If you’re a Kentucky fan trying to make sense of NIL, revenue sharing and JMI, you’re not alone. The athletic director running the whole thing admits it’s “clunky” right now.

From losing ground with high school basketball recruits like Tyran Stokes and Christian Collins, BBN is at all-time high in recruiting anxiety.

In a long sit-down with the Lexington Herald-Leader, Mitch Barnhart tried to explain how Kentucky is operating in this new College Sports Commission / NILGo world. The message was basically this: yes, it’s confusing; no, Kentucky isn’t freelancing; and he believes the structure he’s put in place is actually a strength, not a handicap.

Convincing the fanbase of that isn’t going to be easy without recruits showing up.

‘Clunky’ rules, moving caps and a promise to stay in the guardrails at Kentucky

Barnhart said the current landscape is really two different eras smashed together: what was done before July 1, and everything that’s been built since the House settlement, the College Sports Commission and NILGo went live.

Different schools had different pre-July 1 spending patterns. That history impacts how much cap space they have now. Some have more room. Some have less. That’s part of why it looks like schools are operating under different rulebooks.

Barnhart’s word for the rollout was “clunky.” There are participation agreements that not every school has signed yet, rules that have to go through courts and attorneys general, and separate 30-day windows for both the House plaintiffs and state AGs before some policies can even be implemented. Some rules are in effect. Others are still in line.

In the middle of all that, Barnhart keeps coming back to the same idea: Kentucky is trying to be “steady,” stay within the “guardrails,” and trust that “progress is being made” as the national framework catches up.

That might not satisfy fans who look around and see other schools clearly pushing those guardrails, but it’s the lane he’s chosen. Pope backed that up by saying they will always “err” on the side of caution when it comes to NIL.

NILGo, averages and a ‘hot market’ in Lexington

On the actual NIL payouts, Barnhart said all deals now flow through NILGo, and Kentucky has already had “several hundred” go through the system. At the Champions Blue meeting in October, he pegged the average deal around $3,000, with the biggest near $50,000. He said those numbers are still “trending in the same way.”

He pointed to Kentucky volleyball as a prime example of what a “hot market” looks like. A Final Four run has made that roster more visible in Lexington, and as their “notoriety” has grown, so has their NIL value. Barnhart sounded genuinely excited talking about watching those opportunities grow for non-revenue athletes.

For fans who worry Kentucky isn’t doing anything, that’s the counter: NIL deals are happening, they’re in seven figures across the department, and not just in football and men’s basketball.

The question, of course, is whether that level of activity is enough to land and keep the kind of top-end basketball talent BBN expects. So far, the answer to that question seems to be no.

Why Mitch Barnhart is all-in on JMI

A huge chunk of the interview was essentially a defense of the JMI model that fans hate.

Barnhart’s pitch goes like this: JMI arrives with more than 200 corporate partners already on board and a seasoned sales force generating $35–40 million a year in advertising and sponsorships. That group is now tasked with not just selling Kentucky athletics, but also matching student-athletes with those brands.

From his perspective, that’s an enormous head start. You’ve got a big, experienced sales staff already embedded on campus, already working with companies that “are very, very interested in your program,” and now they can turn that machine toward NIL.

He also made a key point that’s been blurry for fans: JMI isn’t skimming a cut off those NILGo deals. “There’s no fee,” Barnhart said. “We’re fee-free.”

So what’s the trade-off? Marks and flexibility.

If a student-athlete wants to use Kentucky logos and IP in their deals, that path runs through JMI. If they sign with a company that competes with an existing UK sponsor, Barnhart said they’re “certainly” encouraged to give Kentucky partners first crack, but athletes can still go ahead with outside deals they just can’t use the marks.

That is a huge deal. Being able to use the UK brand, and the notoriety that comes with Kentucky basketball is a huge draw for NIL-minded athletes. Not being able to use those can be a deal breaker.

