In the 2025 NCAA Division I men’s basketball tournament, also known as “March Madness,” the Elite Eight consisted of the top seed from all four regions, with the second seed from three of the four regions and third-seeded Texas Tech.

For the first time since the tournament expanded to 32 teams in 1975, the Sweet Sixteen featured teams only from the Power Five conferences, which include the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC), Big Ten Conference (Big Ten), Big 12 Conference (Big 12), Pacific-12 Conference (Pac-12) and Southeastern Conference (SEC).

March Madness, particularly on the men’s side, has long been defined by Cinderella stories and unforgettable upsets, where lower-seeded teams — often hailing from mid-major leagues — defy the odds and capture the hearts of fans nationwide. This unpredictability has been the tournament’s allure: a thrilling ride where anything is possible. 

In the past decade, there have been two remarkable Cinderella runs. In 2022, 15th-seeded Saint Peter’s from the Metro Atlantic Athletic Conference reached the Elite Eight, stunning second-seeded Kentucky (SEC), seventh-seeded Murray State and third-seeded Purdue (Big Ten), respectively, en route.

In 2018, 11th-seeded Loyola Chicago — then representing the Missouri Valley Conference — and the iconic Sister Jean survived and advanced all the way to the Final Four, downing sixth-seeded Miami (ACC), third-seeded Tennessee (SEC), seventh-seeded Nevada and ninth-seeded Kansas State (Big 12), respectively, on the way.

With the absences of Cinderellas and a general lack of upsets in this year’s March Madness, it is time to examine a possible correlation to the most significant shift in collegiate athletics since the Peacocks’ miraculous run: NIL.

What is NIL and how does it specifically benefit Power Five schools?

NIL, which stands for “name, image and likeness,” refers to an individual’s legal entitlement to control the commercial use of their personal brand. Historically, college athletes were prohibited from capitalizing on their fame financially, effectively forfeiting their NIL rights when they committed to collegiate sports programs. However, nearly four years ago, a combination of NCAA regulatory changes and state legislation reinstated these rights, empowering student-athletes to enter into lucrative sponsorship agreements. 

Power Five schools, with their expansive resources, extensive media visibility and well-established networks, are uniquely positioned to attract high-value opportunities. While student-athletes are currently not allowed to be paid by their schools, this could change soon as well. The NCAA’s Division I Board of Directors has approved proposed changes contingent on the landmark $2.8 billion House v. NCAA settlement — a consolidated lawsuit brought by athletes challenging restrictions on their ability to profit from NIL. If finalized, the plan would allow schools to distribute up to $20.5 million annually to student-athletes.

At the end of 2024, CNBC unveiled a list of the 75 wealthiest college sports programs. Among the schools listed, only six were not members of the Power Five conferences. All six of these institutions ranked 67th or higher in the ranking and came from just three leagues: the American Athletic Conference (AAC), the Mountain West Conference and the Big East Conference.

Since the introduction of NIL in 2021, recruiting for Power Five schools has become decidedly easier, surpassing their previous advantages. These programs possess an unparalleled ability to attract elite recruits, primarily due to their capacity to offer financial stakes that smaller institutions simply cannot match. This process is further facilitated by influential boosters, alumni and local businesses, whose elevated assets are especially concentrated within Power Five schools; this provides an additional competitive edge in the hunt for top-tier recruits and the biggest names in the transfer portal.

How has NIL impacted the current state of the transfer portal, which legendary basketball figure Dick Vitale describes as the “wild west”?

The NCAA transfer portal, established in 2018, serves as a compliance tool designed to streamline and manage the process for student-athletes transferring between member institutions. Its primary purpose is to provide greater transparency and allow athletes to publicly express their intent to switch schools.

The men’s basketball portal has reached an unprecedented level of relevance and activity in its current state. Even before the 2025 Final Four kicked off, several highly-coveted players — often seeking better financial opportunities these days — had not only entered the portal but already committed to new schools. While in many of these cases, student-athletes are making moves from one Power Five program to another, there are exceptions involving mid-major programs, with the move often negatively impacting them.

A prominent example of a player from a prosperous mid-major program being poached by a Power Five school is Johnell Davis. The combo guard spent four seasons at Florida Atlantic University (FAU) of the AAC, where he played a pivotal role in the program’s most successful campaign ever in 2022-23. Davis was the leading scorer for an Owls team that made an unexpected run to the Final Four as a ninth seed. After FAU returned to March Madness the following year, Davis transferred to Arkansas to play for legendary coach John Calipari this past season.

While transfers for a player’s fifth year are not uncommon, Davis’ move came amidst a broader exodus from FAU. The Owls suffered the exits of their other four starters and their sixth man coming into this campaign, with two of those players exiting through the transfer portal while the others graduated after the departure of head coach Dusty May, who took over Michigan’s program after six seasons with FAU. Consequently, the Owls, who posted a remarkable 60-13 combined record across the 2022-23 and 2023-24 campaigns, saw a dramatic decline this year, finishing with an 18-16 record.

