[OutsiderFan]

"The WNBA is 25 years old and its base salary for the top four picks in the draft is over $70,000..."

Can that be accurate?  They make it sound like that's a good thing. 



This article tends to reinforce the idea that 1% of college athletes will be making all the money and 99% will not profit.

So just like the greater capitalist economy in general.

Or, considering sports is entertainment, the "traditional" entertainment industry. You have a handful of mega-famous A-listers, a few handfuls of other performers associated with those A-listers that get some solid scraps of their own, and then thousands and thousands and thousands of struggling hopefuls who at least have SAG health insurance and a few small residual checks thanks to a couple local commercials and a minor part in a shitty Netflix show that got cancelled after one season.

Completely true that benefits will be disproportional and analogous to the entertainment industry. But the difference is that for student-athletes any NIL compensation is essentially gravy. The struggling actor still has to survive, meaning working a job or jobs in order to pay rent and eat, so those residual checks are only making a small dent into a losing situation (financially). A scholarship athlete who makes a few thousand dollars (or even just a few hundred) puts it in his/her pocket and is objectively doing better than he/she was doing a year ago pre-NIL. That's why I don't agree that 99% will not profit since any NIL payment is profit, and we're already seeing that plenty of non-stars are entering into NIL deals, even though most are local and presumably modestly compensated.

The guy paying all Miami Football players if they post about his gym on their social channels provides a counter-factual to the "winner take all" dynamic, that will in general obviously prevail.

[OutsiderFan]

"The WNBA is 25 years old and its base salary for the top four picks in the draft is over $70,000..."

Can that be accurate?  They make it sound like that's a good thing. 



This article tends to reinforce the idea that 1% of college athletes will be making all the money and 99% will not profit.

So just like the greater capitalist economy in general.

Or, considering sports is entertainment, the "traditional" entertainment industry. You have a handful of mega-famous A-listers, a few handfuls of other performers associated with those A-listers that get some solid scraps of their own, and then thousands and thousands and thousands of struggling hopefuls who at least have SAG health insurance and a few small residual checks thanks to a couple local commercials and a minor part in a shitty Netflix show that got cancelled after one season.

Completely true that benefits will be disproportional and analogous to the entertainment industry. But the difference is that for student-athletes any NIL compensation is essentially gravy. The struggling actor still has to survive, meaning working a job or jobs in order to pay rent and eat, so those residual checks are only making a small dent into a losing situation (financially). A scholarship athlete who makes a few thousand dollars (or even just a few hundred) puts it in his/her pocket and is objectively doing better than he/she was doing a year ago pre-NIL. That's why I don't agree that 99% will not profit since any NIL payment is profit, and we're already seeing that plenty of non-stars are entering into NIL deals, even though most are local and presumably modestly compensated.

The guy paying all Miami Football players if they post about his gym on their social channels provides a counter-factual to the "winner take all" dynamic, that will in general obviously prevail.