, are often legally off-limits. Some athletes have had to wait until returning to their home countries during school breaks to sign sponsorship agreements. Others risk violating visa terms just to participate in the NIL marketplace, which can jeopardize their immigration status and academic futures.

This exclusion has major implications. International athletes, many of whom came to the U.S. for athletic opportunity, now find themselves sidelined from one of the most transformative shifts in college sports. While there’s increasing political and legal conversation about changing these rules, for now, NIL remains an uneven playing field. Like race and gender, this is not just about access to money—it’s about access to power, representation, and visibility in the public spectacle of college athletics.