Why Should College Athletes Be Paid for 2026?

by Imed Bouchrika, PhD

Co-Founder and Chief Data Scientist

Share

The question is no longer only whether college athletes should be paid. In 2026, the more practical question is how student-athletes should be compensated, protected, educated, and taxed in a college sports system that now includes scholarships, name, image, and likeness (NIL) income, collectives, and direct revenue-sharing models. Intercollegiate athletics remains a major part of American higher education and a career gateway for some athletes, while also raising difficult questions about labor, education, equity, and institutional budgets. In 2025, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) is projected to generate $1.3 billion in revenue, within a broader college sports market exceeding $20 billion annually. This guide explains the strongest arguments on both sides, how compensation works, what changed legally, and what student-athletes, families, schools, and sports management professionals should consider before taking a position.

You will learn what college athletics means, why the amateurism model has been challenged, how scholarships and NIL earnings differ from salaries, what paying athletes could mean for non-revenue sports, and why financial literacy, academic planning, mental health, taxes, and career preparation are now central to the debate.

Should College Athletes Be Paid? Quick Answer and Guide Map

1. What college athletics means and who counts as a college athlete
2. How college athlete compensation changed over time
3. Main arguments for and against paying college athletes
4. Why colleges care about athletics, academics, and revenue
5. Why financial literacy matters for paid student-athletes
6. How academic support can improve long-term outcomes
7. Compensation models beyond traditional scholarships
8. Arguments for keeping limits on athlete pay
9. How accelerated academic options may lower financial pressure
10. Tax and financial planning issues for compensated athletes
11. How social media changes NIL earning potential
12. How compensation could reshape college sports
13. Why mental health belongs in the athlete pay debate
14. Inclusivity, access, and the future of college athletics
15. How athletes can use academics to build careers beyond sports

Quick answer: college athletes already receive some forms of compensation, especially scholarships and athletic support, but many critics argue that this does not fully reflect the time, risk, and revenue attached to major college sports. Supporters of athlete pay emphasize fairness, labor value, medical risk, and financial need. Opponents worry about budget pressure, Title IX compliance, uneven benefits across sports, and the possibility that college athletics will move too far from its educational mission.

The debate also affects more than athletes. It influences tuition conversations, alumni giving, media contracts, recruiting, campus identity, sports-related businesses, and even branding decisions such as unique business name ideas tied to athlete visibility. A useful answer must therefore look beyond slogans and examine who pays, who benefits, what protections athletes receive, and what happens to education when sports become more commercial.

What Is College Athletics?

College athletics refers to organized, competitive sports connected to colleges and universities. In the United States, these programs are not only extracurricular activities; they are tied to admissions, scholarships, campus culture, media revenue, alumni identity, and, for a small group of athletes, professional sports pathways.

How College Athletics Works

College sports include many athletic programs played under rules established by conferences, schools, and governing organizations. The best-known national body is the NCAA, which sanctions championships and sets policies across divisions and sports. Other organizations, including the NAIA and NJCAA, also govern college athletic competition.

The athlete at the center of this system is often called a student-athlete. In 2025, there were a total of 530,135 student-athletes in the NCAA. 

Under the NCAA framework, a student-athlete is enrolled full-time or part-time at a college or university while also participating in that institution’s organized competitive sports program. This dual role matters because athletes must meet academic requirements while also satisfying team, training, travel, media, and competition obligations.

A typical college athlete’s obligations may include the following:

• Participating in practice, typically 20 hours per week, according to the NCAA
• Meeting minimum GPA and academic progress standards to remain eligible
• Training during breaks, off-season periods, and times when many other students are not on campus
• Representing the institution in a way that meets team, conference, and school conduct expectations

For many athletes, college sport is also part of a broader life plan. Some hope to reach professional leagues, but that path is highly competitive. For others, athletics provides access to a college education, structured mentoring, leadership development, and a network that can matter long after competition ends.

How Student-Athlete Compensation Has Traditionally Worked

Before direct revenue sharing and NIL opportunities became central to the conversation, the primary form of athlete compensation was the athletic scholarship. NCAA Division I and II schools provide more than $3.7 billion in athletics scholarships annually. These awards may help with tuition, fees, books, housing, and other education-related expenses, depending on the school, division, sport, and scholarship type.

Scholarships are governed by athletic associations, institutional rules, and academic eligibility standards. Schools may consider grades, standardized test results, athletic ability, roster limits, scholarship limits, admissions policies, and conference rules before offering aid.

