College football has spent the past several years looking more and more like a professional sport. The stadiums were already enormous. The television contracts were already worth billions. Coaches were already earning salaries that rivaled those in the NFL.
Now, some of the players are making serious money, too.
Name, image and likeness deals have allowed college athletes to profit from their value in ways that were prohibited for generations. Most athletes aren't becoming wealthy through NIL, but some of the biggest names in college sports can earn hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars through sponsorships, collectives and other agreements.
That change raises an uncomfortable but increasingly relevant question: If college athletes can earn professional-level money, should they also face professional-style financial penalties for misconduct?
Recent incidents put the question back in the spotlight
The issue resurfaced after a couple of incidents in college football.
Texas edge rusher Colin Simmons was called for unsportsmanlike conduct after sacking Tennessee's quarterback and mimicking unzipping his pants and urinating on the field.
In another game, USC linebacker Desman Stephens II was ejected for targeting Oregon quarterback Dante Moore. Moore suffered a concussion, was taken from the field on a stretcher and transported by ambulance.
Stephens appeared to celebrate immediately after the hit before being ejected. USC later suspended him for one game, and both the school and Stephens apologized.
Neither incident by itself settles the argument over financial penalties. They do, however, provide examples of why the conversation isn't going away.
The professional sports comparison
There is a fairly straightforward argument for allowing fines.
Professional athletes can lose money for certain conduct. The NFL, for example, can fine players for unsportsmanlike behavior, including some offensive or vulgar celebrations.
If college football is moving toward a system in which top players are compensated like professionals, expecting some professional accountability doesn't seem completely unreasonable.
A suspension costs a professional athlete money because players receive salaries from their teams. A college player earning significant NIL money could be suspended without necessarily losing a dollar of that outside income.
That creates a strange situation in which the economics of college football have changed dramatically while much of its disciplinary structure still comes from an era when athletes officially weren't being paid.
But there's a major problem with simply borrowing the NFL model.
College athletes aren't all earning NFL money.
Who gets fined — and how much?
NIL compensation varies enormously.
One starting quarterback might have deals worth millions of dollars. His teammate could have a relatively modest NIL agreement. Another player on the same roster might make virtually nothing.
A $10,000 fine might be irritating to one player and financially devastating to another.
Percentage-based penalties could address some of that disparity, but that creates another problem: Who determines how much NIL money an athlete actually earns, and what income should count?
There's also the larger question of authority.
Schools and coaches already have considerable ability to discipline athletes. Players can be benched or suspended, and universities have used scholarship agreements and team policies to address misconduct.
The rules of the sport provide another layer of punishment. A player can receive a penalty, be ejected or face additional consequences for violations such as targeting.
The NCAA can impose financial penalties in certain circumstances, but those generally fall on institutions and other responsible parties rather than functioning as fines against individual athletes for bad plays or misconduct during games. Conferences can have their own disciplinary systems as well. The Big Ten, for example, gives its commissioner authority under its sportsmanship policy to impose certain penalties on individuals, including fines of up to $10,000.
Adding NIL-related fines would create yet another layer.
NIL money changes the debate, but not necessarily the answer
The temptation is to make this simple: Players wanted to be paid, so now they should be treated exactly like professionals.
College sports aren't that simple.
NIL compensation doesn't necessarily come from an athlete's university, and athletes on the same field can have dramatically different financial arrangements. Creating a fair system of fines would require determining who has the authority to issue them, which conduct deserves a financial penalty and whether the punishment should account for an athlete's income.
There are also legitimate reasons to believe the existing system can handle misconduct. Penalties, ejections, suspensions and loss of playing time can carry significant consequences without turning every disciplinary matter into a financial calculation.
Still, NIL has changed college athletics enough that the question deserves serious consideration.
College football can't embrace professional-level money while pretending none of the expectations surrounding athletes will change. At the same time, earning NIL money shouldn't automatically mean every college player should be disciplined exactly like an NFL veteran.
The challenge will be finding a system that recognizes both realities.
