NIL

College Sports Changes: House Settlement, NIL, Revenue Sharing

Published

8 months ago

May 7, 2025

*Most of this is based on ongoing litigation, so there’s a small chance some of these won’t be implemented. I’ll do my best to have this as up-to-date as possible

College sports has been experiencing a massive amount of change in the past five years, to the point where it’s almost unrecognizable. The NCAA has gone from being the judge, jury, and executioner on all matters to now being overruled by actual judges. They’re losing court cases left and right, to the point where they’re now hesitant to act.

If you haven’t been following the ‘boring’ side of sports, a lawsuit was filed about five years ago regarding compensation for student-athletes (House vs NCAA). This was separate from NIL, but the two are very much tied together.

With all the recent changes, I thought it might be helpful to have this all in one place. I’ve done the best I can to summarize it all, since there’s a lot of “lawyer talk”.

First, why is all of this happening now? Why not 20 years ago?

It was rare to hear of court ruling about the NCAA up until about 10 years ago regarding student athlete compensation, and now we’ve had at least three major ones since 2020. In my opinion, a lot of that was because there wasn’t as much money involved. Students originally played athletics as an extracurricular activity, similar to joining a club. Universities would charge admission or make TV deals to help with the cost of operation, and offered scholarships so the athletes wouldn’t have to decide between working or playing sports.

As those media deals became more valuable, especially in the late 2000s, the amount of revenue coming in exploded. Since 100% of the revenue wasn’t necessary to keep the athletic department afloat, this led to the legitimate question of what to do with all of this money. However, the NCAA had a policy that those funds remained with the university. Had athletes been making these arguments back in the day, they would have been arguing about what to do over a few hundred dollars; not worth getting lawyers involved. But when universities are now regularly pulling in $50 million a year from sports, that old policy definitely became worth challenging.

On top of that, the full cost of attending school wasn’t always a guarantee for student-athletes, and was even limited until as recently as the 1980s. Over time those costs have skyrocketed; according to the Education Data Initiative, the inflation adjusted annual cost of tuition has gone up from about $2,800 in 1980 to $9,000 in 2023. That doesn’t account for living expenses, which have also gone up in the past 40 years, though not as much as tuition.

So from an athlete’s perspective, their costs have gone up while the universities revenue has gone up even more. The athlete has a reasonable argument to be able to negotiate to earn some of that revenue since they reasonably contributed to it.

Pre 2021

Up until 2021, the only compensation student-athletes could receive were directly related to the cost of attending school; scholarships, living expenses, textbooks, and in some cases stipends, if other benefits did not cover the full cost of attending university. This was based on NCAA policy. The hot topic that caused the most debates was the NCAA not allowing athletes access to other types of financial opportunities available to other students. Schools could offer assistance in attending school, but the athlete couldn’t get anything else. There were even limits on part time jobs. There have been debates about the NCAA’s authority for years, but it largely wasn’t worth fighting until recently.

NIL Era

In 2021 that all changed when a court case made its way to the Supreme Court (link to Harvard’s summary, if you want a deep dive). Not only was the Court unanimous in its opinion, but it also bluntly stated the NCAA violated anti-trust laws with these policies. Reading between the lines, it sounded the Court was daring the NCAA to impose further limits. However, the Court didn’t specify NIL; they just said that the NCAA couldn’t impose limits or deny opportunities that were available to other students. For example, some college students will start businesses while still in school, like Mark Zuckerburg with Facebook. If Zuckerburg was an athlete he would have been violating old NCAA policy, but because he was a “normal” student there was no issue.

In response to this, the NCAA changed its policy, opening opportunities previously denied to athletes. That doesn’t mean everyone started making businesses; most student-athletes don’t have the time or resources to do so. But they could now do endorsement deals or be paid to appear at events. Thus began the NIL era, where student-athletes could now appear in Dr. Pepper commercials or sell autographed trading cards.

To help with this, alumni and fans started to organize NIL collective funds, which were separate (but affiliated) organizations with universities. Some operated as limited liability companies (LLCs), others operate as non-profits (501c3s, but the IRS is cracking down on those so they’ll likely change their structure). However, they are legally separate from the university whose athletes they would collect NIL funds for. Donors would contribute to this collective, who work with the community or businesses to find opportunities for these athletes, such as appearances at schools or public events. But individual parties still had the chance to arrange deals directly with the athletes themselves. In many cases student-athletes had agents to help with this, much like professional athletes do when making marketing deals.

