The Emerging “Middle Class” in College Sports
Written by Matthew Manno | March 26, 2026
When asked to picture the highest paid athletes in sports, players like the New York Mets’ Juan Soto come to mind. He’s paid an average of $51 million per year. Interestingly enough, that $51 million is the same amount that Texas A&M University pays to its athletes through monetization of the athlete’s name, image and likeness (NIL). Many proponents of NIL argue that it removes guardrails on athletes’ earnings potential, considering the billions of dollars in revenue they provide to schools through ticket sales & television revenue. However, dissidents of NIL in its current state argue that it creates a competitive imbalance based upon the amount of money teams can provide to their athletes. That imbalance is perfectly reflected in the past year’s edition of Men’s March Madness. The 2025 edition of the NCAA Tournament saw the 3rd lowest combined seed of the last 16 teams, which represented a record-low 4 conferences. Those conferences are the SEC, ACC, Big Ten, and Big 12, also known as the Power 4. Teams from these leagues are typically large state schools with enormous donor bases and NIL collectives, dedicated to bettering the student-athlete experience and compensation. At best, NIL provides student-athletes an opportunity to reap the rewards of their athletic exploits. At worst, NIL provides the foundation for a permanent underclass in college athletics.
Currently in NCAA Football, there already exist two subdivisions: Football Bowl Series (FBS) & Football Championship Series (FCS). The differences between the two as defined by the NCAA are the championships the two divisions compete for, and the lack of scholarships FCS schools offer compared to the FBS. Currently, there exists a growing financial divide between Power 4 & other non-Power 4, “mid-major” programs . As of 2024, only one mid-major program, Memphis, is in the top fifty in NIL spending. Without a spending cap or structure governing NIL, it is becoming increasingly clear that smaller schools cannot compete.
Governing NIL spending is still challenging, with few solutions proposed by leaders in college athletics. Two main solutions arise. The first is a legitimate middle division between the FBS and FCS. The FBS would remain as is, with Power 4 teams competing for the right to play for a national championship in the College Football Playoff. The middle division comprises schools from the American Athletic Conference, Conference USA, Mid-American Conference, Mountain West & Sun Belt. The newly revived Pac-12 Conference will also be a part of this division, as it is composed of former members of conferences such as the Mountain West. The middle division would still compete for the right to play in bowl games, and could even form their own Playoff using existing bowl games. This solution however, fails to recognize the competitive legitimacy of the “Group of 6,” (or mid-majors) who sent a landmark two teams (Tulane & James Madison) to the 2026 College Football Playoff. It also fails to discourage teams from poaching players in the transfer portal using increased NIL earning potential.
A second solution takes a page out of the book of European professional soccer. When a soccer player wishes to transfer clubs while their contract is still active, their new club must pay a fee to their old club, effectively buying out that player’s contract to free them to sign with that new club. This happens between top clubs, who pay as much as $267 million to players like Neymar Jr., as well as between a larger and smaller club, where the former pays the latter to gain the services of a young talent. This easily could be applied to college football. By instituting a “transfer fee” in college football, where a Power 4 school must pay a Group of 6 school to acquire the NIL contract of an up-and-coming player, schools are less likely to start bidding wars for players, competitive balance within conferences can be restored, and teams can be rewarded for properly developing talent. Some would argue that the transfer fee wouldn’t dissuade larger Power 4 schools from poaching players, but that isn’t the intention of this proposed policy. Instead, it is to ensure schools have incentive to develop homegrown players directly out of high school. NIL has the potential to balloon out-of-control, but, with proper regulation, there may not be a need for a permanent underclass in college football.
