Why the NIL era means more for Group of 5 teams?

USF defeated UF on the road, 18-16, in Week 2 of the CFB season

---

Photo by USF Athletics

​In case you missed it, last weekend, the University of South Florida defeated the University of Florida in Football, 18-16. This was a seismic upset of a non-power 4 team’s unexpected take down. You’re probably wondering, but why is this upset different from any others?
 
Well, every once in a while, we run into this situation, a pay-for-play matchup where the expectation is clear: the big powerful team beats up on the smaller weaker team. In this instance, Florida paid USF $500,000 to make this game happen… yet here we are.
 
In the new world of NIL, it’s quite remarkable that a win like this happened on the scale it did because the budget figures make this result even more remarkable. In the 2024 fiscal year, UF’s athletic department brought in $200 million in revenue, while USF trailed with just $103.5 million, roughly half of UF’s total. Florida, also, received about $64.65 million in media rights, CFP and NCAA-related distributions, compared to USF’s $11.35 million.**
 
Athletic departments around the country, thanks to bills passed within the past couple of years, now must set money aside to pay its players. So, for Florida to drop a game to a school they have $100 million more dollars than them is bad, considering the resources they have. Anything can happen on the football field, but when you have that type of program, the expectation for many is, there are no excuses.
 
NIL or Name, Image, and Likeness did not start out like this. It started out as players just wanting to receive compensation for local tv ads or shirts with their names on them to… being paid millions of dollars to play for these schools. Legendary Alabama coach Nick Saban weighed in, warning that the SEC’s once-locked geographic advantage is evaporating. “Kids grew up wanting to go to LSU, Alabama … now they don’t mind going to other places,” he observed, noting NIL has given the Big Ten “a bit of an edge” in recruiting. Essentially stating, that if schools can set aside the money, they have the advantage.
 
Meanwhile, Oregon head coach Dan Lanning offered a pointed reflection on the real investment required to compete - in response to remarks about NIL spending levels at Oregon - "close to $40 million" last year, as estimated by Oklahoma St. head coach Mike Gundy, Lanning said, “If you want to be top 10 in college football, you better be invested in winning. We spend to win. Some people save to have an excuse for why they don’t.”
 
That is why USF’s win, is so impressive.
 
Despite being a smaller financial operation, USF isn’t just surviving - it’s thriving. The Bulls already boast two wins over top-25 opponents this year, marking them as a standout case study in how non–Power-4 programs can excel even amidst college football’s new NIL era.
 
USF’s story is a testament to how leadership, smart resource allocation, and honestly just sheer grit can punch above the financial weight other schools can force. The Bulls aren’t just a spoiler, they’re a blueprint.