One of the major rules that the NCAA has is that those NIL funds could not be tied to the athlete’s performance or have conditions (no quid-pro-quo or “pay for play”). Yes, I know what you’re thinking; no one follows those rules. It’s very hazy how much authority the NCAA has right now with NIL. The NCAA already tried saying athletes can’t negotiate deals before enrolling in schools, but the court got involved again and they rescinded that policy, though it’s still being reviewed. There’s been a few attempts at passing federal law but none have gained traction. Some states outright prohibit those types of deals, but when the deals go across states it gets messy.

The reason NIL seems so chaotic is because it isn’t clear what policies the NCAA, or even the universities themselves, can impose. Because NIL money does not legally go through the university, the NCAA likely cannot impose any controls, and implementing any will likely bring further lawsuits. While I’m not a lawyer (any actual lawyers are free to correct me, I’m just a humble statistician), the Supreme Court basically said the NCAA cannot impose any rules or regulations about income generated outside of athletics. An individual having a sandwich named after them at a local restaurant and getting a share of the profits is not an athletic event, even if the individual happens to be a college athlete. The question right now isn’t what should or shouldn’t be done, or what’s good or bad for athletics, but whether or not the NCAA or universities have the legal authority to impose any rules.

Transfer Portal

If you are reading this, you likely already know about how most of this works. Prior to 2021 an athlete could transfer between schools, but they would have to sit out a year that still counted towards their eligibility (four years). They could get waivers or special exceptions, such as being a graduate student, but for the most part athletes avoided transferring so they wouldn’t waste a year of eligibility. It initially had some limits, such as allowing a student to transfer once without sitting out a year, but most have been removed. Now you enter an online portal, where other schools can see who is available, though there are windows to do this that go in line with school semesters. Athletes can transfer as many times as they like.

Between the transfer portal and NIL changing around the same time, the world of college sports resembled free agency with few limits. In pro leagues there are rules prohibiting contacting players under contracts, when you can speak with players, and some limits on financial promises made in advance. It isn’t clear what limits the NCAA can impose, and right now it’s running more on the honor system than anything. If they do impose hard rules, I wouldn’t be surprised if we see more lawsuits. “Normal” students can transfer as they please without consequences, and athletes could challenge that if they aren’t given the same privileges.

JUCO Ruling

A quiet change this year came from another lawsuit from Diego Pavia.

Pavia started his college career in Junior College at the New Mexico Military Institute. He eventually made his way to Vanderbilt, but argued in court that his year playing in Junior College (JUCO) shouldn’t count towards his eligibility. Currently the NCAA limits athletes to four years to complete, with a few exceptions if a player doesn’t play for a year (such as medical exemptions or redshirts). Pavia’s argument was that since he couldn’t make any NIL money at the JUCO level, the NCAA was limiting how much NIL money he could potentially earn by not allowing him a full 4 years of eligibility at the Division I level. The courts ruled in Pavia’s favor, and while the NCAA is appealing this, for now players who played at the JUCO level were granted an extra year of eligibility. Recently the NCAA has yet to win any of these types of cases so it wouldn’t be surprising if this is a permanent ruling going forward.

This is a quieter change, but does have an impact on recruiting. Typically Division I schools would recruit high school students more than JUCO athletes, because the high school student had 4 years of eligibility. Now if they find a JUCO athlete they feel will be just as good, they don’t have to worry about them not staying as long as the high school recruit.

House Vs NCAA

So now to the big one that prompted this piece. If you thought NIL changed the game, just wait. This case is all about what funds athletes are entitled to that universities directly receive. This lawsuit was filed in 2020 (House vs NCAA). Last year the NCAA saw what was coming and is deciding to settle, rather than let it go farther in court and make themselves look worse. So as with any legal settlement there are conditions both sides got, but the athletes largely came out on top. In short, it’s all about how universities now can share with athletes revenue gained from various media deals.

Any site you go through will group the effects of the settlement into three areas. I’ve done my best to simplify them, since there is a lot of lawyer talk going on. Before I get to those, the settlement for now is a 10 year agreement, so this isn’t indefinitely set in stone. If unforeseen issues come up for either side, they can be addressed without further lawsuits or lengthy court processes.

