Although buzzer-beaters and ads with Charles Barkley are great, my favorite aspect of March Madness is undoubtedly its ability to turn players into stars in the blink of an eye. While some of these sensations don’t end up succeeding at the next level (sorry, Sindarius Thornwell — I really thought you were the next big thing), others, like Steph Curry at Davidson, show their first flashes of greatness on the hardwood in March.
Think back to UConn’s 2014 championship-winning squad, and one name likely jumps to mind: Shabazz Napier, the tournament’s Most Outstanding Player. Averaging 21 points per game as the Huskies tore through their competition, the guard lit up television screens across the country.
Off the court, though, Napier made headlines for a separate reason. “I don’t feel student-athletes should get hundreds of thousands of dollars,” Napier commented to reporters. “But like I said, there are hungry nights that I go to bed and I’m starving.” Though it took almost a decade for the compensation that Napier addressed to come to fruition as name, image and likeness, the NCAA did take some action in response, instituting unlimited meals for Division I athletes only weeks later.
Fast forward to 2025, and March Madness looks a little different. It’s a reality that even Napier failed to foresee: Players can sign endorsement deals, monetize their social media and earn real money — sometimes six or even seven figures — while still chasing a title. All of a sudden, the madness has gotten a lot more lucrative.
Though I already broke down the thorny debate over the ethics of NIL in the December 6, 2024 edition of this column, there’s a new angle of March Madness to consider in the NIL era: How will the increasing emphasis on player marketability influence the tournament?
Currently, the top five NIL earners on the men’s side of college basketball are all estimated to earn more than $1.5 million this season, with Duke’s Cooper Flagg listed at No. 1 ($3.3 million). These players may already be established as superstars, but for many others, March Madness is the perfect opportunity to show that they are not only talented players to scouts but also marketable entities.
We’ve been seeing this happen since NIL went into effect in 2021. On March 21, 2024, Oakland guard Jack Gohlke broke the tournament’s two-game 3-point record and dropped 32 points en route to an upset of Kentucky. A day later, he was on Instagram. “Me and my team made it to the next round by making all our moves count,” Gohlke said in a post. “Just like TurboTax, who makes all your off-court moves count this tax season.”
Had NIL existed a decade ago, there’s no doubt that Napier and many others would have taken a similar approach. Whether this would have affected their play is impossible to say, but it remains true that March Madness will never return to its former state. Unlike most American sports products, the tournament is relatively unbranded, with a focus on the players and the schools they represent. Of course, they run ads and have sponsors, but it’s never as prominently promoted as even a regular-season NBA game. Now, this culture is shifting. If a player is on the phone trying to secure a deal as they step off the court, is the tournament not — at least in part — simply a vehicle to earn branding?
None of this will really matter when the games start; the magic of March will remain. I only ask that when you see a 19-year-old promoting Papa Johns Pizza after a first-round win, you take a moment to consider how we got to this point.