Many families view college athletic scholarships as a valuable exchange: the athlete receives financial help and the institution gains a player who may strengthen the team, increase visibility, and contribute to revenue. The important caveat is that a scholarship is not the same thing as unrestricted income.

An athletic scholarship can carry conditions. It may be renewed annually, reduced, or not renewed under certain circumstances. Athletes also need to understand what medical expenses are covered, who pays for sports-related injuries, and whether coverage continues after they leave the program. Current rules require schools to disclose medical coverage, but there is currently no standardized healthcare coverage for student-athletes.

Scholarship commitments can also affect transfer decisions. When an athlete accepts aid, they commit to the school providing it, and transferring may involve institutional, conference, NCAA, or contract-related consequences. Before signing, families should ask how renewal, transfer, injury, and academic eligibility policies work in writing.

Historical Overview of College Athlete Compensation

For much of the 20th century, college sports were defended as amateur competition: athletes could receive education-related support but not wages for playing. That model became harder to defend as major programs generated large sums through television contracts, ticket sales, sponsorships, merchandising, donor support, and postseason events.

Legal challenges accelerated the shift. Cases such as O'Bannon v. NCAA questioned restrictions that prevented athletes from profiting from their likeness. Later changes opened the door to NIL activity, and following the 2025 House v. NCAA settlement, the NCAA fundamentally restructured athlete compensation by allowing schools to share revenues directly with athletes up to $20.5 million annually per institution, while athletes also continue to earn through commercial NIL deals and collectives, with Division I athletes estimated to receive over $2.3 billion in combined NIL and revenue sharing compensation during the 2025-26 academic year. 

This history matters because the policy question has moved beyond simple amateurism. Schools, athletes, courts, conferences, and lawmakers now have to define a workable system that recognizes athlete value while preserving access, competitive balance, academic priorities, and compliance with gender-equity rules.

Why Should College Athletes Be Paid?

The strongest case for paying college athletes is that many perform labor that creates economic value for institutions, conferences, media partners, and local communities. The strongest case against broad direct pay is that college athletic departments vary widely in resources, and new pay obligations could affect smaller sports, gender-equity compliance, and the educational identity of college athletics.

Arguments in Favor of Paying College Athletes

1. Payment can reduce financial strain. Even when athletes receive student scholarships, aid may not cover every personal, travel, family, medical, tax, or living expense. Walk-ons and partial-scholarship athletes may face even greater pressure. Compensation can help athletes focus on academics and sports instead of trying to add outside work to an already demanding schedule.
2. Athletic participation can resemble a work-study arrangement. Athletes follow schedules, perform under supervision, represent the institution, and help create value. Since professional opportunities can be true for less than 2% of the students, compensation during college may help families even when a professional sports career never materializes.
3. Pay may support retention and degree completion. If athletes can meet financial needs while enrolled, some may feel less pressure to leave early for professional opportunities. Compensation alone will not guarantee graduation, but it can be part of a broader system that encourages athletes to remain academically engaged.

Arguments Against Paying College Athletes Directly

1. Some athletes already receive substantial benefits. Opponents point to scholarships, stipends, housing, academic advising, nutrition, coaching, strength training, medical staff, facilities, and professional development as meaningful compensation, even when no paycheck is issued.
2. Not every sport produces revenue. Men’s basketball, women’s basketball, and gridiron football are the three most popular sports at most colleges and universities. Many other sports operate at a loss. If schools must redirect money toward athlete salaries, some programs may reduce roster spots, cut sports, increase fundraising pressure, or shift costs elsewhere.
3. Employment status could create complex legal issues. If athletes are treated as employees, schools may face questions involving contracts, collective bargaining, workers’ compensation, taxes, immigration rules, academic eligibility, and Title IX. A workable model must address gender equity and avoid creating a system where only a narrow group of athletes benefits.

A balanced approach should separate three issues that are often blended together: whether athletes may earn outside NIL income, whether schools should share athletic revenue, and whether college athletes should be legally classified as employees. Each question leads to different consequences.

The Interests of College Athletics

Education, Competition, Campus Culture, and Recreation

College athletics serves several purposes at once. It supports student recreation and school spirit, gives athletes a structured competitive environment, strengthens alumni loyalty, attracts attention to institutions, and can influence admissions, fundraising, and local identity. That is why compensation policy cannot be viewed only as a payroll issue.