Past compensation

The deal the NCAA agreed to includes paying back athletes who competed from 2016 to 2024. Since universities will be paying athletes going forward, it was decided it is fair to pay athletes who missed the opportunity because of timing. The exact amount varies by source, but the payment range looks to be $2.75-$3 billion. If that sounds like a lot, some estimate that had it gone to court that amount would have ballooned to $20 billion. The exact amount each former/current athlete receives is based on their situation. Football players from bigger conferences might get a few hundred thousand, swimmers at smaller schools may get a few hundred. It looks like universities will determine the exact amounts and athletes to pay, but there are conditions on how much has to be paid each year.

New Pay Method

Past athletes aren’t the only ones getting paid, universities can now directly pay athletes going forward (remember, the universities themselves weren’t paying NIL, the associated collectives were). The money that can be shared is revenue gained from media deals, sponsorships, or ticket revenue (for clarity I’m calling funds received through those “Media Revenue”). There are limits though; they can share up to 22% of total annual Media Revenue, with a limit of $20.5 million, subject to annual change. This essentially acts as a salary cap that professional leagues have. The revenue sharing will apply to the entire athletic department. The universities themselves will determine how much to allocate to each player and sport.

One of the agreements of the settlement was roster size limits. Right now there are only scholarship limits by sport. Part of the settlement is that the NCAA will instead have a limit on the number of players a team can have, regardless of what compensation there may be. Those roster limits were based on current roster sizes, regardless of how many scholarship players there are. For example, football is limited to 85 scholarships, but most teams have around 90-100 players, and the proposed roster limit is 105 football players. Those extra players came from offering partial scholarships or having someone play without a scholarship (walk-ons). However, there are disagreements about the exact limit, some wanting them to be higher, and also how to approach teams that are currently above the limits. The judge overseeing the deal suggested they get grandfathered in, but it doesn’t look like anyone has agreed to that yet. So far this seems to be the biggest source of consternation.

Another part of the settlement is more regulation on NIL. The NCAA is finding their power getting smaller and smaller, and it showed with NIL. Right now it’s the Wild West, where we all know teams are contacting other team’s players and offering NIL deals to transfer. The NCAA had little to no authority to investigate these. Part of the settlement was NIL payments over $600 are subject to review, specifically to see if they violate the NCAA policy of no incentives tied to NIL deals (currently no one is challenging this process). They will be reviewed by a third party clearinghouse, currently rumored to be the financial giant Deloitte, to see if there were any conditions about the NIL payment that violates NCAA policy. So if a player gets a $100,000 NIL deal, this third party will look into it to see if there were any conditions tied to it, such as a “transfer here and we’ll get you’ll $100,000 NIL deal” arrangement. This offers some control, as some schools could have potentially used NIL funds to skirt the revenue sharing limit. However, this would only address schools offering other players NIL deals; it doesn’t look like there are any repercussions to teams calling other players and offering deals from their revenue sharing pool, as long as they don’t exceed the cap limit.

There was a brief window where not all schools had to participate in the settlement, only those specified as defendants were included (mainly those from the power conferences). But the NCAA proposed some rule changes to go in line with the settlement.

Thoughts

Oh boy, this is a lot. I’ll do some more research on the implications, but here are my initial thoughts:

NIL will change…. maybe

We’ll see how thorough and honest the third party clearinghouse is, but if it goes the way the NCAA intends, schools won’t be able to make large NIL offers in advance any more. Players can still get those funds, but most deals will be reviewed to ensure no incentives were tied to them. Any promised funds will have to come from the limited Media Revenue pool. It doesn’t look like there are any limits to how much in NIL a player can receive, since legally those funds don’t go through the university. I wouldn’t be surprised if we see the NIL deals decrease a little, only because they aren’t the sole source of income anymore for athletes. States will continue to implement or modify laws about NIL, which will supersede anything the NCAA implements.

Amateurism is all but gone.

College athletics is increasingly resembling professional leagues. Universities are now having full fledged business departments managing funds, such as Andrew Luck being named the General Manager for Stanford’s football team. The 10 year settlement deal resembles the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) that owners of professional teams have with player’s unions. There will be rules about spending, possible exceptions, guaranteed money, and provisions for third parties. If an athlete is injured in fall camp and has to miss the season, do they still get paid? Would that count towards the spending cap? All of those questions will almost have to be addressed in contracts, since both universities and athletes will want to be financially protected.