He pointed to cases like Trent Noah, who has hometown relationships he wants to honor, and players who arrive with pre-existing high school NIL deals. The message there was, “We work through it,” even if it’s messy. Noah decided to not opt-in with JMI and has deals all through the commonwealth, you just won’t see the UK logo anywhere.

The flip side is obvious: if you don’t like or trust JMI, you’re going to see this entire structure as restrictive, even if the AD keeps calling it a “really cool” family.

Barnhart speaks on conflicts of interest and long relationships

Barnhart didn’t dodge the question about perceived conflicts between UK staff and JMI personnel. He just doesn’t see a problem.

To him, the long-standing ties that span from the Jim Host era to IMG to now 11 years with JMI and a new extension through year 25, are a feature, not a bug. He framed it as a tight-knit group of people who love Kentucky and know the market, not as an insider network that needs to be broken up.

A lot of fan angst comes from the Rachel Newman Baker-Brandon Baker relationship. Rachel is an assistant AD at UK while Brandon is Vice President Partnerships at JMI with the title UK Sports & Campus Marketing. According to JMI, “Brandon’s role is focused on aligning key partners’ marketing objectives with the goals and vision of the university. He directs the team that oversees all key partnerships and renewal business, as well as gameday activations, partner hospitality, and stadium/arena signage.”

“If it was a conflict,” Barnhart essentially argued, why have revenues and rights deals grown so aggressively?

That answer is unlikely to quiet any critics of the relationship between UK and JMI. Some fans hear “family” and “long-term relationships” and immediately think of a closed ecosystem that’s hard to challenge. But Barnhart is clearly not backing away from that model. If anything, he’s doubling down on it as a competitive advantage.

Why Barnhart won’t show his revenue-sharing cards at Kentucky

Maybe the most interesting part of the interview was his insistence on keeping revenue-sharing numbers private.

Barnhart pushed back on the idea that it’s about secrecy. He called it “flexibility.”

In his view, there are two separate buckets: revenue sharing and NIL. He thinks fans and some schools have blurred those lines by bragging about a big “NIL” number that’s really a mix of both.

He wants the freedom to slide resources between those buckets depending on the sport, the year and the player. Maybe a high-profile recruit is better served taking more in rev share and less in NIL, or vice versa. Maybe football needs a bigger push one offseason to address a critical position, while basketball doesn’t. Maybe in another year it’s the opposite.

If he puts hard public numbers on what each program gets, he worries he’ll lock himself into boxes that hurt Kentucky competitively and create a circus of fans comparing individual payouts.

He also says there’s a protective piece: he doesn’t want each athlete “pegged” publicly by a dollar figure or constantly compared to teammates.

You can debate whether that explanation is satisfying, or whether transparency would actually help calm the waters, but it’s at least a clear window into his thinking.

For fans it is just Mitch Barnhart saying they have the money, but won’t show a receipt.

Balancing Kentucky football, Kentucky basketball and the rest of the athletics department

Kentucky’s situation is unusual. Both football and men’s basketball are profitable. Most schools can’t say that.

Barnhart admitted that balancing those two in this new world is tricky. Pre-July 1, he says everyone loved the rosters. Post-July 1, the math is just harder across the board, not only at Kentucky.

His bigger picture vision is to use the power of the Kentucky basketball brand to lift everything. If NIL and rev-share decisions are made wisely, he believes success in men’s hoops and football can raise the tide for baseball, women’s basketball, volleyball and everyone else.

That’s the optimistic version. The pessimistic version is what some fans are already feeling: if basketball misses on elite recruits and football falls behind the SEC arms race, nobody gets lifted and everything falls apart.

On general managers, Mark Pope and ‘talent evaluation’

Barnhart also weighed in on the “general manager” debate that’s hovered over Kentucky basketball.

Will Stein came in and immediately wanted a GM for football. Barnhart was fine with that. For a first-time head coach juggling a new staff, a playoff run and a roster rebuild, he called it “probably a pretty smart decision.”

