NIL
Post
The House v. NCAA class action settlement was approved on June 6. While the House settlement changes the college sports landscape, it has also left institutions, coaches and athletes with questions. Since 2021, there has been a push to pass a piece of federal legislation that creates national standards and guidelines for the use of […]


The House v. NCAA class action settlement was approved on June 6. While the House settlement changes the college sports landscape, it has also left institutions, coaches and athletes with questions.
Since 2021, there has been a push to pass a piece of federal legislation that creates national standards and guidelines for the use of student-athletes’ name, image and likeness (NIL). To date, nothing has garnered any traction. But on June 12, lawmakers discussed a new bill that could shed light on the future of NIL legislation.
Past Federal Discussions
Before the House settlement, congressional bills generally focused on prohibiting institutions from retaliating against student-athletes who enter NIL agreements and centered around ensuring that student-athletes have the right to use an agent. The proposed bills included a preemption clause that would invalidate any conflicting state NIL laws.
But the proposed bills in Congress varied when it came to other details. For example, the proposed College Athlete Economic Freedom Act would have banned entities from colluding to implement a cap on NIL compensation and would have allowed students to collectively bargain. The College Sports NIL Clearinghouse Act of 2023 would have created a clearinghouse to serve as a governing body for matters regarding NIL agreements. Several other bills were also proposed:
Interestingly, most of the proposed bills put the FTC at the center of enforcement. Only the College Athlete Economic Freedom Act included a private right to action, however.
In 2023, Senator Cruz posted a discussion draft that would have barred an institution from restricting a student-athlete from entering an NIL agreement and would have allowed student-athletes to hire agents. The draft would have allowed the NCAA to regulate agents, enforce rules for recruiting, organize championships, and create bylaws to govern membership. If enacted, the proposal would have also preempted other state and federal laws.
None of these proposed federal legislative responses to the changing NIL landscape have gained any traction.
Current Moves in Congress
On June 12, members of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade met to discuss the Student Compensation and Opportunity through Rights and Endorsements (SCORE) Act. In its current state, the SCORE Act is a discussion draft sponsored by Rep. Gus Bilirakis. The bill:
- Prohibits institutions from limiting a student-athlete from profiting off their NIL, unless the deal conflicts with the school’s code of conduct or impermissibly uses an institution’s intellectual property
- Requires athletes to report any NIL deals worth more than $600
- Gives student-athletes the right to hire agents and requires NIL agents to register with what would become the Interstate Intercollegiate Athletic Association (IIAA)
- Codifies NCAA guarantees like access to medical professionals, academic support services and scholarships
- Preempts state and federal laws
This discussion draft leaves the question of antitrust liability open, so the issue can be addressed through later legislation.
After the subcommittee hearing, it became clear that committee members agreed on at least one thing—student-athletes have the right to hire an agent. There was bipartisan support for this condition in federal NIL legislation, and the witnesses present also believed that there is an increasing need for agents in college sports.
But while the discussion draft was comprehensive, it did not gain unanimous support in the subcommittee hearing. Opponents of the draft expressed concern that the SCORE Act would impose more restrictions on student-athletes.
Congresswoman Lori Trahan—a former Division I volleyball player—took issue with the fact that the draft allows for a possible antitrust exemption, does not allow collective bargaining, allows schools to block NIL deals that conflict with existing contracts, preempts state laws, and does not address Title IX concerns or the rights of international athletes. Big Ten Commissioner Sherika Montgomery testified that she, like Congresswoman Trahan, believed that Title IX concerns need to be monitored and addressed before passing a federal NIL law. Congresswoman Yvette Clarke agreed that an NIL bill should not have an antitrust exemption, should allow for student-athlete collective bargaining, and should not include any barriers to NIL collectives, since the House settlement already created a revenue sharing pool.
Unionization was also a contentious issue at the hearing. Like Congresswomen Trahan and Clarke, the executive director of the National College Players Association, Ramogi Huma, said the ability to unionize is the right of any athlete. He also thought that collective bargaining would put athletes in a position where they could demand that NCAA implement important safety protocols. Huma said he would not support a federal bill like the SCORE Act that prohibits student-athletes from being considered employees, because they would never be allowed to unionize. In contrast, Ashley Cozad, SAAC Chair at the University of North Florida and a Division 1 swimmer, reasoned that Olympic sports would die out under an employee framework. She argued that smaller sports would no longer have a place in college athletics under an employer-employee model.
