Several years into the name, image and likeness era, college football has changed in ways that are now hard to miss.
Competition across the major conferences has tightened, and the distance between top teams and the rest seems to be shrinking. Players who might once have waited for a chance to play at Alabama or Ohio State can now earn more by starting somewhere else. That shift has helped make quick turnarounds possible, too. Curt Cignetti took Indiana from an also-ran to an undefeated national champion in two seasons, while Bob Chesney helped put UCLA in the playoff conversation soon after arriving from James Madison.
Georgia coach Kirby Smart recently pointed to another possible consequence of the NIL era: players may be less inclined to embrace the demanding, week-after-week grind of major college football.
After Georgia beat Florida 27-8, Smart was asked whether the team’s injury troubles might be related to the physical demands of its SEC schedule. His answer touched on a broader change in the sport.
“Everybody is practicing less, but everybody’s getting injured more,” Smart said.
He recalled how intensely Georgia practiced in 2021 and 2022, saying the team could not train that way now. Smart wondered whether players’ attitudes had changed, and said earlier teams may have been more driven because they were still working toward a future opportunity. Some current players, he noted, earn more than he did until he was 40. It is, he said, a different era.
There may be something to that. Players who can earn significant money in college might not feel the same pressure to prove themselves for a future NFL paycheck. That’s a pretty understandable human response, though it’s only one possible effect of athletes being paid for their work.
Smart’s remarks drew criticism from people who noted that coaches can earn substantial salaries and sometimes leave programs for better opportunities. If the sport is generating money, they argued, players deserve to benefit from it too.
On Monday, Smart clarified that he wasn’t opposed to players earning money. He called it a positive change and said he wished athletes had been paid when he was playing. His concern, he explained, was more about whether young people are prepared for the long-term effects of suddenly having substantial earning power, and whether they understand what work and money may look like after college. Still, he added, players should make the most of the opportunities they have.
Smart also said coaches now have to consider how a player might respond to earning that kind of money, and whether it will affect their contribution to the team. In the past, NFL scouts might have asked whether a player’s draft status would change him. Now, Smart said, coaches must make similar judgments when recruiting: will a player stay motivated and committed to the team’s culture?
He also linked the shift in practice intensity to new roster limits. Under the 2025 House settlement, teams were limited to 105 players, rather than having rosters that were effectively open-ended. With fewer players available, coaches may be more cautious about full-contact practices and the risk of injuries.
It could be a combination of those factors, or something else entirely. With college football changing so quickly, it’s difficult to pin down one cause. Still, the increased parity has made for a more compelling season so far.
