I know this isn’t a popular take, but I actually think NIL has improved college basketball in some important ways, and I don’t think that’s just wishful thinking as a UCLA fan.
For a long time, the talent distribution in college basketball was extremely top-heavy. A small group of blue bloods, Kentucky, Duke, Kansas, and maybe one or two others, hoarded most of the elite talent. UCLA, in my opinion, was clearly a tier below. We’d land a high-level player here and there, but nothing close to the consistent influx those programs enjoyed. Our formula was different: recruit mostly 3- and 4-star players, develop them over several years, and occasionally supplement with elite talent in hopes of making a real championship run. That’s essentially the model that worked for Villanova and UConn.
I thought we might have something similar when we added Bona and Bailey to an already solid group. We know how that turned out, some bad breaks, some bad luck, but that’s beside the point.
What NIL has changed is the path to building a contender. While it’s true that some programs clearly have more money than others, far more teams now have a legitimate shot at assembling a championship-level roster. Purdue, Iowa State, Michigan, and Michigan State all feel like real contenders—and not because they’re suddenly landing classes full of five-stars.
There are now multiple viable team-building models. Purdue kept its roster together. Michigan aggressively attacked the transfer portal. Duke continues to recruit at an elite high school level. But the teams with the best chance to win it all tend to blend all three: retention, transfers, and selective high-end recruiting.
Because of that, I honestly believe the product on the floor has never been better. This year’s UCLA team, as constructed, would be a very good team in recent eras, even with the hole in the middle. The problem isn’t that we’re bad; it’s that there are now so many stacked teams with few or no weaknesses.
I also think we were closer than the results suggest. If we had been able to hang onto Mara and add an athletic, lockdown wing defender, this team would’ve looked very different. One of the biggest issues was roster fit. Eric and Tyler are essentially the same player archetype. Tyler is clearly better offensively, but Eric could do some of those same things if he weren’t being played out of position. He’s not a 3, and he’s not an ideal defensive 4 either, but he’s a significantly better defender than Tyler. Eric would’ve been better served putting on muscle and playing the 4 elsewhere, while we brought in a true defensive wing.
That said, even tho I'm frustrated, I actually feel hopeful. NIL gives us a chance to keep players like Jules Bernard from the past, someone who never should’ve left in the first place. If we could have offered him real security, there’s no reason to chase a second-round gamble. Going forward, the priority has to be retaining guys like Eric, Trent, and Booker. Since we haven’t been able to attract five-star recruits to that core, the transfer market becomes crucial—and ideally, that’s where you find the athletic wing types this roster has been missing.
NIL hasn’t made things easier, but it has made them more interesting, and more fair. There are more ways to win now, more teams that matter, and more meaningful basketball being played. From a pure on-court perspective, that’s a net positive.