Two days after its apparel deal with Nike officially began, Auburn has unveiled its new football jerseys that will be used for the 2025 season.

The Tigers showed off their Nike threads in a video and photos on social media:

Under Armour had been the Tigers’ official apparel partner dating back to 2006, but the school announced in April 2024 it was making the switch to Nike starting with the 2025-26 academic year.

Auburn’s most recent nine-year deal with Under Armour that was signed in 2015 lost $8.6 million in value because it came with $10 million in UA stock to be paid out over the life of the agreement.

Per Eben Novy-Williams and Brendan Coffey of Sportico, the school’s bet on Under Armour continuing to grow right around the time it was trading at an all-time high price.

As the deal with Under Armour came to an end on July 1, Auburn posted a thank you video with the football team’s standout moments during the 18-year partnership between the two brands.

Financial details of the deal between Auburn and Nike are not publicly available. Matt Cohen of AL.com noted in May 2024 the contract was negotiated between Nike and Auburn’s athletics foundation, Tigers Unlimited, so it is not subject to public records.

With Auburn officially a Nike school now, it joins fellow SEC programs Alabama, Texas, Florida, Arkansas, Georgia, LSU, Kentucky and Mississippi in wearing the Swoosh logo.

Florida State Under Fire for NIL Era’s Dirty Secret originally appeared on Athlon Sports.

The most dangerous contract isn’t the one you read. It’s the one you’re told to trust.

Over the past week, leaked details from Florida State’s proposed revenue-sharing agreements have raised eyebrows and alarms. Legal clauses that allow the university to unilaterally extend a player’s contract, renegotiate deals after injury, and impose multi-thousand-dollar fines have been quietly circulating among athletes. The response from agents, lawyers, and insiders has been swift, according to CBS Sports.

Advertisement

“That’s not normal.”

“That would never fly in pro sports.”

“They have all the leverage, and the terms go too far.”

But here’s the real issue: FSU didn’t invent this model. They just got caught.

And if we’re being honest, the number of programs drafting similarly aggressive terms, silently, systematically, and without public scrutiny, is likely higher than most fans (and players) would ever imagine.

Athletes fought for years to reach this moment. The NCAA settlement promised direct pay, institutional clarity, and a new chapter in player empowerment. For once, the system appeared to be moving in the right direction. But the moment schools gained permission to cut checks, they also began quietly writing their own rules and burying them in legalese.

Advertisement

Florida State’s contract reportedly includes a clause that allows them to void or revise a deal if an athlete’s injury materially impacts their NIL value. Another gives the school the ability to extend a player’s contract without renegotiating, regardless of performance. Penalties for lost equipment or behavioral violations run as high as $2,500.

In theory, these protections serve the university. In practice, they put every athlete at risk of being turned into a line item on a risk management spreadsheet.

Imagine a wide receiver who earns his way into a starting role, only to get sidelined with a broken foot. Under these terms, his deal, once celebrated, can be restructured, devalued, or canceled outright. No agent. No union. No oversight. Just a document, signed in good faith, now turned against him.

Advertisement

It’s hard to blame athletes. Most of them don’t have contract managers. Many don’t even have proper NIL reps. They’re often handed a document by someone they’re taught to trust and told, “This is standard.” That phrase, “this is standard,” might be the most quietly corrosive phrase in the entire NIL era.

Here’s the truth: there is no standard. Not yet.

What FSU’s contract exposes isn’t just one school’s overreach. It is the systemic lack of accountability in college sports’ new financial ecosystem. Athletes are being told they’re professionals now. But professionals have agents, lawyers, and clauses designed to protect their interests. Most college athletes have a parent, a coach, and a pen.

Advertisement

And this is where it gets messy: how many of these “partnerships” are actually one-sided power grabs dressed up as opportunity? If FSU’s contract terms hadn’t leaked, would anyone be asking questions? Would any athletes even know what they signed?

Because if this is what we know from one school’s draft, imagine what’s hidden in the fine print at the end.

This isn’t about whether Florida State is out of bounds.

It’s about the quiet erosion of trust happening behind closed doors, where contracts are crafted with the kind of language that assumes athletes won’t ask questions. Where leverage is baked into clauses, and the benefit of the doubt always tilts toward the institution.

Advertisement

If this is the version that got leaked, what didn’t?

Schools aren’t just offering deals. They’re building systems to control outcomes. The very power athletes were promised is being repackaged and handed back in a form that looks official, but reads like a trap.

