How Good Are NIL Deals for Brands Looking to Invest in Athletes?

The NCAA’s updated name, image and likeness (NIL) guidelines — which allow student-athletes to monetize these things — will turn four years old this summer. Its impact on every aspect of collegiate sports has been massive and well-documented. 

Big donor money is lining the pockets of universities like never before. Long-standing conferences have undergone major realignments to chase bigger and better media rights deals, hoping that increased visibility and revenue opportunities will make them even more attractive to top prospects (among other things). And most visibility, the biggest college stars are now able to command millions of dollars in endorsement deals and other brand partnerships. 

But what are the companies helping to turn these athletes into millionaires and household names getting out of all of this? A new Morning Consult survey set out to explore this question and found that, oftentimes, the answer is complicated.  

NIL’s state of play

Public support for NIL peaked just before the NCAA’s policy update went into effect in July 2021 and has held largely stable ever since. Today, majorities of U.S. adults are in favor of allowing collegiate athletes to profit from brand partnerships (55%) and licensed products (55%), though the share who say the same about autograph signings is notably lower (50%) — likely a lingering effect of past high-profile signing scandals at top football programs like Georgia and Ohio State.

Gen Z adults and millennials are even more approving of all three major NIL behaviors than the general population. This popularity among young people — alongside the fact that roughly half (46%) of all U.S. adults identify as either avid or casual fans of NCAA sports — is part of what makes brands so eager to engage in the space. 

In theory, companies should get direct access to these large and lucrative consumer groups by working with college athletes via NIL engagements. But in practice, this isn’t necessarily a standard outcome. In fact, our data shows that even the biggest names in college sports aren’t reaching the masses consistently. 

An overwhelming majority of U.S. adults said they have not seen, read or heard about any NIL deals involving 10 of the most prominent male and female Division I athletes today, similar to what we saw in early 2023. One possible reason for this? Oversaturation. Because college athletes were prohibited from participating in marketing activities for so long, brands immediately flooded the space, and it all might've been a little bit too much too soon, causing the novelty factor to wear off quicker than expected and consumers to tune out.

Updated transfer portal guidelines are likely at play, too. Also introduced in 2021, this new set of rules granted college athletes the right to transfer schools and retain immediate eligibility, which has resulted in a huge amount of year-over-year roster turnover at most Division I institutions. This environment can make it hard for non-superfans to keep up with who's playing where and with what endorsement deals in tow (Frequent transferring also presents brands with much shorter runways to build memorable campaigns.)

That said, NIL deals are breaking through a bit more among young people, albeit still not to super notable extents. Young consumers’ increased awareness is almost certainly due to their general overlap in lifestage with college athletes and to their being extremely online, which is where a majority (54%) of U.S. adults are hearing about NIL deals, regardless of age. 

Unsurprisingly, younger generations are also among the most responsive to NIL marketing. 

NIL deals most likely to spur action among younger consumers

Less than 1 in 5 U.S. adults said they have ever purchased a product or felt more positively about a brand because it partnered with a college athlete. However, these figures were double-digits higher among Gen Z adults, millennials and self-identified avid NCAA fans. 

In addition to this product pushing proficiency, consumers view athletes of all kinds — professional or collegiate — as more likable than many other typical product ambassadors, including social media influencers. Previous Morning Consult research has also repeatedly found that Americans are on a clear sports kick as of late, doing everything from attending professional events to watching sports media properties like ESPN with increased frequency. 

Amid such a sports-centric environment, NIL deals are ultimately still a net positive investment for most brands — even if they aren’t always reaching a critical mass of consumers. That said, marketers should internalize that the NIL environment is still several years away from maturity, and understand that its dynamism comes with the possibility for unpredictable ROIs.

The best way to navigate these growing pains is to set realistic expectations and be scrupulous in vetting athlete partners; those that have expressed long-term commitment to a particular school and are naturally media-friendly are the best bets. (LSU athletes Livvy Dunne and Flau’jae Johnson are great examples to this end.) 

Also, when it comes to NIL, less is often more. Athletes have no restrictions on the number of organizations they can partner with, so brands should consider advocating for exclusivity as a way to get the most out of the relationship. Of course, this isn’t always possible when working with the biggest collegiate stars — who are now getting invited to Met Galas and landing Vogue covers — but it should be a goal to strive for nonetheless. 

And while NCAA NIL is completely brand-safe, marketers should be paying close attention to the ongoing legalization of NIL at the junior level, as public opinion about high schoolers profiting off of their name, image and likeness is less supportive.

Ultimately though, with athletes becoming increasingly culturally relevant, NIL deals aren’t just an opportunity to move some extra product today; they’re also an opportunity to get an early foot in the door with the mega-stars of tomorrow.