Transfer portal doesn’t officially change

Nothing in the settlement addresses the transfer portal, but that wasn’t part of the lawsuit to begin with, and it would have been out of place to include any new changes. It appears the NCAA still can control some aspects of the portal, though it likely will be based on consensus opinion among schools.

So is all of this a win for big schools? Small schools?

There’s a lot to unpack here, and I’d prefer to do more research before making a definitive opinion. The cap limit helps balance it a little, but you have to have the money in the first place. I see it being similar to pro baseball where teams in bigger markets have more money to work with than the teams in smaller ones. The smaller schools will never be able to spend as much, but at least they can spend now.

It Ain’t over

We’ll see more court rulings and lawyer talk. The NCAA still says it has the authority to impose some limits on NIL, but as of now no one has challenged that. I’m guessing student-athletes will want to continue their hot streak in court and question any new controls the NCAA implements. The NCAA likely won’t dare to put limits on total NIL earnings, but they may attempt to regulate promised deals more.

One aspect that still hasn’t been addressed is Title IX. Title IX, as it relates to college sports, establishes equality among male and female athletes. It includes regulating the amount of scholarships a university can offer between the two, but it isn’t clear how much of this revenue sharing falls under this law. Some schools were planning to share up to 90% of their available funds on football and men’s basketball players, since those are typically the major money makers, but that might violate Title IX. One side is arguing that the revenue has to be split 50% between male and female sports, regardless of who generated the revenue. I anticipate it being largely a political debate.

Closing

These next few years are going to be interesting. While the NCAA, student-athletes, and universities will have an idea of what to expect, until we actually see all these changes in effect, no one will know for sure what it will all look like.

Link

NIL

Ted Cruz warns of ‘utter tragedy’ if Congress fails to act on college football

Published

46 minutes ago

December 30, 2025

Your Sports Nation

Senator Ted Cruz is taking a break from the usual political discourse to sound the alarm on college football.

On Tuesday, he quote-tweeted a college football account, highlighting the massive roster challenges Iowa State is facing. According to the post, the team has only 17 players remaining for next season with just one returning starter after a coaching change.

“An absolute crisis. Congress NEEDS to act,” Cruz wrote on X/Twitter. “For months, I’ve been working night (and) day to try to bring Republicans and Democrats together to save college sports. If we fail to do so, it will be an utter tragedy. And it’s happening right before our eyes.”

Iowa State is trying to steady itself after Matt Campbell, the winningest coach in school history, left for Penn State. This has set off a chain reaction that has unraveled the roster.

Campbell’s departure has resulted in at least 36 players leaving, according to College Sports Network, including quarterback Rocco Becht and leading tackler Marcus Neal. The losses have left Iowa State focused less on postseason ambitions and more on simply staying afloat.

Now the job of rebuilding falls to Jimmy Rogers, hired away from Washington State on Dec. 5. Rogers is in the process of re-recruiting players and assembling a new staff.

Iowa State’s situation is becoming more common in today’s college football. The rise of NIL (Name, Image, and Likeness) and constant coaching changes have made the sport unstable, with rosters changing almost overnight.

NIL refers to the ability of college athletes to earn money from endorsements, sponsorships, appearances, and other commercial uses of their personal brand.

Adopted nationwide in 2021, NIL allows athletes to profit without being paid directly by their schools for performance. While supporters see it as a long-overdue correction to amateurism, critics argue it has created an uneven, lightly regulated marketplace that has upended recruiting and competitive balance in college sports.

Link

NIL

College football transfer portal: Texas’ Steve Sarkisian calls out irrational agents

Published

2 hours ago

December 30, 2025

Your Sports Nation

Constructing a college football roster is wildly different now than it was even three years ago, as the transfer portal, NIL and revenue sharing completely reshaped the way coaches and programs must operate.

There are plenty of teams that use the ability to (legally) pay players and the portal to their advantage, but the newness of everything related paying players and the lack of regulations in college football, due to the ever-weakening NCAA, created a number of challenges.

Texas coach Steve Sarkisian detailed one major problem he hopes to see addressed after a reporter asked about how he approaches building through the portal. Texas doesn’t have much issue with investment or resources, but Sarkisian explained that the lack of a certification process for agents can lead to some absurd situations.

