WASHINGTON (TNND) — It’s another football weekend and athletes across the country are cashing in like never before. But with the recent election, what does the future look like for these kids and their parents with Name, Image and Likeness contracts?

The Supreme Court ruled in 2021 that US-born athletes could earn money from things like advertisements, autographs and college incentives. Before that, athletes could only compete for a diploma.

NIL platform Opendorse estimates that the NIL market is expected to reach $1.67 billion in the academic year 2024-2025. The platform reports that the highest earnings typically go to top men’s basketball and soccer players.

The decision was a game-changer for athletes preparing to turn pro, who can now create their own brands while still in college and secure future endorsement deals.

Recent examples include athletes like Colorado’s Travis Hunter and Shedeur Sanders, Texas’ Arch Manning and Alabama’s Jalen Milroe. Conformable on the 3rd Sanders’ NIL rating is $6.3 million, Hunter’s is $3.4 million, Manning’s is $3.1 million and Milroe’s is $2.2 million.

Robert Boland is a sports law attorney at the Shumaker law firm in Ohio and a professor at Seton Hall University, and spoke to the National News Desk about the NIL deals and how a new Trump administration could play a role in how the process works.

While the NCAA has collected money by selling game tickets over the years, Boland said it’s only fair that the players get a percentage.

“College athletics is an $18 billion business, second only to the NFL. And so yes, the athletes who have helped make this possible and have been denied a percentage of it for probably too long.”

Boland said one of the challenges facing the industry is the system of sharing these revenues and at the moment it is NIL, which remains largely unregulated at the moment.

There are plenty of examples of athletes not getting what they were promised, less than they were promised, or none of what they were promised,” Boland said. “And there are certainly people out there waiting to take part of this money from them when I receive it.”

On the other hand, Boland said many good things about NIL allow athletes to “benefit enormously.”

“It’s a very mixed bag and one that probably needs some, some, some cleaning and some fixing given how young some of these athletes really are,” Boland said.

Boland noted that managing money for athletes could be a potential problem.

I think there is a benefit to giving athletes some participation and percentage, maybe at a lower level before they do much as professionals. In some cases, maybe that’s all they’ll do.”

Despite this, Boland said with concern for youth and immaturity, athletes need protection in this regard.

Turning to politics, President-elect Donald Trump’s sweep of the White House and Congress has some families wondering what will happen to NIL with full control of Congress.

“We’re probably heading into a time where the movement that went along with denying athletes to be employed and athletes to be union members is probably going to slow down. If it doesn’t stop,” Boland said. “So NIL can exist as the predominant system by which athletes are paid, which means you’re not an employee, you’re a supporter and an independent contractor.”

Boland said we are also looking at a settlement in the case House v. NCAA.

In October, a California judge gave preliminary approval to a proposed settlement of House v. NCAA, which includes a landmark settlement of $2.8 billion of three antitrust cases facing the NCAA and conferences, The Athletic reported. That would pave the way for schools to start paying players directly through revenue sharing as early as 2025.

Boland believes this will receive the approval of a Republican Congress and the Trump administration.

“But, NIL will still be there for others. If not, just somewhat restricted,” Boland said.

_____

The Associated Press contributed to this report.