The Three Things CFB and CBB Need to Fix If They Want to Be Watchable
Three things, multiple takes I have that you should read
Three things have changed college sports in a major way, and not all of those changes have been for the better. But what are they, and how can we fix them?
1. N.I.L.
NIL has shifted college sports from an amateur model toward a professional one, and without structure, that shift is doing more harm than good.
NIL has completely changed college sports, and at first, it was a great thing. Athletes finally gained the ability to profit from their name, image, and likeness, something they should have had decades ago. For the first time, players could help their families, build brands, and be financially stable while still in school. That part of NIL is absolutely a win.
But now, NIL has gone too far.
What started as a fairness movement has turned into something that looks far too much like professional free agency. Players are not just earning money anymore. They are shopping for the biggest deal, regardless of fit, development, or opportunity. If a better offer pops up, they leave. No waiting period. No real commitment. Just gone.
That constant movement is killing stability in college sports.
It is not just the players, either. Coaches can jump ship whenever a bigger contract comes calling. In college football, LSU paying massive money to lure Lane Kiffin away from Ole Miss is a perfect example of how ruthless this has become. Ole Miss did not just lose a coach. They lost the guy who rebuilt the program, led them to national relevance, and positioned them as a playoff team. One decision and one check wiped away years of progress.
And now we have crossed another line. Schools are effectively re signing players, just like professional franchises. USC publicly announcing that they re-signed running back Waymond Jordan, among others says everything. South Carolina reaching an agreement to keep quarterback LaNorris Sellers feels less like college football and more like NFL free agency news.
Let us stop pretending. These are not amateur programs anymore. These are teams.
The worst part is that competitive balance is collapsing. Wealthy programs with massive donor bases can simply outbid everyone else, stockpile talent, and reload every offseason. Smaller schools develop players, give them opportunities, and then lose them the moment they break out. Take wide receiver Danny Scudero, for example. The former Sacramento State Hornet transferred to San Jose State for the 2025 season. Now, after a breakout year, he is transferring again, likely to a championship contending team like Georgia, Michigan, or Oklahoma. That is a great decision for Scudero, but he is leaving a program that already trusted him with the offense and made him the focal point.
NIL itself is not the problem. The lack of structure and regulation is.
The Fix
The solution starts with a program wide NIL spending cap. Not a cap per player, but a cap per team. Every school gets the same amount to work with. If you want to win, you have to sell recruits on coaching, development, culture, and opportunity, not just money.
College sports should reward building something, not buying everything.
NIL is making college football and basketball more like the NFL and NBA in all the wrong ways.
2. Conference Realignments
Conference realignment shows how chasing revenue has slowly stripped college sports of geography, rivalries, and identity.
Conference realignment might be the most obvious example of money killing what made college sports special.
For decades, conferences were built on geography, rivalries, and identity. Fans grew up watching the same matchups every year, and until recently, that system worked. Conferences like the Pac-12 thrived because they grouped top regional programs together. Now, teams like UCLA, USC, and Oregon are playing in massive conferences like the Big Ten, facing opponents on the opposite side of the country.
The ACC now has Cal and Stanford. Two California based schools are playing in the Atlantic Coast Conference. That alone makes no sense.
In fact, Cal played the Miami Hurricanes last season, a nearly three thousand mile road trip for the Golden Bears. What happened to geographic logic? Teams should not be leaving for conferences they clearly do not belong in.
There is a simple fix. Limit conference size and prioritize geography. We should not be seeing Cal versus Miami. UCLA versus Ohio State is not ideal either, but it is still better than crossing the entire country.
I also have to point out that, as I am writing and publishing this, I am in Boca Raton, Florida. And guess what? I live in Los Angeles. So I’ve experienced that flight before — and oh boy. 5.5-6 hours is tiring.
There need to be limits. Conference sizes should be capped, and geography should matter again. Not every decision that makes money is good for the sport.
3. Five Year Holdbacks? Seriously?
Eligibility rules have become inconsistent and confusing, creating a system that contradicts the idea of college athletics.
The idea of holdbacks or extended eligibility restrictions might be the most confusing part of the NCAA’s logic.
The NCAA allows players to transfer freely, chase NIL money, and treat rosters like revolving doors. At the same time, it allows players far older than typical undergraduates to compete. Extensions are necessary for athletes like Gonzaga men’s basketball player Tyon Grant Foster, who suffered serious medical issues and missed years of the sport he loves. However, the same logic should not apply to former professional athletes trying to restart their careers in college, such as former MLB player and Arkansas receiver Monte Harrison.
If a player wants to stay, earn a degree, and compete, they should be allowed to do so. If injuries cost them years, they deserve another chance. What should not happen is players nearing thirty years old competing against traditional college athletes.
This is where limits are needed. There should be a maximum number of years a player can compete past graduation. Two years is reasonable. Grant Foster should be allowed to play, but eligibility should end around age twenty six or twenty seven. Two years after open heart surgery is fair. Extending that window further crosses the line.
This rule would significantly impact NBA G League players who want to enter college basketball. Under the current system, players as young as twenty two can return to college after playing professionally. BYU’s Abdullah Ahmed, Louisville’s London Johnson, and Santa Clara’s Thierry Darlan are examples of players who have taken advantage of this pathway.
College sports need to look in the mirror and ask a serious question. What is the purpose of the sport now? When older athletes, cross country conferences, and former professionals are all part of the same system, the identity of college athletics becomes unclear.
Final Thoughts
College sports are at a crossroads.
NIL is not evil, but it needs structure. Conference realignment is not always bad, but in many cases it removes what made the sport fun. Eligibility restrictions are necessary, and significantly older athletes should not be competing in college sports.
If the NCAA does not step in with real regulation, college football and men’s college basketball will not collapse. However, they will lose what made them matter. Loyalty, identity, and development are being replaced by money, chaos, and short term thinking.
What do you think about this? Let me know down below!
Hey Jack, I really liked the article and I find it to be relevant in a time where NIL is a major talking point in college sports. I do have a few comments though in regards to your solutions and opinions on the harm of NIL.
First, I have heard that with the introduction of NIL, there is an unfair advantage now. The wealthiest schools get the best players. I would argue that the same schools that were always winning, are still winning. Pre NIL, schools such as Ohio State, Michigan, and Georgia were winning the national championship. That has not been changed by NIL.
Two, your suggestion of a cap for NIL I believe faces many threats to its existence because NIL isn’t what the schools pay the players, it’s what business’s or donors pay athletes to represent their products or personal interests. To cap that would potentially violate antitrust laws, the same laws that the US judicial system deemed violated by the NCAA for not allowing players to profit off their NIL in the first place.
Also, the SEC and the B10 would have to agree to a similar caps, which could potentially lead to a smaller conference offering student athletes zero cap, giving them a competitive advantage in recruitment.
It’s a good starting point for how should post amateurism in revenue generating college sports be managed, but it may not be feasible. We agree that there is a lot of change, and that Lane Kiffin being forced to leave and not coach for ole miss during the CFP is a negative example of the current rules. That can be fixed though with proper scheduling of when and how the recruitment schedule works.
I like NIL, I like players getting paid as much as the market seems them being worth. There does however need to be more structure, that you have gotten absolutely right