For years, there has been an ongoing debate regarding whether full-ride scholarships are considered enough compensation for National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I athletes. While full scholarships cover tuition, room, board and additional fees, they often do not contribute to any further needs of these athletes. Now, legal and public pressures have led to the adaptation of the NCAA policy. D1 athletes now have multiple avenues for earning income, including Name, Image and Likeness deals, cost of attendance stipends and additional benefits from universities and third-party entities.

NIL

In July 2021, the NCAA lifted restrictions on athletes profiting from their Name, Image and Likeness. Lifting these restrictions allows student-athletes to sign sponsorship deals, partner with brands and monetize their brands on social media.

NIL deals vary widely in value. Some well-known athletes from notable programs have signed valuable agreements with major brands such as Nike, Gatorade and Boost Mobile, earning millions in endorsements. On a more local scale, lesser-known athletes can capitalize on local sponsorships, social media promotions and more. With platforms such as Instagram, TikTok and YouTube, athletes can monetize content in previously underutilized ways.

Stipends

A new financial benefit for D1 athletes is a Cost of Attendance stipend. While most full-ride scholarships traditionally covered direct education expenses, they did not account for other costs such as travel, personal expenses and supplies. In 2015, the NCAA began allowing schools to provide additional stipends to cover these expenses.

The Cost of Attendance stipend varies by school and location but typically ranges from $2,000 to $5,000 annually. While this amount may sound small, the additional financial support helps student-athletes with everyday costs that otherwise would have been their responsibility to cover. This financial relief allows them to focus more on academics and their college athletic careers rather than trying to find a job to afford day-to-day expenses.

NCAA v. Alston

In 2021, the Supreme Court ruled in NCAA v. Alston that the NCAA could not prohibit schools from providing additional educational benefits to student-athletes. Due to this ruling, universities can offer financial incentives based on academic performance, such as scholarships for postgraduate studies, laptops, internships and even direct cash payments for academic achievements. These "Alston payments" are a different form of compensation, allowing schools to offer student-athletes more money for meeting specific academic benchmarks.

The future of D1 athlete compensation

The ongoing discussion surrounding athlete compensation suggests that the current model is evolving. Some argue that the billions of dollars generated by college athletics should be redistributed directly to athletes, as they believe this would be the only way to compensate student-athletes fairly. To counter this argument, some critics argue that revenue-sharing would change the culture of college athletes, similar to professional sports, leading to more commercial and economic interests over the educational interests of these college athletes, leading to heightened tensions. While significant changes have already occurred, this issue will only continue to evolve with the introduction of new policies and more athlete experiences.