Research on physical activity and learning continues to shape the discussion. Experts report that physically active people are not only healthier but also perform better on tests of cerebral or intellectual ability, according to studies (Gomez-Pinilla & Hillman, 2025). Still, student-athletes face a difficult balancing act. Training, travel, competition, and recovery can support discipline, but they can also reduce study time when academic systems are not flexible enough.

Yukhymenko-Lescroart (2025), in “The role of passion for sport in college student-athletes’ motivation and effort in academics and athletics,” examined how athletes distribute effort between sport and school. The study found that athletic effort was closely tied to interest in sport, while academic effort was influenced by academic identity and the perceived value of coursework. 

The study also identified cross-domain effects: how athletes think about sport can affect academics, and how they value academics can affect sports effort. Harmonious passion for sport supported psychological needs and autonomous motivation across both domains, while obsessive passion helped athletic identity and perceived sport value but harmed perceived choice of major. The takeaway is practical: colleges should not treat athletic and academic motivation as separate systems.

Because college sports affect enrollment, finances, student life, and public reputation, they deserve serious academic and policy attention. Treating the topic as entertainment alone overlooks the institutional power and student consequences involved.

Well-run athletic programs can build resilience, accountability, time management, teamwork, leadership, and goal orientation. Those benefits are strongest when athletes have enough academic freedom, health protection, and career support to become more than performers for the university.

The College Sports Industry

For some institutions, athletics is a major business operation. Universities generate revenue through media rights, ticket sales, branding, licensing, postseason events, donor contributions, and sponsorships. In 2025, the athletic departments of NCAA member colleges generated $21.5 billion in revenue. 

Athletic reputation can also influence non-athletes. A successful team may increase applications, deepen alumni attachment, elevate regional visibility, and strengthen the college brand. This broader institutional value is one reason athletes argue that their role should be recognized financially, especially when their performance contributes to public attention and donor enthusiasm.

How Can Financial Literacy Empower College Athletes?

Financial education is now a core protection for student-athletes. NIL deals, revenue-sharing payments, appearance fees, social media sponsorships, and collectives can create income, but they also create tax obligations, contract risk, budgeting challenges, and pressure from family or outside advisors. Athletes need practical training in saving, taxes, debt, credit, insurance, basic investing, contract review, and career planning. For athletes who want additional career options outside sports, even short vocational pathways such as a 4 week online course for medical coding and billing cost can be part of a broader backup plan.

How Can Stronger Academic Programs Improve Long-Term Outcomes for College Athletes?

Academic support is not a substitute for fair compensation, but it is one of the most important safeguards in a commercialized sports system. Athletes need course schedules that accommodate travel, advisors who understand eligibility rules, access to summer courses, tutoring that does not steer them into unsuitable majors, and career counseling that starts before senior year. Flexible options from online colleges with open enrollment may help some athletes continue progress when competition schedules, transfers, injuries, or family needs interrupt a traditional academic path.

What Alternative Compensation Models Are Viable for College Athletes?

A serious compensation model should match the purpose of the payment. NIL rewards market value. Scholarships support education. Revenue sharing recognizes the athlete’s role in generating sports income. Long-term academic benefits support life after competition. Schools and policymakers can combine these tools, but each model creates different winners, risks, and compliance issues. Families should also compare educational cost strategies, including whether is online college cheaper for a specific athlete’s situation, because lower academic costs can reduce pressure even when sports income is uncertain.

Are There Benefits From Not Paying College Athletes?

The traditional argument for not paying college athletes rests on amateurism: college sports were framed as educational competition rather than professional employment. That framework changed significantly in 2025 as the House v. NCAA settlement implementation began, allowing schools to directly pay athletes through multi-billion dollar revenue-sharing models. By this mid-2020s era, the century-old prohibition on salaries ended, replacing the aristocratic amateurism once portrayed by collegiate competition with a formal professional structure where athletes receive a significant portion of primary media rights revenue. 

Historically, the NCAA limited professionalism in college athletics by restricting compensation to scholarships and related benefits. The stated purpose was to preserve student status, maintain fan interest, and keep athletes connected to the educational community. Critics argue that this justification became less persuasive as media contracts and athletic department revenues grew.

The term “student-athlete” emerged in the 1950s and was later used in disputes involving workers’ compensation and injury claims. That history remains relevant because injuries are not hypothetical. According to the latest available data, on average, the estimated injury rate per 1,000 athlete exposures is 7.18% (NCAA, 2025). 

