NIL compensation and corruption risk: evidence from low-profile NCAA programmes

Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) compensation expanded legal earnings opportunities for college athletes but did so unevenly across programmes. Using 9,560 NCAA Division I men’s basketball games from 2015–16 through 2024–25, this article tests whether the relationship between betting-market expectations and realized outcomes changed differentially for lower-profile programmes after NIL. Difference-in-differences estimates show no statistically detectable increase in favourites winning without covering relative to a spread-based benchmark. Event-study estimates show no differential pre-trend, and the conclusion is robust to alternative spread thresholds, conference classifications, conference realignment, and the post-2018 expansion of legal betting. The evidence indicates stability in market-relative outcomes; it does not rule out misconduct already incorporated into betting prices.