With Mark Pope, he’s not forcing the issue. Barnhart said he’s going to “lean into” Pope’s preference and give him the flexibility to decide whether he wants that role or not down the line.

Then he slipped in a line that will jump out to fans: “Our talent assessment was fine until we lost a couple games, and then everybody started wondering about our talent assessment, correct?” Well, Mitch that is usually how it works.

In other words: he doesn’t think one rough stretch means the eval process is broken, and he doesn’t believe a GM is some magic fix. But he did leave the door open to adjustments later if Pope decides he wants to structure things differently.

Will Mitch Barnhart still be the one steering this or will he retire?

Finally, the obvious question: how much longer does he want to do this?

Barnhart acknowledged the ambassador clause in his contract that would allow him to step aside after December 31 and shift roles. He didn’t commit one way or the other.

He talked instead about loving competition, loving Kentucky and the fact that he and his family came planning to stay 6–8 years and never left. He admitted the job has changed, where it used to be 75% competition and 25% “other stuff,” he thinks those numbers have flipped. Now it’s more about sustaining the enterprise of college sports than just trying to win Saturday.

He also admitted the personal connection piece is harder in an era where 35–40% of the roster turns over every year. Meeting every recruit, knowing every family? That’s tougher now.

But the thrill of competition is still there for him. “The day that changes,” he said, is probably the day someone else should take over.

That’s the backdrop to everything he just laid out: a clunky system, a controversial partnership model, a fanbase demanding top-tier results, and an athletic director who insists Kentucky has “a good plan” for all of it, and says he still wants to be the one fighting to make it work.

STILLWATER — The Oklahoma State athletic department has announced the OSU NIL Alliance to provide a unified approach to revenue sharing and endorsement opportunities for the school’s student-athletes.

The Alliance will provide resources and partnerships for athletes as they navigate the era of name, image and likeness in college athletics.

“At Oklahoma State, we have long empowered our student-athletes to achieve success in academics and athletics,” OSU athletic director Chad Weiberg said in a statement Wednesday, Dec. 17. “The launch of The Alliance represents a tremendous opportunity for our student-athletes to become entrepreneurs in commercial activity driven by their brand. By streamlining our efforts and expanding our NIL initiatives, we’re aligning the brands of our student athletes with the strength of the OSU Athletics brand, our business partnerships, and the power of our loyal fan base.”

By ERIC OLSON, AP College Football Writer

Unlike last year’s debut of the 12-team College Football Playoff, weather should not be a factor in any of the first-round games this weekend.

Southeastern Conference teams Oklahoma, Mississippi and Texas A&M and one of the Big Ten’s four West Coast schools, Oregon, are hosting first-round games.

Last year, Notre Dame, Penn State and Ohio State were hosts along with Texas. Conditions for the games played on the three cold-weather campuses were, ahem, quite seasonal for the week before Christmas. Kickoff temperatures were 27 degrees Fahrenheit for Indiana-Notre Dame, 25 with an 18-mph wind for SMU-Penn State and 25 for Tennessee-Ohio State. It was sunny and 60 for Clemson-Texas.

It was especially nasty in Happy Valley with gusty winds creating a feels-like temperature of 12 degrees.

The forecast for Friday calls for a temperature in the 50s and some wind for Alabama-Oklahoma. On Saturday, it should be in the 70s and sunny for Miami-Texas A&M, mid-60s and clear for Tulane-Mississippi and mid-40s with a chance of rain for James Madison-Oregon.

The picks, with CFP seed and lines from BetMGM Sportsbook:

The Sooners beat Alabama 23-21 on the road five weeks ago despite being out-yarded 406-212. The difference was Eli Bowen’s 87-yard pick-6 and a couple other Oklahoma takeaways. If the Sooners play a clean game offensively and their defense comes close to shutting down Alabama’s run game like Georgia did in the SEC championship game, they will be off to the Rose Bowl to face No. 1 Indiana.

Pick: Oklahoma 19-17.