“I think it’s all so strategic, right? It’s one about need. It’s two about money and the cost and where’s the market and which agent you’re dealing with,” Sarkisian said. “There are some agents that are rational, and there are some agents that this is the first time ever being an agent — I don’t know if they are even licensed to be agents, but all of a sudden they get to be agents because we have no certification process in college football. In the NFL, you have to be certified. In college football, it may be their college roommate their freshman year who’s their agent right now, and this guy is throwing numbers at you and it’s like, we can’t even deal with this. Like, you just move on. It’s unfortunate. And we’ll get there in college football, but right now it’s a tough situation.”

Coaches complaining about NIL and the portal often amount to sour grapes, but Sarkisian’s point about the challenge of dealing with agents which have no previous experience or understanding of the market is a legitimate one.

That said, you have to wonder if this is fresh in Sarkisian’s mind due to any of Texas’ opt-outs, as they have 13 players who announced intentions to enter the transfer portal and won’t play in the Citrus Bowl. Among them are the Longhorns top three running backs, headlined by Tre Wisner, and their second-leading receiver, DeAndre Moore Jr.

Eventually one would think some governing body will emerge that can provide some form of regulations on that sort of thing and require certification to help everyone out — as players would be better served being represented by more professional agents. However, it’s not clear when that will happen as the fear of anti-trust litigation led the NCAA to await congressional action, which has yet to materialize in any meaningful way.

In the meantime, coaches and GMs will have to deal with the occasional green agent who asks the world, which even a program with seemingly endless resources like Texas has to laugh off.

Link

NIL

$1.4 million QB strongly linked to Big Ten program after decision to enter transfer portal

Published

3 hours ago

December 30, 2025

Your Sports Nation

The college football transfer portal window opens soon with a flurry of high-profile movement expected across the country.

One of the most significant announcements comes from a veteran quarterback, with a reported $1.4 million valuation by On3, who declared his intention to seek a new home for his final senior campaign. This signal-caller brings a wealth of experience and production to the open market as teams look to solidify their rosters for 2026.

This prospect stands out as the most experienced returning starter in the Power 4 conferences with 39 career starts under his belt. He has accumulated 26 victories over the last three years and boasts 83 total touchdowns during his collegiate career. His decision to move on follows a challenging 2025 season where he battled through a partially torn labrum and an AC sprain while leading his team.

Speculation immediately centers on a reunion with his former head coach who recently departed for a prominent job in the Big Ten Conference. The two share a close relationship that could facilitate a quick transition to the new program in State College.

Analysts believe this connection makes the Nittany Lions a logical landing spot for the seasoned passer as he explores his options in a lucrative marketplace.

Quarterback Rocco Becht leaves Iowa State Cyclones to pursue new opportunities

Rocco Becht officially announced his decision to enter the NCAA transfer portal on Dec. 20 through a social media post. The Iowa State Cyclones standout thanked the fanbase and the program before stating his desire to find a new destination for his final year of eligibility. Becht leaves Ames as one of the most productive players in school history and as the coach who guided the team to its first 11-win season in 2024.

His entry into the portal comes shortly after Iowa State Cyclones head coach Matt Campbell accepted the head coaching position with the Penn State Nittany Lions. Campbell and Becht developed a strong bond during their time together in the Big 12 Conference.

Iowa State Cyclones quarterback Rocco Becht (3) finished his 2025 campaign with 2,584 yards and 24 total touchdowns. | William Purnell-Imagn Images

Reports from ESPN’s Max Olson suggest Becht is a strong candidate to follow Campbell to Pennsylvania. However, the redshirt junior is expected to consider offers from other schools before finalizing his decision.

The market for experienced quarterbacks has grown expensive with top passers commanding deals in the $3 million to $4 million range. Becht offers a proven track record despite a statistically down year in 2025 caused by multiple injuries. He underwent surgery on his non-throwing shoulder recently to address a labrum issue that plagued him throughout the fall.

The 6-foot-1 quarterback threw for 2,584 yards and 24 touchdowns this past season while managing the physical setbacks. He ends his time at Iowa State with 9,274 passing yards and 64 passing touchdowns.

The NCAA transfer portal window will open for all players on Jan. 2.

Major college football program ‘targeting’ $2.4 million QB in transfer portal

Published

3 hours ago

December 30, 2025

Your Sports Nation

The NCAA transfer portal officially opens on Friday for all college football players seeking new programs to play for in 2026. The portal will stay open for the following two weeks.

Among the vast number of players who have entered the transfer portal, quarterbacks have received the most attention in recent weeks. No less than seven Power Four starters from the 2025 season are on the move, and there are a number of starters from the Group of Five ranks looking to move into the Power Four.

