When speaking with Paul Finebaum about NIL and the future of collegiate athletics, Georgia Bulldogs coach Kirby Smart didn’t mince words.
In recent years, college athletics have been undergoing a major transformation, driven by the introduction of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) rights for athletes. As more college athletes leverage these rights to sign endorsement deals and secure lucrative compensation, the landscape of collegiate sports has shifted in ways that few could have predicted. The change has brought both excitement and challenges, with coaches, administrators, and athletes themselves grappling with the new normal.
One of the most prominent voices in college football today is Kirby Smart, the head coach of the Georgia Bulldogs. A leader of one of the top programs in the nation, Smart has always been known for his candid approach to the game, and in his recent interview with Paul Finebaum, he didn’t pull any punches when discussing the impact of NIL on college athletics.
In the conversation that followed, Smart shared his thoughts on how NIL is shaping the future of college football, what it means for recruiting, the challenges coaches face, and where he believes the system needs to evolve. What emerged was a powerful commentary on the state of college sports, one that is likely to provoke both praise and criticism as the debate around NIL continues to evolve.
For decades, college athletics had operated under an amateurism model, which prohibited athletes from receiving any form of financial compensation beyond their scholarships. That system began to crack in 2021 when the NCAA officially adopted new NIL guidelines, allowing athletes to profit from their personal brand by signing endorsement deals, monetizing social media platforms, and engaging in other activities that capitalize on their name, image, and likeness.
Since then, NIL has sparked a revolution in the world of college sports, particularly in high-revenue sports like football and basketball. But as the rules have evolved, so too has the debate over the future of collegiate athletics. While some argue that NIL provides student-athletes with the opportunities they deserve, others, including Smart, express concern that the changes could undermine the integrity of the sport, creating an environment where financial incentives overshadow the student experience.
In his conversation with Finebaum, Kirby Smart didn’t mince words when discussing the changes brought on by NIL. “I think the landscape has completely changed, and I think it’s changed for the worse,” he began, pointing out that while the concept of NIL was designed to allow athletes to profit, it has, in many ways, become a game of “who can pay the most.” Smart raised the issue of “pay-for-play” deals that have begun to crop up, which he believes threaten to erode the foundation of college football.
“It’s not about an education or a scholarship anymore. It’s about who’s going to pay the most for these kids to come to their school. And that’s a problem,” he said firmly. “When you take away the idea that these kids are coming to school first for the education and to get developed as athletes, and now it’s about money, I think we lose something really valuable in the process.”
One of the most significant effects of NIL has been its impact on recruiting. As programs with deep-pocketed boosters and alumni networks begin to offer NIL deals that can rival the salaries of many professional athletes, the recruiting landscape has shifted dramatically. In Smart’s view, NIL has created a new “arms race” in recruiting, where schools with the financial resources to secure lucrative deals for their athletes are gaining an unfair advantage.
“Recruiting is now about money, and that’s not what I got into coaching for,” Smart remarked. “I got into coaching to develop young men, to help them grow, and to teach them how to play the game of football. But now, it’s all about who can write the biggest check.”
Smart’s frustration stems from what he sees as a growing disparity in the way schools with different financial capabilities are able to attract top talent. The schools with large donor bases and the financial infrastructure to fund NIL deals are able to offer athletes substantial compensation packages, which puts smaller programs at a significant disadvantage.
“I think it’s great that athletes have the opportunity to make money off their name, image, and likeness,” Smart acknowledged. “But I don’t think it’s right for it to become a bidding war, where the wealthiest schools just buy the best players. It completely distorts the competitive balance of college football.”
The rise of NIL collectives — organizations that pool resources to help fund deals for athletes — has only intensified this issue. These collectives, often backed by wealthy donors, are able to offer athletes financial incentives to commit to certain schools, further complicating the recruitment process.
“I don’t think the NCAA or anyone else has done enough to regulate it,” Smart continued. “There are no rules right now. Everyone is just operating in the gray area. And that’s a dangerous place to be.”
As much as NIL has changed recruiting, Smart is also concerned about how the new financial realities could impact the dynamics within teams. College football, like any team sport, relies heavily on chemistry, cohesion, and a shared commitment to team goals. Smart worries that if players are too focused on maximizing their individual earning potential, it could detract from the collective focus needed to succeed on the field.
“The most successful teams are the ones where every guy buys in,” Smart explained. “When you start bringing in guys who are just focused on their personal brand or how much money they can make, that’s when the problems start.”
At the University of Georgia, Smart has built a program based on discipline, teamwork, and development. The Bulldogs have been one of the most successful programs in college football in recent years, including winning a national championship in 2021. Smart believes that part of Georgia’s success has been due to the fact that players have bought into the program’s culture, putting the team first.
With NIL, however, Smart believes that the emphasis on individual financial gain could threaten the sense of unity that is vital to team success. “When players start looking at their teammates as competitors for NIL deals, rather than as brothers on the field, that can create a toxic atmosphere,” he said.
Smart also raised concerns about how NIL could affect athletes’ long-term career prospects. While many athletes will benefit from endorsement deals in college, Smart cautions that the frenzy around NIL could overshadow the importance of developing skills that will help athletes succeed at the next level, whether in the NFL or elsewhere.
“Some of these kids are going to sign million-dollar deals, but they’re not going to have the work ethic or the development to make it in the pros. And when that happens, they’re going to be left with nothing,” Smart warned.
As Smart sees it, one of the biggest issues with NIL is the lack of oversight from the NCAA. The organization, which has traditionally regulated college athletics, has been slow to react to the changing landscape, leaving individual schools and coaches to navigate the murky waters of NIL on their own.
“Where is the NCAA in all this?” Smart asked rhetorically. “They’ve been completely absent in terms of setting any guidelines or regulations around NIL. It’s created chaos, and it’s going to continue to get worse unless someone steps in and takes control.”
Smart believes that the NCAA needs to step up and create a more structured approach to NIL, one that ensures fairness and competitive balance. He also thinks that the NCAA should work to ensure that athletes’ academic and athletic development is still the priority, rather than simply turning college athletics into a free-for-all financial market.
“I think the NCAA needs to be proactive here,” Smart said. “If they don’t, we’re going to see even more of these issues pop up. It’s time to put some rules in place to protect the integrity of college sports.”
As Smart concluded his conversation with Finebaum, he made it clear that he is not opposed to NIL in principle. He understands the importance of athletes being able to benefit from their name, image, and likeness, and he acknowledges that the system has needed reform for a long time. However, he believes that the current state of NIL is unsustainable, and that without significant changes, it will ultimately hurt the sport in the long run.
“College football has been great for a long time because it’s been about more than just money,” Smart concluded. “We need to make sure that we don’t lose sight of what makes this sport special. If we’re not careful, we could end up in a place where NIL is the only thing that matters, and that would be a tragedy for the game.”
Kirby Smart’s candid remarks about NIL and the future of college athletics reflect the growing concerns among coaches, administrators, and fans alike. While NIL offers exciting opportunities for student-athletes, it also raises important questions about the future of college sports. Will the system lead to an uneven playing field, where the wealthiest programs dominate? Will it erode the sense of tradition and community that has made college football so beloved? And will the NCAA step in to regulate this rapidly changing environment before it’s too late?