This matchup could come down to which line wins in the trenches. Miami first-team AP All-America tackle Francis Mauigoa is the star on one of the best offensive lines in the country, one that has allowed just 11 sacks. First-team All-American edge Cashius Howell leads an Aggies front four on a defense that has recorded 41 sacks, most in the nation.

Pick: Texas A&M 24-20.

The Rebels beat Tulane 45-10 at home in September and now will go for a second win over the Green Wave in Oxford. The wild card is how Mississippi’s players and holdover staff respond to Lane Kiffin’s departure three weeks ago. Tulane also is in transition, with Jon Sumrall leaving for Florida once the playoff run ends. One thing is almost certain: Tulane QB Jake Retzlaff will play better than he did in the first meeting.

Pick: Mississippi 31-21.

The Sun Belt Conference champion Dukes got into the playoff after Duke knocked off Virginia in the ACC championship game. For all they’ve accomplished under UCLA-bound Bob Chesney, they are out of their depth in this game. The Ducks were the unbeaten No. 1 CFP seed last year and were blown out by Ohio State in their first game, a quarterfinal at the Rose Bowl. A first-round game at home will be no problem this year.

Pick: Oregon 45-10.

Conference championship week: Straight up — 6-4; Against spread — 6-4.

Season: Straight-up — 192-59; Against spread — 123-127-1.

____

Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here. AP college football: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-football-poll and https://apnews.com/hub/college-football

We are lucky to live in this state. Wyoming has space, community, and a shared identity that is rare in modern America.

Other than our world class-rodeo cowboys, we don’t have professional sports franchises competing for attention.

Instead, we have something better: a common bond in the University of Wyoming. Cowboy athletics — especially football — are not just a game. They are morale, identity, and more than most people realize, economic engines.

When the Cowboys are good and War Memorial Stadium is packed, the impact ripples far beyond Laramie. Ticket sales are only the beginning. Hotels fill from Cheyenne to Rawlins. Restaurants hum. Retailers sell brown-and-gold merchandise across the state.

A winning season doesn’t just lift spirits; it quietly generates millions of dollars in economic activity.

A decent bowl appearance adds direct revenue to the university itself, beyond the shared conference payouts. More importantly, competitive athletics help drive enrollment.

Yes, UW has strong academics and comparatively low tuition, and that matters.

But young people — like it or not — want to attend colleges where football and basketball are visible and successful. Athletics are the spotlight shining on the university. When the bulb is dull, it is hard for the university to shine.

Wyoming has done a lot of things exceptionally well. Through disciplined fundraising, generous private donations, and smart legislative matching, we have built world-class facilities in Laramie.

For decades, that was enough. Facilities, culture, coaching, and grit could overcome harsh climate and a small population college town. Sadly, that era is over.

Name, Image, and Likeness money has fundamentally changed the rules of college athletics.

This is not a moral judgment; it is an observation of fact. Programs willing to commit resources can be transformed almost overnight.

Texas Tech reportedly spent $28 million on NIL and made the College Football Playoff this year.

Indiana, through a coordinated effort involving boosters, the state, and private business, spent roughly $15 million and turned its program around in two years. They are the  #1 seed and sitting at 13-0 for the season.

Meanwhile, the University of Wyoming’s NIL budget for all sports combined this year was approximately $1.2 million.

For a more regional perspective, BYU reportedly spent $7 million just to land the top-rated basketball player in the country. The CU Buffs are committed to spending $20.5 million in NIL money next year.

UW officials are candid and realistic about what is needed going forward.

Wyoming does not need to spend $20 million to be competitive in the Mountain West. But, we need to be closer to $10 million or more, to compete consistently.

Here’s the uncomfortable truth: if we don’t adapt, we won’t merely stay mediocre winning 4-5 games per year. We will slide backward. Conference realignment has already shown how quickly programs can be left behind.

A demotion to a lower division would mean loss of television revenue, reduced donor interest, declining recruiting, and — most damaging of all — loss of pride. Once that spiral begins, it is brutally hard to reverse.