NCAA officials have argued that limits on compensation help protect athletes’ academic experience. Economists and athlete advocates counter that the model has restrained a labor market that benefits schools and media partners more than athletes, particularly following the 2025 implementation of direct revenue-sharing models that still place arbitrary caps on student-athlete earnings (Dortch, 2025). 

Language is also changing. New legal standards in 2025 have redefined the term student-athlete as "inherently contradictory because college players are now recognized as employees with collective bargaining rights." Being students at play understates their contractual athletic obligations, while referring to them as athletes in college may no longer imply they are amateurs. As a result, the term is increasingly being replaced by student-employee in modern collegiate legal frameworks. 

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has argued that some college athletes should be treated as university employees (NLRB, 2025). In that view, calling them “student-athletes” may discourage them from understanding or exercising employment-related rights.

Even so, the “do not pay” position should not be dismissed as simple denial of athlete value. Some supporters worry that direct pay may harm Olympic and non-revenue sports, intensify recruiting inequality, complicate taxes and visas, or turn educational institutions into professional sports employers. The practical challenge is to protect athletes without designing a system that only the wealthiest programs can sustain.

Can Accelerated Academic Programs Reduce Financial Strain for Student-Athletes?

Accelerated academic pathways can help some athletes reduce opportunity cost, finish credentials faster, and prepare for work if a sports career ends early. They are not a replacement for fair compensation or health protections, but they can lower long-term debt exposure and improve career flexibility. A student-athlete considering a 6 month associate degree should still verify accreditation, transferability, course intensity, eligibility impact, and whether the program fits training and travel demands.

What Are the Tax and Financial Planning Considerations for Paid College Athletes?

Athlete compensation can create taxable income. NIL payments, endorsement income, appearance fees, merchandise revenue, social media sponsorships, and direct payments may trigger federal, state, and sometimes local tax obligations. Depending on the structure, athletes may need to track expenses, file additional forms, pay quarterly estimated taxes, and understand self-employment rules.

A practical financial plan should include a separate tax savings account, written contracts, expense records, budgeting, emergency savings, insurance review, and guidance from qualified tax or legal professionals. Athletes should also avoid spending based on projected deals that are not signed or guaranteed. Academic planning can support financial stability as well; for example, exploring easy degrees to get online that pay well may help athletes connect education decisions with realistic career outcomes.

How Does Social Media Influence College Athlete Compensation Opportunities?

Social media gives athletes a direct path to audience-building, sponsorships, and NIL income. A player who creates useful, authentic, and compliant content can attract local businesses, national brands, camps, apparel companies, and digital advertisers. The downside is that online visibility also creates reputational risk, contract pressure, harassment, and time demands. Athletes who want to turn visibility into a durable career may benefit from business, communication, analytics, or management training, including flexible options such as 1 year online master's programs later in their academic path.

What Paying Athletes Could Mean for College Sports

Compensation changes could make college sports more transparent and fair for athletes, but they may also widen gaps between wealthy and less wealthy programs. NIL rights are especially important because they let athletes monetize identity rather than only athletic labor. A college athlete’s name, image, and likeness (NIL) can now carry business value, whether through endorsements, camps, content, merchandise, or entrepreneurial projects such as naming a business ideas around an athlete-led brand.

NIL Rights and Revenue Sharing

Beginning August 1, 2025, NCAA college athletes operate under a permanent governance structure following the settlement of House v. NCAA, which replaced interim policies with a formal revenue-sharing model allowing schools to pay student-athletes directly (NCAA, 2025). The new framework directed all concerned to the following: 

• Athletes may participate in NIL activity that complies with the law of the state where their school operates, and institutions may help explain applicable state requirements.
• Athletes at schools in states without NIL statutes may pursue NIL opportunities without violating NCAA rules related to name, image, and likeness.
• Athletes may use professional service providers to support NIL activities.
• Athletes should report NIL activity according to state law, school rules, and conference requirements.

Across divisions, the policy continues to distinguish permissible NIL activity from pay-for-play arrangements and recruiting inducements tied to enrollment at a particular school.

State law continues to shape the market. As of January 1, 2025, 33 states have enacted specific legislation governing college athlete compensation (O’Banion, 2025). Some states are also revisiting earlier NIL laws because overly restrictive rules may place local universities at a recruiting disadvantage or conflict with newer national frameworks. 

