2026 is Here: Clear the Decks and Manifest Progress in College Sports
New Year’s Eve has always sincerely been one of my favorite holidays of the year, for two reasons: I love countdowns, and I always go to the garbage dump.
Countdowns are powerful because they trigger psychological principles like scarcity, urgency (FOMO), and anticipation, motivating immediate action and creating excitement. When we set a countdown for an upcoming event, we're not just marking time; we're psychologically preparing ourselves for action. This anticipation builds a sense of urgency and excitement, making the journey towards the event as meaningful as the destination itself. NASA originally believed a countdown would build suspense for the audience but engineers soon realized this cinematic idea was practical, too. It allowed for a structured way to synchronize teams and systems safely before launch.
And what is there not to love about going to the garbage dump? I know many share my cathartic sigh of relief in the rewarding process of decluttering and creating physical space, as well as a sense of accomplishment in managing waste and getting rid of stuff that no longer serves you, providing a clean slate, physically and mentally. The best part - pulling away with an empty car, and for the moment being totally in control, free from the things that have been weighing you down.
Another year is over, and a new one has just begun in the world of college sports. What will 2025’s countdown lead to as we embark on our journey in college sports in 2026? What will be the manifesto that replaces our clean slate? There's nothing better than putting bold predictions on the record and seeing how they age. As the calendar flips, a fresh set of questions and possibilities emerges across the collegiate athletic landscape. While some may fear treading where angels won't, here are my best shots at forecasting the top ten storylines and champions of the year.
1) The flood of Title IX lawsuits finally begins
While these were expected soon after the House v. NCAA settlement, a wave of Title IX complaints and lawsuits hit schools after they begin formal reporting and plaintiffs obtain sport-by-sport payout totals and eligibility criteria from the 2025–26 academic year. The cases are less about “we think football got most of it” and more about “here are the numbers, here are the internal memos, and here is how women were denied equivalent benefits and opportunities.”
2) “Revenue-share equity audits” become mandatory
In response, multiple Power 4 programs quietly standardize gender-equity “compensation impact assessments” before the next revenue-share cycle, because plaintiffs’ firms begin requesting revenue-share allocation documents in early Title IX discovery.
3) Title IX cases pivot from “equal pay” to “equal pay architecture”
What happens in 2026: Plaintiffs stop arguing only about dollar parity and instead challenge the design of revenue-sharing participation criteria (e.g., who gets access, what performance triggers exist, what benefits attach) as structurally discriminatory. Schools respond by offering uniform baseline benefits to all athletes, then “earned” add-ons—creating a two-tier model that becomes the industry template.
4) The “student-athlete” label gets retired
The phrase doesn’t get to its 70th birthday. Several conferences switch to “college athlete” in revenue-share agreements, roster-limit communications, and NIL compliance portals to reduce litigation whiplash across labor and antitrust contexts. That language change shows up first in the fine print, then in public-facing policy pages when it becomes too awkward to keep paying people while calling them something else.
5) A conference pilots “sectoral bargaining” to avoid 50 separate fights
With Congress and the NCAA unable to make progress on reform, one power conference quietly explores a multi-school labor framework (conference-wide standard terms) to stabilize pay, safety, and transfer-related promises and to reduce antitrust exposure from inconsistent rules.
6) DOL/NLRB guidance triggers a split: “employees here, not there.”
Federal guidance (or NLRB action) leads to a bifurcated reality where some athletes (revenue-sport, high-control environments) are treated as employees for bargaining purposes while others remain nonemployees, creating compliance chaos across mixed teams and departments. Universities attempt “dual-track” agreements: employment-style terms for some athletes and participation agreements for others.
7) Transfer “tampering” becomes a contract tort battlefield
More schools sue each other over alleged interference with revenue-share agreements and portal circumvention. Courts start developing a fact-specific common law of “tampering,” forcing schools to formalize recruiting-contact compliance like pro teams do.
9) Eligibility becomes a Supreme Court candidate
The split deepens on whether NCAA eligibility limits are commercial restraints in the NIL/revenue-share era, and appellate courts tee up conflicting outcomes that directly impact athletes’ earning windows. By late 2026, at least one high-profile eligibility dispute is positioned as a clean vehicle for higher-court review because the “commercial vs. noncommercial” threshold question keeps producing inconsistent results.
10) Quick Picks:
The appeals filed in House v. NCAA prevail and the Ninth Circuit will require a complete restructuring of the back damages formula to comply with TItle IX’s proportionality requirements, redirecting over $1 billion to female athletes.
Nick Saban will become a legendary figure in college sports reform in 2026, almost mythically reshaping the entire landscape from retirement.
My 2026 Non-Negotiable
As I lauded the wrapping up of 2025 on Wednesday, I also shared in the agony of defeat with my daughter and her Ohio State family. And it hit me - hard - the existing stresses of college athletics are now compounded by professionalization and financial stakes, making losses potentially devastating to some athletes' mental health. The introduction of NIL deals and direct payments to college athletes exacerbates the mental health impact of a big loss by increasing performance pressure and linking self-worth to financial success and public scrutiny.
NIL has opened a new frontier of public scrutiny through social media, where athletes are exposed to 24/7 commentary and potential negative feedback after a loss. This can lead to worse mental health outcomes, including persistent sadness and hopelessness for those who spend excessive time on brand management. For athletes whose identity is intertwined with both their athletic performance and their brand/marketability, a major loss can trigger an even deeper identity crisis and loss of purpose. Disparities in NIL earnings among teammates can create tension and feelings of inadequacy, making a shared loss a potential source of conflict rather than a collective challenge to overcome.
Addressing the athlete crisis WILL BE a priority at Christine Brown & Partners in 2026.