And yet, Wyoming is uniquely positioned to meet this challenge.

Few states — if any — have a financial structure like ours. We have roughly $25 billion in permanent trust funds, generating about $1.86 billion in interest income annually.

We have a $1.9 billion rainy-day fund. This is energy wealth, carefully stewarded over generations.

We understand Wyoming’s conservative spending instincts. They are a virtue, not a flaw.

Even though we can easily afford it simply carving $10 million out of the general fund and handing it to an NIL pool, the expenditure would likely raise eyebrows.

But we already have a Wyoming solution successfully used in the past. A partnership between private donations and the State.

For decades, the Legislature has matched private donations for UW facilities, multiplying the impact of philanthropy while maintaining fiscal discipline. Why not apply that same model here?

A 2-1 match — two state dollars for every private dollar raised — would incentivize donors, limit state exposure, and quickly move Wyoming into a competitive NIL position without abandoning our values.

This is not about buying championships. It is about preserving relevance, protecting economic impact, and maintaining a shared institution that binds this state together. Cowboy athletics are not a luxury; they are a strategic asset.

The rules have changed. Standing still is no longer a viable strategy — it is reckless.

The question is not whether NIL money matters for Wyoming, it already does. The question is whether we respond with creativity and partnership, or whether we wait and watch something uniquely Wyoming quickly slip away.

In this state, we pride ourselves on being innovative when addressing problems in the state. Let’s follow that strategy now. Please contact your local legislators and ask them to promote and vote in favor of state partnership on the NIL issues for UW.

Tom Lubnau served in the Wyoming Legislature from 2004 – 2015 and is a former Speaker of the House. He can be reached at: YourInputAppreciated@gmail.com

Scott Ortiz is a Wyoming native and graduate of the university of Wyoming. He has practiced law in Casper since 1991. He can be reached at Sortiz@wpdn.net

The College Football Playoff field is officially set with a bracket full of heavyweights. While the seeding placed the Big Ten champion at the very top, those within the sport see a different outcome on the horizon.

An anonymous poll conducted by The Athletic surveyed coaches from the Power 4 and Group of 5 conferences to gauge their expectations. The results showed that 50 percent of the coaches believe one program will hoist the trophy in Miami, edging out a season-long favorite that carried 42 percent of the vote.

This program received the majority vote despite spending most of the regular season outside the top five of the rankings. They finished ahead of the team that spent most of the season ranked No. 1 in the major polls.

The remaining ballots were split evenly between the No. 1 seed and another Big Ten team. Each of those programs received four percent of the total tally.

The confidence in the projected winner stems from a strong finish to the regular season. This team just avenged its only loss of the year with a dominant performance in the conference championship game.

Coaches cite roster maturity and championship pedigree as the decisive factors. The voting data suggest that individuals who scheme against these teams weekly value recent momentum over final seeding.

Coaches pick SEC powerhouse to win national title

The Georgia Bulldogs are the heavy favorite among the coaching fraternity. Georgia Bulldogs head coach Kirby Smart has his team positioned for a run at a third title in five years after decimating the Alabama Crimson Tide 28-7 to win the SEC. The poll reflects a belief that Georgia is peaking at the exact right moment.

One Group of 5 head coach noted that the current field lacks a truly dominant force compared to previous years. However, this coach highlighted the growth in Athens as the difference.

“Georgia’s O-line has matured, so that team has taken a jump,” the coach said. “The QB is a winner. Defensively, Georgia can play big and can match up. They are really good and they are battle-tested.”

That quarterback is Gunner Stockton. He has added a new dimension to the offense with his legs. Stockton has rushed for 442 yards this season. This is significantly more production on the ground than previous championship quarterbacks produced for the program. The offense also benefits from the late-season surge of running back Nate Frazier. He rushed for 181 yards against Mississippi State and has solidified the ground attack.