What’s Next?
The past federal proposals and the latest congressional hearing provide several insights. First, if a federal NIL bill is passed, there will likely be a provision that codifies student-athletes’ rights to hire representation or agents. Second, as addressed in prior bills and despite pushback from some lawmakers, a federal NIL bill will likely include a preemption clause that overrides any other federal or state NIL law.
Nonetheless, several points remain unresolved, particularly over antitrust exemptions, private rights of action, and employment status and unionization. Likewise, several legislators signaled wanting to keep an eye on how the House settlement affects female athletes under Title IX. These issues will likely be front and center to the NIL conversation going forward.
Special thanks to our contributing author, Bailey Bates, a 2025 summer associate from Tulane University Law School.
NIL
Rhett Lashlee fires shot at Curt Cignetti after Indiana coach’s SEC scheduling comment
One week after SEC Media Days, the conference remained a popular piece of conversation elsewhere, just ask Greg Sankey. Two coaches, in particular, found themselves in headlines — SMU‘s Rhett Lashlee and Curt Cignetti of Indiana. Neither one made folks inside the SEC quite happy with what was said. Lashlee wanted to make sure everyone […]

One week after SEC Media Days, the conference remained a popular piece of conversation elsewhere, just ask Greg Sankey. Two coaches, in particular, found themselves in headlines — SMU‘s Rhett Lashlee and Curt Cignetti of Indiana. Neither one made folks inside the SEC quite happy with what was said.
Lashlee wanted to make sure everyone understood the difference between the two, though. He commented on how the SEC has been “top-heavy” and pointed out only six schools have won the conference over the course of 60 years. Different from Cignetti, in his opinion, who threw “shade” at the SEC at Big Ten Media Days.
“I will differentiate from what I said to what Cignetti said,” Lashlee said via The Paul Finebaum Show. “Again, I just brought up a historical fact that can be backed up by data. I didn’t come out and throw shade at the SEC scheduling when I didn’t play a power four team on my schedule myself.”
Indiana once again sparked up a Strength of Schedule conversation this month after canceling a home-and-home series with Virginia. Instead, Cignetti will lead his team onto the field against FCS opponents during the 2027 and 2028 seasons. When asked about the decision, he ended his quote by going after the SEC’s scheduling.
“Twelve of the 16 SEC teams play three G5 or an FCS game,” Cignetti said. “Twelve of those teams play 36 games – 29 G5 games and seven FCS games, and one less conference game. So we figured we’d just adopt [an] SEC scheduling philosophy. Some people don’t like it. I’m more focused in on those nine conference games.”
As Lashlee subtly pointed out on Finebaum, the only power conference games Indiana played last season came during Big Ten play. The Hooisers’ nonconference games were against FIU, Western Illinois, and Charlotte. To pile on, many SEC fans and coaches would then signal to only one ranked opponent being against Ohio State, a game IU lost 38-15. Almost no topic was discussed more leading into the College Football Playoff.
What the SMU head coach said may have upset people inside the SEC as he looks to politic in favor of the ACC. But he believes coming into the argument with some data is different than what Cignetti presented while talking with the media. While you might be able to argue about the term “top-heavy,” there is no denying Lashlee’s main point about the same six programs continually winning the SEC Championship.
NIL
NCAA Appealing Rutgers’ Jett Elad’s Five-Year Eligibility Case
The NCAA contends the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit should avoid becoming “the first appellate court in the nation to invalidate sensible limits on how long student-athletes can play college sports” and thus should reverse a trial court’s preliminary injunction allowing 24-year-old Rutgers transfer Jett Elad to play for the Scarlet Knights […]

The NCAA contends the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit should avoid becoming “the first appellate court in the nation to invalidate sensible limits on how long student-athletes can play college sports” and thus should reverse a trial court’s preliminary injunction allowing 24-year-old Rutgers transfer Jett Elad to play for the Scarlet Knights this fall.
