[StanfordMatt]

I've read so many articles about the new NIL system being broken apart.  No enforcement and it's business as usual; funnel as much money as possible from donors to elite recruits/transfers.  There is a charade of having a NIL request system in place but many programs find loopholes or the players ignore it completely.

I think this comment deserves more emphasis. In the 2025-26 academic year, the revenue share cap was $20.5 million. Most P4 programs are allocating around 75-80% of the cap to football, 10-15% to MBB, 5% to WBB and the remaining percentage points to what's left. Obviously, there are exceptions to this and the basketball programs at Big East schools like St. John's and Villanova that don't fund FBS football are at a competitive advantage because they don't have to share.

Under the House settlement, athletes from any sport are still eligible to earn money through legitimate NIL deals (an amount consistent with a player's fair market value for a defined set of deliverables) that don't count against the $20.5 million. Those deals are supposed to be approved by the College Sports Commission and its NIL Go clearinghouse before going into effect. As katebru mentioned, though, the system is a mess. A group of 18 Nebraska football players recently challenged the CSC's denial of their NIL deals in a case that could expose major cracks in the whole system.

Anyways, there are a group of schools that clearly don't give a damn about the cap or the legitimacy requirement of NIL deals. The top football programs are spending $40-$50 million on their rosters and the top MBB programs are spending close to $15 million. In a lot of cases, the NIL deals being put forth are from multimedia rights partners or apparel companies. For example, Texas Tech is partnered with Under Armour. The Red Raiders need a new left tackle and the going rate for top left tackles is $1 million. Lo and behold, Under Armour decides they want to sign that left tackle to a $1 million NIL deal. It is a VERY GRAY area (hence the Nebraska case) but a lot of programs are comfortable living in the gray.

I am the furthest thing from a Stanford WBB insider, but my guess is that the availability of the money may not be as big of an obstacle as how to get that money into the athletes' hands on the up and up. After football and MBB, there's probably not a lot left of the $20.5 million pie leftover for WBB to compete at the level Stanford fans are accustomed to. Having a big donor is nice but it's only half the battle in this new landscape and Stanford will always be extremely conservative when it comes to playing by the rules.

[StanfordMatt]

I've read so many articles about the new NIL system being broken apart.  No enforcement and it's business as usual; funnel as much money as possible from donors to elite recruits/transfers.  There is a charade of having a NIL request system in place but many programs find loopholes or the players ignore it completely.

I think this comment deserves more emphasis. In the 2025-26 academic year, the revenue share cap was $20.5 million. Most P4 programs are allocating around 75-80% of the cap to football, 10-15% to MBB, 5% to WBB and the remaining percentage points to what's left. Obviously, there are exceptions to this and the basketball programs at Big East schools like St. John's and Villanova that don't fund FBS football are at a competitive advantage because they don't have to share.

Under the House settlement, athletes from any sport are still eligible to earn money through legitimate NIL deals (an amount consistent with a player's fair market value for a defined set of deliverables) that don't count against the $20.5 million. Those deals are supposed to be approved by the College Sports Commission and its NIL Go clearinghouse before going into effect. As katebru mentioned, though, the system is a mess. A group of 18 Nebraska football players recently challenged the CSC's denial of their NIL deals in a case that could expose major cracks in the whole system.

Anyways, there are a group of schools that clearly don't give a damn about the cap or the legitimacy requirement of NIL deals. The top football programs are spending $40-$50 million on their rosters and the top MBB programs are spending close to $15 million. In a lot of cases, the NIL deals being put forth are from multimedia rights partners or apparel companies. For example, Texas Tech is partnered with Under Armour. The Red Raiders need a new left tackle and the going rate for top left tackles is $1 million. Lo and behold, Under Armour decides they want to sign that left tackle to a $1 million NIL deal. It is a VERY GRAY area (hence the Nebraska case) but a lot of programs are comfortable living in the gray.

I am the furthest thing from a Stanford WBB insider, but my guess is that the availability of the money may not be as big of an obstacle as how to get that money into the athletes' hands on the up and up. After football and MBB, there's probably not a lot left of the $20.5 million pie leftover for WBB to compete at the level Stanford fans are accustomed to. Having a big donor is nice but it's only half the battle in this new landscape and Stanford will always be extremely conservative when it comes to playing by the rules.