Sports

Villanova Legend Kris Jenkins Sues NCAA Over Denied NIL Earnings in Landmark Case

Villanova Legend Kris Jenkins Sues NCAA Over Denied NIL Earnings in Landmark Case
NCAA
lawsuit
NIL
Key Points
  • 3-time NCAA Tournament participant opts out of $2.8B class action settlement
  • Lawsuit claims Villanova earned $1B+ from Jenkins' championship-winning shot
  • Case tests retroactive application of 2021 NIL policy changes

Four years before college athletes gained name/image/likeness (NIL) rights, Kris Jenkins' iconic buzzer-beater cemented Villanova's 2016 national championship. New court filings reveal the financial paradox: While the university reportedly gained $250 million in publicity value and $19.1 million in NCAA distributions from the victory, Jenkins himself earned $0 from his career-defining moment.

The 14-page complaint alleges systematic exploitation through collusive restraintsby the NCAA and six major conferences. Legal analysts note this case breaks new ground by demanding compensation for:

  • Broadcast revenue shares from 76 televised games
  • Video game avatar licensing opportunities
  • Social media brand partnerships during peak popularity

Industry data shows Power Five schools generated $3.3 billion in athletic revenue during Jenkins' senior year alone. The lawsuit contends athletes received less than 8% through scholarships while conferences distributed 72% to administrators and coaches. A regional comparison reveals the Big East allocated $42 million to member schools in 2016 - funds Jenkins argues should have included athlete profit-sharing.

Three unique factors make this case pivotal: First, the viral nature of Jenkins' championship moment creates measurable commercial value. Second, new NIL policies enable direct comparisons between past and present earning potential. Third, the NCAA's $22.6 million athletic department windfall from 2016 provides clear revenue benchmarks for potential damages.

Legal experts cite parallels to the 2014 O'Bannon case where athletes won $60 million for unauthorized EA Sports avatars. However, Jenkins' claim differs by targeting broadcast revenues - a $19 billion college sports income stream never shared with players. The outcome could force schools to retroactively compensate thousands of pre-2021 athletes.

As conferences prepare to distribute new $75 million annual playoff revenues, this lawsuit underscores growing tension between institutional wealth and athlete compensation. With 350+ opt-outs from the NCAA settlement, Jenkins' case may spark a wave of individual claims rewriting college sports economics.