Legal Issues and Their Implications for College Athletics

California’s Fair Pay to Play Act helped accelerate national NIL reform, and currently all 50 states have introduced or passed legislation along the same lines. By 2026, the number of enacted laws and subsequent amendments related to student-athlete compensation reached a new peak, with 43 states having active NIL statutes. Some states have cited the need to maintain a competitive recruiting advantage as the primary reason for the continuous updates to their local laws. At least seven states are currently considering further revisions to align with the latest federal oversight proposals. 

Although state provisions differ, many laws restrict the NCAA, conferences, and schools from blocking athlete NIL compensation. Many also address agent involvement, disclosure rules, conflicts with institutional sponsorships, and whether athletes must report endorsement or advertising agreements.

The Supreme Court’s unanimous June 21 decision rejecting the NCAA’s ban on education-related benefits did not directly decide NIL pay, but it weakened the legal foundation for broad restrictions on athlete compensation. It also encouraged further scrutiny of the claim that unpaid athletic labor is necessary to preserve college sports.

The NCAA’s NIL changes allow athletes to earn from sponsorships, appearances, autographs, social media, camps, licensing, and other market-based activities that were once prohibited under amateurism rules.

NIL opportunities can apply to individuals and, in some cases, team-based arrangements. However, benefits are uneven. High-profile athletes, large-market schools, and revenue sports often receive the most attention, while athletes in smaller programs may need local, niche, or community-based strategies.

The system still needs refinement. Better disclosure, contract education, tax support, agent oversight, mental health services, and gender-equity analysis are necessary if compensation is to help athletes rather than expose them to new risks. College sports is a major business, and athletes whose playing careers end at graduation should not be left without education, savings, healthcare understanding, or career direction.

Recruiting has also changed. Top prospects increasingly compare not only coaching, facilities, playing time, and academics, but also NIL infrastructure, alumni networks, local sponsorship markets, collective activity, and the school’s record of supporting athlete brands.

Common Mistakes Student-Athletes and Families Should Avoid

What Role Does Mental Health Play in the Discussion on Paying College Athletes?

Mental health is central to the compensation debate because money, visibility, performance pressure, injury risk, academics, and public criticism all interact. Paying athletes may reduce some financial stress, but it can also increase expectations, scrutiny, and pressure to perform as a revenue-generating figure.

• Financial stress can worsen anxiety.
  • Scholarships may not cover all personal expenses, travel needs, family obligations, taxes, or cost-of-living gaps. Athletes with demanding schedules often cannot work traditional jobs.
  • Compensation can reduce immediate stress, but only if athletes receive guidance on budgeting, saving, taxes, and responsible decision-making.
• Performance pressure can lead to burnout.
  • Athletes in high-profile sports may feel pressure to justify scholarships, NIL deals, roster spots, and public attention, especially when fans and sponsors treat them like professionals.
  • Football and basketball often receive the most revenue-related scrutiny, but burnout can affect athletes in any sport when training, travel, academics, and personal expectations collide.
• Mental health resources are uneven.
  • Some institutions offer strong counseling, sports psychology, peer support, and crisis services, while others provide limited access or long waits.
  • A fair compensation system should be paired with confidential mental health support, injury counseling, academic flexibility, and workload monitoring.

The Future of College Sports: Inclusivity and Accessibility

The future of college athletics should not be designed only around the most visible programs. Compensation reform must consider athletes in smaller sports, women’s teams, students from low-income backgrounds, international athletes, disabled athletes, and military-affiliated students. Flexible academic models, including those used by some military friendly online colleges, show how institutions can support learners whose schedules and responsibilities do not fit a traditional campus routine.

A more inclusive athletic system would combine fair compensation with access to advising, mental health care, academic flexibility, transfer support, and career services. Students with military experience, for example, may bring leadership, discipline, and teamwork that align strongly with athletic programs, while also needing schedules that respect service-related obligations.

Equity also requires careful budgeting. If athlete pay leads schools to cut less profitable sports, the system may help some athletes while reducing opportunities for others. The best reforms will recognize athlete value without narrowing who gets to participate in college sports.

How Can College Athletes Improve Long-Term Career Prospects Through Academic Choices?

Most college athletes will eventually need careers outside professional sports. That makes academic choice one of the most important financial decisions an athlete makes. Students should choose majors based on interests, labor-market fit, course demands, internship access, transferability, and time to completion—not only on what fits the practice schedule. Some athletes may compare flexible options, including the easiest college majors, but the goal should be a realistic and valuable degree path rather than simply the least demanding option.