The argument was featured in a brief filed by the NCAA last Friday. The brief disputed testimony by Rutgers head football coach Greg Schiano, whose remarks about Elad’s NIL opportunities and potential NFL career were dismissed as reliant on “self-interested, non-expert [and] subjective beliefs.”
In April, U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi blocked the NCAA from disqualifying the 24-year-old Canadian safety from playing this fall. As Sportico detailed, Rutgers is Elad’s fourth college as he previously attended Ohio University, Garden City Community College (JUCO) and UNLV. Elad has already played four seasons (2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024) in five years (2019, 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024). He is thus ineligible under the NCAA’s five-year eligibility rule, which limits athletes to four seasons of intercollegiate competition—including JUCO competition—in any one sport within a five-year window.
If deemed eligible, Elad figures to play a prominent role for the Scarlet Knights’ defense. He’s (clearly) a seasoned player at the collegiate level. Elad is an accomplished player, too, having been a finalist for the 2024 Jon Cornish Trophy, which recognizes the top Canadian in NCAA football, and was honorable mention for the All-Mountain West Team.
In his order, Quraishi wrote critically about the five-year rule. He described it as unreasonably restraining the labor market for players who can sign lucrative NIL deals, nowadays receive a revenue share via the House settlement and, as the judge noted, “transition into the NFL.”
Quraishi indicated Schiano’s testimony on behalf of Elad was especially persuasive. As a former NFL coach and experienced power conference coach, Schiano’s opinion that Elad is an “NFL-caliber safety” who would benefit greatly by having the chance to showcase his talents at the NFL combine was viewed as an authoritative and reliable statement about Elad’s future.
Although Elad could have declared for the 2025 NFL Draft, Schiano explained that Elad was “under the impression that he was going to be able to play another season of college football.” Elad relied, mistakenly, on the NCAA issuing a JUCO waiver policy in the wake of Vanderbilt quarterback and former JUCO transfer Diego Pavia receiving a court ruling last December to play another season this fall.
The gist of Quraishi’s injunction for Elad was that college football, at least at a power conference school, shares some features of a professional football experience and the players, while still full-time students, ought to be viewed as selling services to teams.
In a brief authored by Kenneth L. Racowski and other attorneys from Holland & Knight, the NCAA contends Quraishi fumbled key aspects of the case.
One alleged defect is Quraishi placing importance in Schiano’s “subjective belief that playing for Rutgers will lead to Elad being drafted by an NFL team.” The NCAA argues this testimony was “inherently speculative,” since it frames “whether scouts see him in another college season” as a determinative factor without empirical support. The NCAA adds that Schiano’s acknowledgment that an injury “would prevent Elad from being drafted” only serves to confirm “that Elad’s NFL prospects depend on numerous factors that are out of Coach Schiano’s hands.”
Another alleged weakness in the injunction is how Elad relies on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in NCAA v. Alston (2021). The NCAA stresses that Alston “had nothing to do with eligibility rules” and didn’t “call into question every rule that might impact commercial opportunities” for college athletes. Alston was about NCAA rules restricting education-related benefits for student athletes—not whether college athletes can sign NIL deals or eligibility rules.
The NCAA also argues that Elad’s exclusion from playing college football doesn’t show the rule causes economic harm from a market standpoint. The rule doesn’t “reduce the number of roster spots” but instead “defines and limits” which athletes can “compete for opportunities and for how long.” The rule reflects the “zero-sum game” of team rosters, since Elad’s inclusion would mean another player isn’t on the Scarlet Knights’ roster and thus wouldn’t be able to sign NIL deals as a Rutgers player.
“Even Coach Schiano’s testimony,” the NCAA asserts, “concedes that Elad would be taking away a roster spot from another player, who will not make the Rutgers roster, and playing time from another player who would otherwise get snaps that Elad plays.”
The NCAA also insists there are important justifications for the five-year rule, including that it is designed for college athletes in a period that “roughly corresponds to the time required to complete most college studies.” Elad’s “framework” for college sports, the NCAA charges, would permit athletes to train at JUCO, D-II and D-III “indefinitely before transferring to Division I with four full seasons remaining.” This approach would allegedly “fundamentally alter the structure of college sports” and constitute a “complete redefinition” akin to a minor league. Along those lines, the NCAA invites the Third Circuit to think about the ramifications of permitting athletes “to participate in college sports well past the time necessary for them to complete a college degree.”