It’s not enough to say athletes are finally getting paid. Not if the price is autonomy. Not if the paperwork gives the school a way out and leaves the player holding nothing.

This is what the new era looks like when no one’s watching.

And now that we’ve seen a piece of it, we should start asking who else is hoping we don’t.

Related: How NIL Spending Is Reshaping College Football’s Competitive Landscape

This story was originally reported by Athlon Sports on Jul 3, 2025, where it first appeared.

GAINESVILLE, Fla. — Florida Gators Coach Billy Napier and his brethren have been bracing for a roster reckoning spurred by the House v. NCAA antitrust settlement.

The landmark legislation went into effect Tuesday, but sweeping changes remained on the horizon, not yet at the doorstep.

With fall camp scheduled to start at month’s end, Napier’s roster stands at 117 players — a dozen above the proposed future limit of 105.

“When we got the job, there were certain parameters around how you build your roster. We proceeded that way,” Napier said at the SEC spring meetings on May 28 in Destin. “I really like the group that we have. We’ve been fortunate to keep that group intact for the most part. … But if we’ve learned anything, it’s very fluid.

“So, play by the rules this year.”

Senior District Judge Claudia Wilken did not approve the settlement until June 6. A sticking point was including a provision to allow current walk-ons to receive a grandfather clause.

The reprieve is welcomed by coaches grappling with roster management in an era of the transfer portal, NIL and the College Football Playoff. While the delay buys time, it doesn’t allay long-term concerns about the impact of smaller rosters on player safety and practice efficiency.

Napier recalled a study indicating NFL franchises had an average of 119 players pass through their rosters, even though teams are limited 53 active players and up to 16 on a practice squad. A free-agent market provides a continual source of available players to replace those who are injured or underperforming.

“The biggest challenge from, from our perspective, is we don’t have access to a revolving roster situation during the season,” Texas A&M Coach Mike Elko said during the SEC Spring Meetings. “If it was 105 that could stay 105, it would be enough. The fear that we have is you get a rash of injuries in the NFL you go to the free-agent wire and you fix it.

“You get a rash of injuries for us, and there’s no out, there’s no option, there’s nothing you can do.”

Many have bemoaned the settlement’s impact on walk-ons, especially coaches who once were non-scholarship players themselves.

Clemson Coach Dabo Swinney walked on at Alabama as a wide receiver. Former Florida and South Carolina Coach Will Muschamp was a walk-on safety at Georgia, where he currently is a defensive analyst.

“I’m totally against eliminating walk-ons,” Swinney told the Orlando Sentinel last winter.

Swinney’s stance was philosophical and practical relative to roster size as much as personal to his experience.

“It’s enough to be able to play the games,” he said. “But in college football, to prepare guys properly with a 20-hour rule, to not be able to have the ability to have a practice squad at a minimum is going to be a challenge for a lot of people.”

Coaches initially worried walk-ons would be entirely fazed out. While some conferences could allow all 105 players to receive a scholarship, the SEC will permit 85 scholarship players and an additional 20 walk-ons.

“I didn’t like when it was initially presented,” Ole Miss Coach Lane Kiffin said. “There’s so many stories, whether it’s coaches in that room, great players that went on to be great NFL players that, as you start saying, well, if we don’t have that, then those don’t exist.

“It’s just a really cool part of a locker room.”

Yet, locker rooms will soon become less crowded.

The average roster size in 2024 was 128. UF at one point had 131 players.

Coaches have already whittled down their numbers, but avoided the larger cuts soon to come.

“We’ve been very honest with our guys,” Georgia Coach Kirby Smart said in late May. “We told them that they were free to go in the (transfer) portal. Some have looked out and realized that that’s not necessarily the grass is greener because there’s not a lot of opportunities. Everybody’s got a reduction of opportunities.”

Elko lamented the difficult choices, conversations and calculations he and his fellow coaches faced, but felt worse for the players impacted by legislation meant to help student-athletes.

The settlement set out to control costs and protect athletes as schools would begin to share revenue and increase scholarship funding to a tune of $20.5 million. Roster limits were seen as one way to manage transition amid an ever-changing financial model of college athletics, where football and men’s basketball fund nearly every other sport.

“It’s challenging. You’re trying to figure out your fall camp roster in late June and still don’t have clarity,” Elko said. “We’ve tried to be honest with the kids. But from their perspective, it’s even tougher. You’ve got 19-year-olds who don’t know if they’re part of the team. They’re left in limbo heading into the summer.”

