Intercollegiate athletics is undergoing one of the most consequential transformations in its history. An article by Brian Krumm, associate professor of law at the University of Tennessee Winston College of Law, The Future of Intercollegiate Athletics: Is It Legally Attainable and Financially Sustainable?, examines this shift. The article reviews the evolution of college athletes’ legal rights, particularly regarding the use of their name, image, and likeness, and their ability to participate more equitably in intercollegiate athletics’ revenue. This research presents a critical legal and economic perspective on college sports in the wake of the House v. NCAA settlement.
Approved in June 2025, the $2.8 billion settlement resolved antitrust claims against the NCAA, allowing schools to directly compensate athletes through revenue-sharing agreements. The resolution fundamentally altered the financial relationship between student-athletes and universities, imposing unprecedented administrative and financial burdens on universities. By permitting Division I institutions to share up to 22 percent of athletic revenue directly with athletes, the settlement represents a decisive break from the NCAA’s traditional amateurism model. Krumm’s article critically analyzes the House v. NCAA settlement agreement and assesses its projected annual financial impact on athletic departments of varying sizes.
“Although this change advances athlete compensation rights, it also exposes deep structural vulnerabilities in the financial models that support most athletic departments,” said Krumm.
Krumm’s research uses financial data from five athletic departments to demonstrate that the vast majority of programs already operate at or near break-even, with football and men’s basketball subsidizing all other sports. When revenue sharing, expanded scholarships, back damages, and the potential classification of athletes as employees are layered onto this system, the question becomes not whether change is necessary, but whether current models are sustainable at all—particularly for smaller and mid-major institutions.
Krumm’s article presents a balanced approach. Rather than opposing athlete compensation, Krumm highlights the risks of continued piecemeal litigation and regulatory uncertainty. He points to collective bargaining and regulatory reform as potential paths toward stability, fairness, and long-term viability.
Krumm has been on the frontlines of NIL work at UT and has witnessed up close the dramatic shift over the past decade. That practical experience also informs his teaching in the Transactional Law Clinic, where he works alongside students on real-world business and transactional matters.
For athletic administrators, legislators, lawyers and fans, Krumm’s article offers a timely examination of the legal and financial challenges shaping the future of intercollegiate sports, concluding that legal and financial guardrails will ultimately determine whether college sports can survive.