One Power Four starter on the move is Cincinnati quarterback Brendan Sorsby. He will have one season of eligibility remaining at his third school.

While Sorsby is an attractive starter candidate from the transfer portal, one of the strongest contenders lies within the Big 12.

The Athletic recently unveiled projections for each quarterback’s potential destination out of the transfer portal. One of the projections listed Sorsby transferring to Texas Tech in the 2026 offseason.

The Red Raiders are some of the most aggressive NIL spenders in college football, but they have seldom used the portal for a quarterback. Tyler Shough is the only quarterback Texas Tech has started from the portal under Joey McGuire, and he transferred to Louisville after suffering an injury and losing the job to Behren Morton.

Sorsby began his college football career at Indiana under Tom Allen in 2022. He redshirted that season, finishing 3-of-6 passing for eight yards and an interception in a blowout loss to Penn State.

The Hoosiers featured Sorsby in 10 games during the 2023 season. He passed for 1,587 yards, 15 touchdowns and five interceptions and rushed for 112 yards and four touchdowns. Allen was fired by Indiana that offseason, so Sorsby transferred to Cincinnati.

Brendan Sorsby evades a tackle in Indiana's 2023 football game against Michigan State. — Indiana’s Brendan Sorsby (15) runs during the first half of the Indiana versus Michigan State football game at Memorial Stadium on Saturday, Nov. 18, 2023. | Rich Janzaruk/Herald-Times / USA TODAY NETWORK

Scott Satterfield immediately named Sorsby as the Bearcats’ starter in 2024. He compiled 2,813 pass yards, 18 touchdowns and seven interceptions to go along with 447 rush yards and nine rush touchdowns. Cincinnati finished the year 5-7, losing each of its last five games.

Sorsby accumulated 2,800 passing yards, 27 touchdown passes and nine interceptions to go along with 580 yards and nine touchdowns on the ground. The 36 total touchdowns are the most in Cincinnati program history.

Since the portal opens on Jan. 2, Sorsby will not play in Cincinnati’s bowl game. The Bearcats (7-5, 5-4) will face Navy (10-2, 7-1) in the AutoZone Liberty Bowl (4:30 p.m. EST, ESPN).

Brendan Sorsby throws the ball against BY — Cincinnati Bearcats quarterback Brendan Sorsby (2) throws a pass against the BYU Cougars in the first half at Nippert Stadium. | Aaron Doster-Imagn Images

Link

NIL

No. 1 transfer portal player heavily linked to major college football program

Published

4 hours ago

December 30, 2025

Your Sports Nation

After entering the year ranked No. 2 in the AP Top 25 preseason poll, Penn State endured a turbulent 2025 season that included the firing of long-time head coach James Franklin, a disappointing 3–6 Big Ten conference record, and a late rebound capped by a 22–10 Pinstripe Bowl win over Clemson to finish 7–6.

Chaz Coleman, Penn State’s true freshman defensive end, emerged as one of the program’s more promising underclass pass-rush prospects in 2025, recording eight total tackles, three tackles for loss, one sack, one forced fumble, and two fumble recoveries across five appearances.

However, Coleman announced his decision to enter the transfer portal on December 18 and has since emerged as the No. 1-ranked player in the portal according to 247Sports.

Soon after, reports surfaced regarding Ohio State’s interest in portal edge talent, with On3’s Pete Nakos specifically naming Coleman and listing the Buckeyes among the programs already connected to him.

On Monday, Nakos again linked Coleman to Ohio State, noting significant mutual interest and that the two sides appear close to coming together.

Warren G. Harding athlete Chaz Coleman. — Chaz Coleman watches warm-ups before Ohio State’s game against the Marshall University Thundering Herd at Ohio Stadium. | Lori Schmidt / Columbus Dispatch / USA TODAY NETWORK via Imagn Images

Coleman is a Warren, Ohio, product who arrived at Penn State as a highly regarded high school prospect.

He was listed by On3 as a four-star recruit, the No. 25-ranked edge rusher nationally, and the No. 8-ranked prospect in Ohio, holding more than a dozen offers before choosing the Nittany Lions over Kentucky, Florida State, Illinois, Michigan State, Missouri, and Ohio State.

Ohio State compiled a 12–1 regular-season record in 2025, finished undefeated in Big Ten play before falling to Indiana in the conference title game, and entered the College Football Playoff as the No. 2 seed, drawing a quarterfinal matchup against Miami in the Goodyear Cotton Bowl Classic on Wednesday.

