Former NBA owner buying college programs? Are the Cats up for sale and what it could mean for college athletics.

Fans may not like it, but the professionalization of college sports has accelerated significantly in recent years. Driven by the NCAA's evolving policies and legal challenges surrounding Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) rights, college athletics will never be the same; whether that is a good thing or not remains to be seen.

Recent settlements, including the groundbreaking $2.8 billion NCAA NIL settlement, have reshaped the landscape of college athletics. These settlements address past situations, providing payouts to athletes for missed opportunities and creating forward-looking systems for things like revenue sharing. It has even set up direct NIL payments by universities to studenth athletes in all sports. By 2025, these changes will allow schools to allocate up to 22% of their athletic revenue to athletes, fundamentally blurring the lines between amateur and professional sports. And some argue it will be bad for the smaller schools, further solidifying the gap between large programs and small.

As NIL collectives continue to wield influence, some suggest that college sports may enter an entirely new commercial era. Marc Lasry, former owner of the Milwaukee Bucks, is exploring the idea of buying stakes in college football and basketball teams. His vision? Schools selling 51% of their athletic programs at valuations of up to $750M. The schools would then use the infusion of cash for NIL investments, new facilities, or facility upgrades. Such a move would turn college programs into semi-professional entities, where private ownership partners directly support athlete compensation.

For programs like Kentucky basketball, this concept is particularly intriguing. Kentucky is a storied powerhouse with an international fan base and historical success. The Cats are one of the few basketball programs that could realistically reach such valuations. If Kentucky embraced partial privatization, it could revolutionize its NIL strategy, which has lagged behind with Mitch Barnhart.

It would also be an enhancing factor in its competitiveness in recruiting elite talent and building new facilities without state funds. However, this also raises questions about the identity of college athletics. Would you, as fans, embrace your beloved Wildcats operating like a professional franchise? Would this model further stratify college sports, leaving smaller programs unable to compete? Would fans stop loving their college teams? Because let's face it, nothing beats a college atmosphere on gameday, and professional basketball is lagging in ratings.

More broadly, Lasry's proposal signals a seismic shift in how college sports are viewed by outside investors. College sports, traditionally tethered to educational institutions, are moving toward a professional framework, of that there is no doubt. This could mean greater financial stability for athletes and programs, but also risks commercialization undermining the tradition and community spirit that make college sports unique.

For Kentucky, already a leader in college basketball's modern evolution, adapting to these changes could solidify its dominance if it is willing to be the first to act. Yet, as fans clad in Kentucky blue contemplate these changes, the central question looms: How much "professionalization" can college sports sustain before losing its essence? The answer may redefine the future of collegiate athletics altogether.