Navigating the Impact of NIL on College Sports Betting
Session Title
Poster session
Presentation Type
Poster Presentation
Start Date
27-5-2026 12:00 AM
Abstract
The study investigates whether U.S. college football betting markets have fully incorporated new financial disparities created by Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) collective funding. After the 2021 policy changes that allowed athletes to earn from NIL deals, donor-backed collectives and subscription models rapidly emerged, giving some schools much stronger funding positions that can attract better talent. The core question is whether these funding gaps were accurately reflected in setting point spreads or whether there have been exploitable inefficiencies. Using data from 55 large public universities in the major conferences for the 2023–2024 seasons, we estimate collective funding from public revenue and contribution data and link it to game-level point spreads and results. Point spreads are strong predictors of outcomes, but funding ratios for home teams are also significant, especially when the home team is favored and the game is not at a neutral site. This implies that collective funding offers additional explanatory power beyond the line. Betting simulations show that visiting teams, particularly underdogs in games where the home team’s funding advantage is small or negative, outperform the spread at abnormal rates. We conclude that markets have not fully adjusted to the NIL-driven funding landscape, and that systematic use of collective funding information can identify profitable wagering opportunities, at least while NIL structures remain in flux.
Navigating the Impact of NIL on College Sports Betting
The study investigates whether U.S. college football betting markets have fully incorporated new financial disparities created by Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) collective funding. After the 2021 policy changes that allowed athletes to earn from NIL deals, donor-backed collectives and subscription models rapidly emerged, giving some schools much stronger funding positions that can attract better talent. The core question is whether these funding gaps were accurately reflected in setting point spreads or whether there have been exploitable inefficiencies. Using data from 55 large public universities in the major conferences for the 2023–2024 seasons, we estimate collective funding from public revenue and contribution data and link it to game-level point spreads and results. Point spreads are strong predictors of outcomes, but funding ratios for home teams are also significant, especially when the home team is favored and the game is not at a neutral site. This implies that collective funding offers additional explanatory power beyond the line. Betting simulations show that visiting teams, particularly underdogs in games where the home team’s funding advantage is small or negative, outperform the spread at abnormal rates. We conclude that markets have not fully adjusted to the NIL-driven funding landscape, and that systematic use of collective funding information can identify profitable wagering opportunities, at least while NIL structures remain in flux.