The panel was discussing whether name-image-likeness money has piled unfair pressure onto college athletes. Wilder pushed back on the premise — pressure is the job, she argued, and the self-belief required to compete at that level is not rational in the first place. She went on to say some of that pressure is welcome, up to the point where it stops being motivating.
I think because for so long these student athletes weren't getting paid, or if they were getting paid, it was under the table and not allowed, as Charlotte mentioned with the Bagman. But I think that there's also this feeling of these student athletes having almost too much power by having access to significant amounts of capital. I think that there is pushback in people saying, well, don't they need to go get a job and also, you know, have an entry-level job where they're not making a lot of money and they're grinding it out when they're making significant amounts of money from a very young age. So I think that discussion and pushback extends beyond even the student athlete, I think, and extends into all these new ways that people can make money, especially with the rise of social media, that these people are able to make way more money on the internet than they ever could in an entry-level job or a job even later on in their career. And so I think that there's just inherent pushback and it makes these people feel uncomfortable that these students are feeling empowered and can make this much money.
I remember I was at UNC when our men's team won the national championship in 2017. And every day leading up to those games, the energy on campus was so intense and the players must have felt so much pressure. And I think about today, if that were to happen, first of all, it would be amazing if our team made it far in March Madness today. But those players would also have to worry about brand deals on top of winning the game. And it just feels like so much pressure.
I think at the same time, though, you know, we're talking about pressure. Like that is what these athletes have learned to do. That's their job. You know, whether that's fair or not, or whether the vitriol online is definitely not fair, something has to be done about that. But that's why these are very competitive people who are playing a sport to win. They are playing a sport to bring a national championship to their college. You have to be delusional to be an athlete at the D1 or pro level. You have to believe that you're better than everybody else and that you will win a national championship, even though the odds are so slim. Otherwise, how could you do it? You kind of have to lie to yourself a little bit. And so I think some of that pressure to these athletes is welcomed to a certain extent. It depends on the individual as to where that line of pressure goes from being motivating to unhealthy, I think.
What do you all think are the potential positives of NIL for students? Obviously, besides the money.
Yeah, I think it's one, the financial empowerment aspect. As you mentioned, they're setting themselves up for success, even if their chances of going pro fall through by the time they graduate or leave university. I think there's that. I also think that even beyond just earning more capital, they're earning cultural capital by building brands and names for themselves beyond just their on the field or on the court performances. That could potentially extend to, you know, who knows what in the future, launching their own company if they're interested in some venture investing in other businesses. And I think that there's almost the possibilities are endless, I think, for these student athletes as NIL. became an option for them. So I think, and I also think that it creates safety net for more athletes than was ever possible before.
I guess you could argue too, it does teach them about business. You know, you can get a business degree, but you're also getting a practical business degree in terms of managing money and having a team of people around you. So maybe that's an aspect of it.