How does athletes having an independent income source negatively affect the bottom line for a school?My point is, the Supreme Court can’t stop Universities from dropping programs who don’t want to deal with the ruling and no longer want to lose money just to serve as a platform for some of the athletes to make money or to serve as a feeder program for the power teams. So technically, it does matter if some people don’t like it.
Big money donors behind a given sport can step up (or not) regardless of school size. It should make sports generally more affordable, if anything.
Do you think University Academic Leaders care much if at all, about the success on the field of their non-revenue sports?
I don't.
Athletic Administrators should care, because NIL has the potential to reduce their power and leverage. But eliminating sports would just be cutting off their nose in spite of their face.
As long as their are teams Coaches will concern themselves with the student athletes in front of them and the student body and alumni will rally behind those athletes.
Last edited: