|Perhaps market size will prove to matter more for more traditional forms of media or endorsement categories that require a higher level of production and professional connections, such as television commercials, acting, music production or modeling. But take one look at the Instagram followings for the No. 1-seeded women in Storrs, Connecticut, and the No. 1-seeded men in Spokane, Washington, and that should dispel any notion that market size alone will determine earning potential.
Similar to how one of the previous scatter plots established that the production for a women’s basketball player could enhance, but not universally limit, her social media following, you could posit that market size could have a similar effect. It certainly doesn’t hurt to be a nationally relevant player at a Los Angeles-based school, but it’s also not required to capitalize on one’s earning potential.
After NCAA President Mark Emmert meets virtually with the athletes behind the #NotNCAAProperty movement after the men’s NCAA tournament and after the U.S. Supreme Court hears oral arguments for NCAA v. Alston, regarding the NCAA’s restrictions on athlete compensation, conjectures about the roles of market size, recruiting rankings and individual performance in regards to NIL earning potential will soon be replaced with relevant findings from real transactions.
But until then, we’re left to analyze the data that is available, and that data suggests the athletes who were by all accounts allocated lesser COVID-19 testing, weight rooms, meals and swag bags for the NCAA tournament are also some of the athletes who have the most to gain from their NIL.