Coleman’s Ohio roots, size (6’4″, 240 pounds), and Ohio State’s recent success developing portal and transfer edge defenders into NFL-caliber players make the Buckeyes a logical fit.

NIL

Why Georgia hasn’t slipped amid college football’s changes — it starts with Kirby Smart

Published

5 hours ago

December 30, 2025

Your Sports Nation

Kirby Smart’s first college coaching stop was at tiny Valdosta State back in 2000. The team’s strength and conditioning coach was Michael Doscher, who was asked two decades later what Smart was like then, which may have foretold what he would become. Doscher thought for a couple beats, then answered.

“He was humble,” Doscher said.

Valdosta State was a budding cradle of future big-time head coaches — Hal Mumme, Mike Leach, Dana Holgorsen, Will Muschamp — and they all had some “it factor” about them. And for the 22-year-old Smart, fresh off an All-SEC playing career, it was the way he carried himself.

“Kirby was a little more personable about it, more friendly and had that way about him,” Doscher said.

Maybe it’s hard to consider the current Smart — the 10th-year Georgia coach who rants and rails on the sideline, who has six national title rings as a head coach and defensive coordinator — as humble. Yet, it’s also a bit of the secret sauce.

It was for Nick Saban, the man who hired Smart away from Valdosta State and into his vortex, and is now off the stage — essentially replaced by Smart as the accepted best coach in the sport. And while they’re not the same person or coach, the reason they got to the top and stayed there may be the same: The flexibility to adjust when the world around them changes.

Saban, the defensive mastermind and offensive traditionalist, adjusted late in his career to the up-tempo, passing revolution. Smart made the same adjustment, but also to changes in the sport: unlimited transferring, paying players, the flattening of the talent pool such that the Georgias and Alabamas can’t hoard talent like the old days.

Eleven months ago, Smart’s program seemed to be falling back to the pack. The Dawgs were soundly beaten by Notre Dame in the quarterfinals of the College Football Playoff, ending a season that had an SEC championship, but also three losses and more close calls. When it ended, Smart declined to make any changes to his coaching staff, to the concern of many in Georgia’s fan base.

And a month into this season, Georgia suffered its first home loss in six years and needed the help of a missed field goal to win at Tennessee. The Dawgs didn’t look like a great team anymore.

Now here they are: SEC champions again. Playing their best ball going into the Playoff, one of three betting co-favorites to win the national title. The Playoff could always re-ignite questions. However, right now, entering Thursday’s Sugar Bowl tilt against Ole Miss, Georgia as an elite program seems inevitable, for a simple reason: The head coach knows what he’s doing.

Staff management

Some saw it as stubbornness. Smart saw it as stability.

Georgia was coming off a rough offensive season in 2024, especially in blocking. Quarterback Carson Beck regressed, receivers dropped passes and there was almost no running game. That was despite three offensive linemen being good enough to be drafted in the first three rounds of the NFL Draft.

And yet Smart opted to bring back offensive line coach Stacy Searals and offensive coordinator Mike Bobo, who was Smart’s college teammate and close friend. To the critics, Smart was allowing personal relationships to cloud his professional thinking. To Smart, he was counting on two veteran coaches with longer track records.

“We’ve built our program around retention,” Smart said in the spring. “I think we’ve got the most stable, not only staff, but stable organization in all of college football. I think that’s what we’ve hung our hat on, is we have stability. We have retention. We have a great foundation. We’re built to last.”

And built, it turns out, to validate Smart’s gamble.

Gunner Stockton and the Georgia offense have soared this season, validating Kirby Smart’s bet on continuity. (Kevin C. Cox / Getty Images)

Georgia’s offense may be the reason it made the Playoff, winning early-season shootouts against Tennessee (44-41) and Ole Miss (43-35). New quarterback Gunner Stockton ended up seventh in the Heisman Trophy voting. The running game was a strength. Bobo was named a finalist for the Broyles Award, which goes to the nation’s top assistant.

The defense was realistically the bigger worry until late in the season, when the old Georgia defense showed up again, smothering Texas, Georgia Tech and Alabama.

Still, it goes further than that: Georgia’s special teams have always been an underrated strength, and Smart has put Kirk Benedict in charge of that for several years.