Elad’s case is one of many taking place in courtrooms featuring seasoned college athletes who want to keep playing after exhausting their NCAA eligibility. As the NCAA notes, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently sided with the NCAA in a case brought by Wisconsin cornerback Nyzier Fourqurean to play a fifth season of college football in five years. The possibility of the Third Circuit or another federal circuit siding with an athlete invites a potential “circuit split,” meaning federal courts of appeals holding conflicting views about the same legal question, with the Seventh Circuit. Circuit splits provide a compelling reason for the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene, since otherwise the rights and obligations of Americans can vary based on which circuit their cases happen to be litigated.
NIL
Paul Finebaum reacts to UNC, SEC rumors, makes prediction on if move will happen
Earlier last week, sources told Inside Carolina‘s Adam Smith that North Carolina could be exploring a move away from the ACC to the SEC. The Tar Heels are reportedly at the front of the pack when it comes to ACC schools looking to move, and it could happen in the near future. As is usually the case […]

Earlier last week, sources told Inside Carolina‘s Adam Smith that North Carolina could be exploring a move away from the ACC to the SEC. The Tar Heels are reportedly at the front of the pack when it comes to ACC schools looking to move, and it could happen in the near future.
As is usually the case when it comes to anything SEC, Paul Finebaum made his opinion known on the matter. He’s not shying away from the potential of UNC in the SEC, believing that it’s more plausible than ever that the Tar Heels could join the conference.
“I think No. 1, one of the people that we talked to the other day seemed to indicate that the commissioner was involved, and I don’t speak for anyone, but I think it’s safe to know that anyone who is close to, or has been around Greg Sankey, knows this — he has not spoken, formally or informally, to anyone. That’s not how he works. That’s not how he’s going to work, especially in light of what happened a couple of years ago,” Finebaum stated, via McElroy and Cubelic in the Morning. “It sounds very much to me like people close to North Carolina are floating this out there, probably frustrated with their current position, even though the ACC is now singing Kumbaya.
“We all know that there are a lot of anxious schools there. I’ve said all that as a preamble, to say that I think ultimately it’s going to happen. I took a long way to get to it, but I think when, once we get to this next iteration, North Carolina has always been the No. 1 choice of many people in SEC circles. I think the bigger question is when exactly does it happen, and secondly, who would their drafting partner be.”
Additionally, Finebaum isn’t the only prominent SEC figure believing UNC could join the conference. Greg McElroy responded in a similar vein, thinking that the hire of Bill Belichick is signaling something in the works for the Tar Heels.
“It kind of checks out, Paul. Every single time a team hires a superstar head coach, they seem to be on the move. Colorado is an example. A splashy head coach, they seem to be on the move. Texas hiring Sarkisian. These are not really that uncommon,” McElroy explained. “You can kind of connect the dots back. Bill Belichick now being at North Carolina makes you feel like, you know what, there might be something to this.”
For now, Bill Belichick and North Carolina will focus on the ACC, but in the future? The Tar Heels could be on the move to the SEC, and that would certainly shake up the college sports landscape in more ways than one. We’ll see if where there’s smoke, there’s fire.
NIL
AJ Dybantsa Leaves a Short Message for Caitlin Clark During BYU Practice
In the middle of ongoing speculation about athletes’ loyalty to brands and their willingness to express themselves, BYU’s number one recruit, AJ Dybantsa from the 2025 class, unexpectedly delivered a brief but meaningful shout-out to WNBA star Caitlin Clark. The gesture offers a glimpse into how young athletes navigate endorsement deals while showing respect for […]

In the middle of ongoing speculation about athletes’ loyalty to brands and their willingness to express themselves, BYU’s number one recruit, AJ Dybantsa from the 2025 class, unexpectedly delivered a brief but meaningful shout-out to WNBA star Caitlin Clark. The gesture offers a glimpse into how young athletes navigate endorsement deals while showing respect for peers across different sports.
Why Did AJ Dybantsa Tag Caitlin Clark in His Nike Shoes Post?
