The money is already here—so why are the rules still stuck in limbo? We sit down with Tom Dieters to map how NIL evolved from booster-led collectives into university-controlled revenue sharing after House v. NCAA, and what that shift means for athletes across every sport. From donor intent getting sidelined by caps to student fees propping up compensation, we confront the uncomfortable question: if this is now a professional marketplace, who should set the rules and who should be accountable?

Tom explains the real NIL economy beyond the headlines, where most contracts land under $100,000 and often make the difference between staying enrolled and stepping away. We look at Michigan’s push to protect athlete earnings and limit external control, the growing call to recognize athletes as employees, and why a conference-level collective bargaining model may be the only way to reduce transfer chaos, guarantee health and education benefits, and provide fair floors for non‑revenue sports. Along the way, we connect donor-directed funding, transparent carve-outs, and practical contract tools—like buyouts and season-aligned transfer windows—to a more stable and honest system.

The takeaway is clear: college sports don’t need nostalgia for amateurism; they need professional governance that matches the money already in play. If you care about fairness for athletes, continuity for fans, and trust for donors and students, this conversation lays out a realistic path forward. If you enjoyed the episode, subscribe on Substack, leave a review, and share this with a friend who debates NIL at every tailgate. Your take—cap the market or bargain for balance?

Support the show

Engage the conversation on Substack at The Common Bridge!