And off the field, the longtime guiding force remains Scott Sinclair, who has been the strength and conditioning coordinator throughout Smart’s tenure. The two are wrapping up their 10th season together.

“This league will chew you up and spit you out,” Smart said, mentioning how other teams have player and coaching turnover, while his program is among the best at retention. “I take a lot of pride in that, and I think that’s one of our weapons.”

Smart in charge (still, with help)

Georgia’s talent advantage isn’t what it was in the pre-2021 days, when unlimited transferring and NIL arrived. The Bulldogs no longer can stow blue-chip recruits on their bench for a few years, then unleash them as starters. It has been a hit to the team’s depth, and occasionally left weak spots on the field.

The program, nonetheless, has also managed it well enough that it still has plenty of talent. Georgia signed 21 of its 24 starters in the SEC championship in one of its past four recruiting classes, all of which ranked in the top three nationally.

And when the program badly needed a difference-making receiver, it got him via the transfer portal. USC’s Zachariah Branch has become such a focal point of the offense that with 73 catches, he’s four away from setting Georgia’s single-season record.

In an age when many programs are hiring a general manager, Georgia already has one: Smart. He has always been the de facto GM, the one in charge of roster procurement. There isn’t a person in charge of it who reports to Smart. There is a football chief of staff — Mark Robinson — and director of player personnel — Will Myers. Still, as the portal and NIL became prominent, Georgia didn’t have to expand its personnel staff. It was already pretty robust.

“We’ve got a lot of people in charge of roster management, including myself, including our football office staff (who) are involved,” Smart said. “Our operations slash player development, player personnel staff, everybody gets involved in that.”

This was what Saban did: He revolutionized college football coaching at Alabama in the late 2000s by hiring analysts, which critics pilloried as staff-bloating, but it was Saban who wanted extra eyes on his team and extra hands in recruiting. Saban was not arrogant enough to think he could do everything.

That’s the formula for Smart in this era: Lots of eyes, ears and mouths involved, then he makes the final call.

“It’s a team effort,” Smart said. “We reorganize and restructure some things in terms of what falls under whose duty and whose aspects. But at the end of the day, I’m not ready to run off and go hire somebody that’s just going to make all the decisions for what goes on the football field. I think I’ve got to stay involved in that heavily. We’ve got the capacity and the quality of people in the areas that I think we need.”

Georgia’s 117 wins since Kirby Smart took over in 2016 are second-most in the country behind only Alabama’s 121. (Todd Kirkland / Getty Images)

Internal culture in the age of NIL and the portal

Georgia has dealt with too many bad headlines over the last few years, with a couple dozen players arrested since the January 2023 car crash that killed a player and staff member. However, Georgia people — administrators, staffers, players — put those issues in a separate category from what they see as a strong internal culture. There is a dichotomy: Players getting in legal trouble is something Smart has had to handle, adjusting his level and manner of punishment. Yet, when it comes to team-building and chemistry in the age of NIL and the portal, not much has changed.

“NIL hasn’t impacted what we’ve been doing,” said Drew Brannon, a sports psychologist who has worked with Georgia since 2018, especially starting with the 2021 national championship season. “The things we’ve built in terms of program DNA have certainly had a positive impact given the ramifications of NIL, but we haven’t done things differently due to NIL, portal, etc.”

Georgia has been practicing skull sessions — when players in small or large groups discuss personal issues or desires — since 2021. Smart has also given Brannon the floor to introduce motivational exercises, such as before the second national championship, using the Netflix and Blockbuster story.

There have been some challenges, especially last year, when players said the connection among teammates, especially on offense, wasn’t as strong. Still, there was also optimism from existing players about the returning 2025 core.

“I’ve got a lot of faith in them,” linebacker Smael Mondon said last February. “They’ve got a good leadership class, and I feel really good about it.”

That’s been borne out. The quarterback change also helped. Beck was quieter and on his own, while Stockton’s personality and playing style endeared him to teammates. Teams often feed off the personality of their quarterbacks. This year’s team pulled off comeback wins over Tennessee, Auburn, Ole Miss and Florida — and it did that last year too. This time, though, it improved as the season continued and looks much better heading into the CFP.

“We do our best to enhance our efforts each year with tweaks, but the fundamentals don’t change, and I think that has a lot to do with why our players and staff don’t flinch when they encounter challenging situations,” Brannon said. “Coach Smart does an incredible job of modeling this from the top, which is what you see in the highest-performing organizations in the world.”

Link