During a practice session, Dybantsa posted an Instagram story showing him lacing up Clark’s signature Nike sneakers and tagged @CaitlinClark with fire emojis. The image featured him sporting the shoes courtside at the Marriott Center, creating buzz among fans of both basketball programs.

This moment highlights the mutual respect between rising stars in college basketball and established WNBA talent. Dybantsa’s choice to showcase Clark’s signature shoes while tagging her demonstrates the cross-sport admiration that exists among elite athletes.
Dybantsa’s recent performances have been quite notable on the court. At the Grind Session World Championship, he scored 14 points to lead Utah Prep to a commanding 80-57 win over The Fort, demonstrating both his scoring ability and his reach as a wing player.
Beyond national borders, Dybantsa dominated at the FIBA U19 World Cup, grabbing MVP honors after delivering 14.3 points, 4.1 rebounds, 2.3 assists, and 1.1 steals per game when Team USA took gold in Switzerland. His international success has only added to the excitement surrounding his upcoming college career.
How Do Dybantsa’s Endorsement Deals Complicate Brand Loyalty?
Off the court, Dybantsa has faced NIL endorsement questions that have sparked fresh discussion about athlete brand relationships. Though he signed a reported $4 million deal with Nike, he was spotted with New Balance gear, similar to Cooper Flagg’s choice, sparking debate over brand loyalty in college basketball.
Fans noticed his full New Balance kit during a photo with Dylan Harper at Summer League, despite Nike providing him with personalized GT Future P.E. sneakers and a custom ‘AJ’ logo. The contrast between his Nike contract and his New Balance appearances has created intrigue about how modern endorsement deals actually work.
The situation became more interesting when Dybantsa threw out the first pitch for his hometown Boston Red Sox wearing New Balance 1906 sneakers. This connection to Boston-based New Balance, which also recently signed Flagg, has created additional speculation around athlete endorsement strategies in the NIL era.
Here’s some better video of #BYU‘s AJ Dybantsa tossing out the first pitch before tonight’s Red Sox game at Fenway Park.#BYUHoops pic.twitter.com/DriTb3N9BE
— Sam Farnsworth (@Samsworth_TV) July 11, 2025
The shoe situation reveals the evolving nature of athlete endorsements, where what’s required on the court and what athletes prefer off the court can differ significantly. College basketball fans had varied reactions to these developments.
As Dybantsa prepares to start his first season at BYU with Coach Kevin Young, moments like tagging Clark in her shoes provide a brief glimpse into his personality and his admiration for other stars. The gesture shows how today’s athletes connect across sport boundaries while navigating the complex world of brand partnerships and personal expression.
NIL
My Turn
President Donald Trump hosts Florida’s NCAA champion men’s basketball team in May in the East Room at the White House in Washington, D.C. Yuri Gripas/Abaca Press/TNS The executive order signed last week by President Donald Trump — titled “Saving College Sports” — harms college sports. It will add more uncertainty by generating more lawsuits. But […]

President Donald Trump hosts Florida’s NCAA champion men’s basketball team in May in the East Room at the White House in Washington, D.C.
The executive order signed last week by President Donald Trump — titled “Saving College Sports” — harms college sports. It will add more uncertainty by generating more lawsuits.
But first, let’s consider its good points.
The order states that “the inability to maintain reasonable rules and guardrails is a mortal threat to most college sports.”
To this point, the order adds: “As a result, players at some universities will receive more than $50 million per year, mostly for the revenue-generating sports like football. … By the 2025 season, football players at one university will reportedly be paid $35-40 million, with revenue-sharing included.”
Yes, that is a serious problem stemming from the House v. NCAA settlement.
The order also takes direct aim at the power conferences:
Michael LeRoy
“This not only reduces competition and parity by creating an oligarchy of teams that can simply buy the best players — including the best players from less-wealthy programs at the end of each season — but the imperative that university donors must devote ever-escalating resources to compete in the revenue-generating sports like football and basketball siphons away the resources necessary to support the panoply of non-revenue sports.
“Absent guardrails to stop the madness and ensure a reasonable, balanced use of resources across collegiate athletic programs that preserves their educational and developmental benefits, many college sports will soon cease to exist.”
All of this is true.