1. Meet with both an athletic academic advisor and a general academic advisor before choosing a major.
2. Ask how travel, practice, injury, redshirt years, and transfer rules may affect graduation timing.
3. Use summers for internships, courses, certifications, or career exploration when possible.
4. Build a resume that includes leadership, teamwork, media experience, community engagement, and measurable achievements.
5. Create a post-sports plan before eligibility ends, not after the final season.

Balancing Athlete Pay With the Educational Mission

The athlete compensation debate is difficult because both sides identify real concerns. College sports can be part of a meaningful education, but the cost of getting a bachelor’s degree continues to create pressure for students and families. At the same time, direct pay, NIL income, and revenue sharing require rules that protect athletes without destabilizing programs that do not generate major revenue.

The NCAA and its member institutions should be judged not only by how much money athletes can earn, but also by whether athletes graduate, receive honest advising, understand contracts, access medical and mental health care, and leave college with credible career options. That is especially important for athletes from low-income backgrounds and underserved communities.

Miller (2025), in “The Centerpiece of College Athletics: Prioritizing Education in the College Sports Reform Movement,” argued for reforms that better compensate the professional role performed by athletes in revenue-generating sports without abandoning the educational foundation of college athletics. Proposed changes include stronger eligibility expectations, more time and financial support to complete college degrees, and tying coaching compensation to graduation outcomes. The broader lesson is that athlete pay and athlete education should be designed together, not treated as competing goals.

Key Insights

• The debate has shifted from “pay or no pay” to “what kind of pay, under what rules.” Scholarships, NIL income, collectives, and direct revenue-sharing models now coexist, but they serve different purposes and create different risks.
• Athletes create value, but not all programs have the same resources. Major revenue sports drive much of the public debate, while non-revenue sports, smaller schools, and gender-equity obligations complicate any one-size-fits-all payment model.
• Scholarships are valuable but limited. They may reduce tuition and living costs, yet they do not always cover all expenses, medical risks, tax issues, family needs, or the market value of athlete labor and identity.
• NIL income requires financial literacy. Paid athletes need contract review, tax planning, budgeting, savings discipline, and protection from predatory advisors or poorly structured deals.
• Academic planning is part of fair compensation. Athletes need real degree options, honest advising, transfer support, internships, and degree-completion help because most will not have long professional playing careers.
• Mental health and medical protection should be central to reform. Compensation can reduce financial pressure, but it can also increase scrutiny and performance expectations unless schools invest in confidential support services.
• The best system is not simply the highest-paying one. A stronger college sports model should combine fair compensation, transparent rules, Title IX compliance, healthcare clarity, academic integrity, and long-term career preparation.

References

• Dortch, C. (2025, January 15). The new era of revenue sharing: Impact on the 2025-26 athletic season. Blue Ribbon Yearbook. https://blueribbon.substack.com/p/ncaa-revenue-sharing-2025-impact
• Gomez-Pinilla, F., & Hillman, C. H. (2025). The structural and functional effects of physical activity on the aging brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 26(1), 12-28. https://www.nature.com/nrn/
• National Collegiate Athletic Association. (2025). NCAA finances: Revenue and expenses for division I, II, and III. https://www.ncaa.org/sports/2025/1/15/finances.aspx
• National Labor Relations Board. (2025). Office of the General Counsel: Enforcement Guidance on Protected Concerted Activity and Misclassification of Collegiate Athletes. https://www.nlrb.gov/guidance/memos/general-counsel-memos
• National Labor Relations Board. (2025). Collective bargaining and the employment status of collegiate athletes. https://www.nlrb.gov/guidance/memos/2025-student-athlete-employment-status
• NCAA Sport Science Institute. (2025). NCAA Injury Surveillance Program: 2025 Annual Data Report. https://www.ncaa.org/sports/2025/1/15/sport-science-institute-injury-surveillance-program.aspx
• Yukhymenko-Lescroart, M. A. (2025). The role of passion for sport in college student-athletes’ motivation and effort in academics and athletics. International Journal of Educational Research, 131, 102512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2025.102512
• National Conference of State Legislatures. (2025). Student-Athlete Name, Image and Likeness Legislation. https://www.ncsl.org/education/student-athlete-name-image-and-likeness-legislation