As UF and other high-profile programs inch toward an uncertain future, the task of balancing a football roster is one of many issues facing college athletics as it adapts to a new reality of athlete compensation and legal accountability.

Napier and his fellow coaches can take a breath for now, but change is coming.

“We’ll proceed according to the settlement,” he said. “But I think it’s to be determined in the next couple of months or years where it goes.”

Former Florida Gator coach Urban Meyer never had to deal with the NIL Era and was able to leverage things like getting players to the NFL when recruiting players. Since stepping away from coaching for good, money has turned into the name of game in recruiting.

And while Florida’s NIL situation doesn’t quite match what some of the big boys are able to do, including Meyer’s last school at Ohio State, it’s still way better than what FSU might be trying to get away with.

Urban Meyer calls out FSU for their revenue-sharing situation

With revenue sharing now the way of the land, schools are having to figure out how to distribute the extra money to players. CBS Sports ran a story last week highlighting FSU’s plan, and there are some doozies in it.

According to CBS:

“One clause, which CBS Sports has seen a copy of, allows the team to extend a player at the end of their contract unilaterally without having to negotiate with the player. Another section on team rules — common in most NIL or rev share deals — includes a maximum $2,500 fine on the first offense if a player loses team equipment such as a pair of cleats. The max fine for using a controlled substance for the first time is $1,000.

There’s another clause about things that would constitute a breach of contract. Among them is “illness or injury which is serious enough to affect the value of rights granted to the school.” The way it’s written allows Florida State to renegotiate or even cancel a player’s contract at its discretion after any sort of injury — among other potential liquidated damages provisions included as part of the contract — including those that happen on the football field.”

Appearing on The Triple Option, Meyer made the point that if this is actually the path the Seminoles try to take, they will never be heard from again in college football:

“I’ll make this statement if this is legit, this goes through, which I’m so skeptical, then the days of Florida State are numbered. It won’t happen. It won’t happen. It can’t happen. No chance.”

The flaw in FSU’s plan is that no five or four-star prospect is going to want to wind up in Tallahassee, knowing they have no bargaining power if they were to outperform their initial deal.

Combined with zero protections if a player gets injured, word will leak very quickly to look elsewhere.

Terms of the settlement between Florida State, Clemson and the ACC show the conference’s year-by-year exit fees. The figures show the amount schools would have to pay if they want to leave, according to On3’s Brett McMurphy.

If a school were to leave the ACC in 2025-26, it would owe $165 million. That number drops to $147 million in 2026-27, $129 million in 2027-28 and $111 million in 2028-29. After it hits $93 million in 2029-30, schools would owe a $75 million exit fee from 2030-2036.

Florida State, Clemson and the ACC all approved the settlement in March after the two schools filed lawsuits regarding the conference’s grant of rights. FSU’s suit centered on the grant of rights, while Clemson sought to clarify language about whether the university controls its broadcast rights.

The exit fees line up with the proposal approved by the schools, which also included a new revenue distribution model based on a rolling average of TV ratings. The proposal also said schools would keep their media rights after paying the exit fees.

Under the new revenue model, a majority share – 60% – of the base media rights will be placed into a viewership pool to be distributed via a TV ratings-based model, the settlement terms said. It will take effect this year.

When it approved the settlement, Clemson projected the “opportunity” for more than $120 million in new revenue over the next six years in its board meeting. It includes the “viewership pool,” as well as enhanced ACC “success initiatives.”

Florida State trustee Drew Weatherford also said praised the way things “drastically changed” after he and others made it clear the school was willing to leave the ACC. He called the settlements a win for all sides.

“I’m proud of where we’ve where we’ve landed,” Weatherford said. “We made some commitments 14 months ago that we would do everything in our power to ensure that we could compete at the highest level. I think we’ve done that here. We also made it clear that we were willing to seek a new home if something drastically didn’t change.

“But the good news is that things have drastically changed since we had that conversation – for our benefit – and there’s been a lot of work done. … So I just want Seminole nation to know that the future is bright. I am extremely encouraged and I’m confident that we will remain one of the top athletic brands in the country for decades to come, and I wasn’t that confident 14 months ago. So I just commend the entire board, the entire organization, for getting to where we are today. Net and net, I think it’s a really great outcome for everybody involved.”