But the order misidentifies “litigation” as the source of this problem.
In other words, the problem is lawsuits by athletes that seek a bigger share of the wealth they generate for millionaire coaches and athletic directors: “Waves of recent litigation against collegiate athletics’ governing rules have eliminated limits on athlete compensation, pay-for-play recruiting inducements, and transfers between universities, unleashing a sea change that threatens the viability of college sports.”
The order’s primary solution appears in Section 4, titled, “Legal Protections for College Athletics from Lawsuits.”
It says: “The Attorney General and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission shall work to stabilize and preserve college athletics through litigation, guidelines, policies or other actions, as appropriate, by protecting the rights and interests of student-athletes and the long-term availability of collegiate athletic scholarships and opportunities when such elements are unreasonably challenged under antitrust or other legal theories.”
What do “other legal theories” mean?
It could apply to this hypothetical situation.
A Big Ten basketball player ruptures his Achilles tendon in the first game of the season. He has signed an name, image and likeness deal worth $1 million, but he’ll be out the rest of the year.
The Big Ten form contract allows a school to adjust NIL pay. It doesn’t put any conditions on these adjustments.
Let’s say the school cuts the athlete’s pay to $100,000, claiming his NIL value dropped. The athlete sues the school for breach of contract, fraudulent inducement and breach of a duty of good faith and fair dealing.
This is a basic contract lawsuit.
Will the executive order limit this athlete’s access to the legal system by substituting a school’s dispute resolution process for a lawsuit?
My current research suggests that this is possible. We will see when the Department of Justice issues its guidelines.
Ironically, this order will launch more lawsuits.
For example: Is the executive order constitutional? Likely not.
Bloomberg reported that courts had entered over 200 orders to stop the administration’s actions in 128 cases through May 1. Courts allowed executive actions to proceed in 43 cases.
And let’s not forget that the Supreme Court voted 9-0 against the NCAA in the Alston case, which challenged the NCAA’s restrictions on student-athlete compensation. The justices are on the side of athletes, not NCAA power brokers who hoard the wealth in their fat-cat employment contracts.
The Sports Agent Responsibility and Trust Act regulates sports agents to protect college athletes from agent fraud. But the act has no NIL regulations.
Big Ten, beware
An executive order is valid insofar as it executes specific legislation.
In this case, there is no federal legislation for NIL, nor limits on pay to play, so there is nothing for the president to execute. So the order usurps legislative power that is reserved for Congress.
But the order poses deeper problems.
First, it adds new financial burdens to schools by directing more athletic scholarships for Olympic and women’s sports.
Second, it intends to limit player mobility in the transfer portal. This will create more market-rigging harm for athletes.
Thus, more lawsuits are likely.
Some lawsuits will seek to clarify how the House v. NCAA antitrust settlement works in this unexpected setting.
Schools might challenge their new financial obligations when they cannot pay for them.
Athletes will likely sue to overturn unconstitutional limits on how they are paid for NIL.
Third, the order contains an ominous hint at the use of “federal funding decisions” to enforce its terms.
The president has withdrawn federal funds to bludgeon elite universities into submission. He has withheld billions of dollars in committed research grants.
Now, he is taking aim at athletic programs who form an “oligarchy of teams that can simply buy the best players.”
This targets every Big Ten and SEC school.
Comply — or else
The New York Times reported an unnamed athletic director’s reaction: “That part definitely caught my attention. Tying compliance to federal funding creates a big stick, especially for public institutions. After everything higher ed has navigated from D.C. this year, this just adds another layer of political and operational uncertainty.”
Elite athletic schools face a dilemma.
The federal government is creating a centrally planned and controlled market for scholarship and NIL opportunities to make lower-tier football and basketball programs competitive with bigger schools.
Elite schools must comply at the risk of losing federal funds — unspecified in amounts but likely to be large — while curbing their pay-for-play NIL recruiting advantage.
Even critics of the House v. NCAA settlement and the SCORE Act — a bill supported by the NCAA to further regulate NIL pay — recognize that judicial and legislative procedures are legitimate tools for addressing the competing economic interests of the NCAA, power-conference schools and athletes.
Rule by executive order disenfranchises all the stakeholders in college athletics.