The advent of the transfer portal, hinged on the rise of NIL, has made it extremely challenging for mid-majors to experience sustained success. Since the implementation of NIL, there has been a noticeable shift in student-athletes’ priorities, with many seemingly opting to sacrifice playing time at more historically prestigious programs and potentially jeopardizing their professional prospects in exchange for higher financial incentives. 

From an individual standpoint, this decision is understandable, particularly for those not pursuing a professional basketball career. However, on a broader scale, this trend contributes to a growing disparity in talent across the NCAA, exacerbating an ever-widening gap that threatens to further destabilize the competitive balance in collegiate basketball.

What is the NCAA’s Division I Basketball Performance Fund, and how does it contribute to the growing discrepancy between Power Five schools and mid-majors?

The NCAA earns most of its annual revenue from two main sources: television and marketing rights, and championship tournaments. For the 2024 fiscal year, the organization generated $1.38 billion, with a major portion coming from March Madness. The men’s basketball tournament alone accounted for more than $900 million.

Last year, the NCAA distributed its revenue across nine areas, including allocating $171,242,775 to the “Basketball Performance Fund.” According to the organization’s website, this fund is “distributed to Division I conferences and independent schools based on their performance in the men’s basketball tournament over a six-year rolling period.” 

Leagues earn “units” based on how far their teams advance in the NCAA Tournament. Each unit is valued at $340,000 and is paid out over six years, increasing by 3% annually. Reaching the championship game — which requires five wins — earns a conference five units, or approximately $1.7 million. Thanks to Florida and Houston making the finals in the 2025 edition of March Madness, the SEC and Big 12, respectively, secured about $11 million to be paid out over time. 

While Power Five institutions typically distribute large payouts directly to their member schools, mid- and low-majors rely on unit revenue to fund their operations. Even a decade ago before NIL’s arrival, more prosperous leagues were already dominating these earnings. Between 2009 and 2013, just six of all the Division I conferences — which were 32 at the time — captured 64% of all profits distributed through the Basketball Performance Fund.

The NCAA does also allot money through the “Equal Conference Fund,” which distributes funds “equally among Division I basketball-playing conferences that meet athletic and academic standards to play in the men’s basketball tournament.” However, the Equal Conference Fund totaled just $54,797,687 in 2024 — a 68% decrease compared to the Basketball Performance Fund.

Where does Stony Brook stand within this issue’s realm?

The Coastal Athletic Association (CAA) — Stony Brook’s current conference — is widely regarded as a low-major. Among the 31 Division I men’s basketball conferences, the CAA ranked 15th in the 2024-25 Rating Percentage Index as compiled by TeamRankings.com. Four of the five Power Five conferences occupy the top five in these rankings. Meanwhile, the Pac-12 finds itself in a period of transition following the departure of eight teams in response to the conference’s inability to secure a lucrative media rights deal capable of competing with the financial powerhouses of the Big Ten and SEC, which would have led to reduced revenue for those programs.

Stony Brook Athletics has just two third-party organizations facilitating NIL opportunities for its student-athletes: The 1957 Club and the CR97 Fund, the latter of which solely supports the men’s basketball team. While the financial impacts of these initiatives remains unclear since NIL deals are private transactions and not publicly disclosed, they may have contributed to the Seawolves’ most high-profile transfer acquisition since the inception of NIL: guard Joe Octave. 

For his graduate year, Octave — a 2023-24 Third-Team All-Patriot League selection for Holy Cross — chose Stony Brook, which was in desperate need of experienced talent after losing four starters to graduation and its sixth man to the portal. That sixth man, center Keenan Fitzmorris, was financially lured away by Northwestern. The big man played just 9.2 minutes per game this past season for the Big Ten team, which finished with the fourth-worst record in conference play within the Power Five league.

Unfortunately for the Seawolves, things also did not work out on their end with Octave. A lower-body injury sidelined him for the team’s final 11 regular season games as well as the 2025 CAA Championship, where Stony Brook was eliminated in the First Round. Even when Octave was healthy, his shooting struggles were evident. While he averaged a respectable 13.3 points per game, it came with career-low shooting percentages from the field (.351) and three-point range (.208).

Octave’s absence paved the way for some revelations, most notably guard C.J. Luster II and forward Andre Snoddy, who emerged as the Seawolves’ standout performers during the 2024-25 campaign. However, the two are now on their way out. Luster II has transferred to the University of North Carolina Wilmington, the CAA’s reigning champion and one of the conference’s leaders in NIL initiatives alongside Charleston. Conversely, Snoddy is currently in the transfer portal despite having already exhausted his eligibility, aligning himself with a wave of athletes in a similar limbo. They remain hopeful that ongoing litigation will compel the NCAA to revise its eligibility regulations, although the organization maintains that no such discussions are currently taking place.

Not aided by the aforementioned departures, Stony Brook finds itself in a significantly disadvantageous position, both now and in the foreseeable future. The program is in the midst of a rebuild after enduring its worst season in 17 years, grappling with both internal challenges surrounding coaching and player development along with the NCAA’s ever-evolving landscape. The institution’s limited NIL influence severely hampers its ability to attract the talent — whether from the transfer portal or incoming freshman — needed to spark a turnaround and regain competitive relevance.