The defense has also returned to form under defensive coordinator Glenn Schumann. The unit recorded 12 sacks in the final five games of the season. An SEC defensive coordinator praised the team’s tactical efficiency.

“They look the cleanest,” the coordinator said. “They have been getting better as the season has gone on. They are going to stop the run and find your weaknesses. And they are good at using them against you.”

The primary challenger in the poll was the Ohio State Buckeyes. They spent most of the year at No. 1 before a loss to the Indiana Hoosiers. A Big Ten offensive assistant coach picked the Buckeyes because of their elite personnel on the outside.

“Ohio State. Georgia seems flawed,” the assistant said. “I know Indiana just beat them but I don’t think they can beat them twice. Ohio State was pretty banged up in that game. The wideouts will be healthier. On defense, Ohio State is really sound with great players.”

The Georgia Bulldogs will begin their pursuit of a third title in five years when they face the winner of the Ole Miss Rebels and Tulane Green Wave in the Sugar Bowl on Jan. 1.

Read more on College Football HQ

The College Football Playoff hasn’t quite started, but the transfer portal is heating up. The last week has seen some intriguing QB prospects make the portal dive. Here’s a rundown of the top five portal prospects (from On3.com’s rankings) and a quick thought on potential destinations for each.

Sam Leavitt, Arizona State QB

Leavitt remains On3’s top-ranked player in the portal. In 2024, he helped Arizona State reach the College Football Playoff by passing for 2,885 yards and 24 touchdowns and rushing for 443 yards and five more scores. His 2025 season was cut short by an injury in October, but in the portion of the year he could play, Leavitt passed for 1,628 yards and 10 scores in just seven games.

A week ago, we mentioned Indiana and LSU as possible destinations for Leavitt. Recent reports have confirmed both of those possibilities, with Oregon and Miami also mentioned. Of the four, it’s LSU that seems to have the dance card that’s filling up the quickest, with Trinidad Chambliss a potential nab for Lane Kiffin. Indiana and Oregon might now be the two most logical picks.

Dylan Raiola, Nebraska QB

Raiola was a five-star recruit for Matt Rhule, but after two up-and-down seasons, is looking to move on. He has passed for 4,819 yards and 31 touchdowns against 17 interceptions. Raiola showed improvement in 2025, throwing for 18 scores and six picks, but his season was shut down early due to injury.

Raiola has been tied to Louisville early in the process, as the Cardinals look to replace Miller Moss. Miami is another school frequently mentioned in conjunction with Raiola, as the Hurricanes look to replace Carson Beck, likely with a portal addition.

Brendan Sorsby, Cincinnati QB

Sorsby headed to Cincinnati from Indiana, leaving that program just before IU’s fortunes jumped. He has played well at Cincinnati, throwing for over 5,600 yards in the past two seasons with 45 touchdowns to 12 interceptions. Sorsby also rushed for over 1,000 yards and 18 scores over the past two seasons.

Early talk has linked Sorsby extensively with Texas Tech. No announcement has been made, but early indications are that he’s the likely successor to Behren Morton, and it’ll be a surprise if he ends up elsewhere.

DJ Lagway, Florida QB

A talented Florida passer, Lagway struggled with consistency in two up-and-down seasons as a Gator, ending up with over 4,100 yards and 28 touchdowns to 23 interceptions. His arm strength was legendary, but he often stacked bad decisions into some awful performances.

Lagway has been connected to Baylor early. His father played for the school, and it’s near his hometown. Another possibility is Clemson, where Lagway was recruited extensively and the Tigers could use a replacement for Cade Klubnik.

Drew Mestemaker, North Texas QB

Mestemaker exploded from out of nowhere. From being a high school backup to walking on at North Texas to becoming QB1 in 2025, he has always suprised. The redshirt freshman passed for 4,129 yards and 31 touchdowns this season.

Mestemaker might well follow his North Texas coach, Eric Morris, to Oklahoma State. A longer-shot possibility might be Tennessee, where Joey Aguilar will have to be replaced.