Regulating college athletics in the executive branch — at the expense of a negotiated settlement of a lawsuit and a bill before Congress — moves the goalposts for governing college athletics outside the stadium, beyond the reach of university presidents, chancellors and athletic directors, and into the White House.
NIL
How Kentucky Football Won the Offseason
When Mark Stoops sat in front of the podium at Kroger Field for the first time ahead of the 2025 Kentucky football season, he shared an offseason anecdote that would be unremarkable in most instances. During this offseason, every small detail matters. For the first time in 13 years, the strength and conditioning staff reported […]

When Mark Stoops sat in front of the podium at Kroger Field for the first time ahead of the 2025 Kentucky football season, he shared an offseason anecdote that would be unremarkable in most instances. During this offseason, every small detail matters.
For the first time in 13 years, the strength and conditioning staff reported to the head coach that they had 100% participation in summer workouts. There was just one exception.
“We had a situation where a freshman was late a couple times, and his unit grabbed him, straightened it out, and got them right back on track,” Stoops said.
That’s not nothing. As Kentucky’s 2024 season spiraled, we heard whispers about cracks in the culture. There was a void in leadership and accountability.
This anecdote does not mean all of Kentucky’s problems have been solved. You can keep the “Mission Accomplished” banner in the closet a little longer. However, this is one small sign that this program is taking a step in the right direction.
Kentucky Stacked Up Winning Days in the Weight Room
Every offseason is dedicated to getting bigger, faster, and stronger. This applies in every sport. If you got a nickel for every time a professional athlete said ahead of a season, “I’m in the best shape of my life,” you could fully fund your 401(k).
Kentucky amplified the urgency in the locker room this offseason, in part because of the injuries that depleted the team’s depth in the trenches last fall. Mark Stoops’ best teams have been some of the most physical teams in the SEC. You can’t get that by snapping your fingers on Saturdays. It can only be done by putting in the work every single day. Mark Stoops set out to accomplish that by challenging his staff to demand more from the players.
“Our strength and conditioning team, I really challenged them because they are amazing. They’ve done a remarkable job for a long time, and they have my full trust,” said Stoops.
“But I did challenge them because we need to be bigger, we need to be stronger, we need to be more athletic. We need a lot of things, and so there was a lot of pressure put on them, and they’ve really delivered. Now, it’s up to us and our (coaching) staff to make sure that we have a great camp,” said Stoops.
Entering his 13th season in Lexington, Mark Stoops isn’t putting his head in the sand. He knows his program fell well short of expectations a year ago. In order to create a successful team, he did what we knows works, go to work.
Kentucky fans get tired of hearing that their coach is, “Going to get back to work.” But that’s who he is. He couldn’t try to be a Shane Beamer and run PR for his program all offseason. Instead, he went back to the well and built a team in his identity.
“It’s been very quiet. Guys have put their head down, have worked extremely hard,” he said. “They’ve been remarkable. You could see that with their strength, with their size, and their commitment to each other. The fact that we’ve been so consistent this summer says a lot about them.”
If you do the little things right every day, the big things aren’t so hard. This Kentucky football team has a monumental task ahead. They did the little things the right way to set themselves up for success in 2025.
-
College Sports3 weeks ago
Why a rising mid-major power with an NCAA Tournament team opted out of revenue-sharing — and advertised it
-
Fashion2 weeks ago
EA Sports College Football 26 review – They got us in the first half, not gonna lie
-
Health2 weeks ago
CAREGD Trademark Hits the Streets for Mental Health Month
-
Sports2 weeks ago
Volleyball Releases 2025 Schedule – Niagara University Athletics
-
Youtube3 weeks ago
Will Giannis DEPART Milwaukee⁉️ + How signing Turner & waiving Dame impacts the Bucks | NBA Today
-
Sports2 weeks ago
New NCAA historical database provides wealth of information on championships
-
Sports2 weeks ago
Adapti, Inc. (OTC
-
College Sports2 weeks ago
Buford DB Tyriq Green Commits to Georgia
-
Youtube3 weeks ago
FREE AGENCY BREAKDOWN 🚨 What moves can the 76ers make? 🤔 | NBA Today
-
High School Sports4 days ago
100 days to men's college basketball