BYU cornerback Evan Johnson has made headlines after threatening to leave the football program, citing frustration over underpayment and growing tensions surrounding Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) deals. Johnson’s statements shed light on a larger issue within college athletics, where players increasingly expect fair compensation for their contributions, especially as NIL opportunities evolve across the NCAA landscape.
Johnson, a rising talent in the Cougars’ secondary, expressed dissatisfaction with what he perceives as a lack of support and fairness in BYU’s approach to NIL compensation. According to sources close to the situation, Johnson feels his value on the field and growing presence off it have not been adequately recognized in the deals facilitated by the school or its partners. His concerns reflect those of many college athletes nationwide, who are navigating a new and often confusing marketplace that has dramatically shifted the traditional student-athlete model.
“I put in the work, I represent the brand, and I’m not being compensated the way others are,” Johnson reportedly told teammates. His frustration isn’t just about money—it’s about equity, recognition, and respect. NIL deals are not uniformly distributed, and athletes at schools with less aggressive NIL collectives or limited commercial reach can find themselves at a disadvantage.
At BYU, a private, faith-based institution with a strong commitment to team unity and conservative values, the integration of NIL has been cautious. While some athletes have found success with local endorsements or group deals, others like Johnson feel left behind. The school’s culture, while admirable for fostering cohesion and discipline, may be colliding with the individualistic nature of NIL, where marketability and personal branding often take precedence.
Johnson’s threat to transfer underscores a broader concern that schools failing to support players adequately in the NIL era risk losing top talent. The NCAA’s transfer portal gives athletes far more flexibility to explore better opportunities elsewhere, and NIL is quickly becoming a deciding factor. If players believe they can earn significantly more at another program, they are more likely to test the waters.
Coaches and administrators now face a new balancing act—maintaining team culture while also helping athletes maximize their earning potential. Johnson’s situation may serve as a wake-up call for BYU and similar institutions. Without competitive NIL support, retaining star players becomes increasingly difficult.
Reactions to Johnson’s comments have been mixed. Some fans and alumni have expressed disappointment, citing loyalty and team unity as core BYU values. Others sympathize, acknowledging that athletes deserve fair compensation, especially in a billion-dollar industry where coaches and schools profit immensely from their labor.
As the story develops, it remains to be seen whether BYU can mend fences with Johnson or if his exit becomes a catalyst for broader change. What is clear is that the NIL era has fundamentally altered college sports, and programs must adapt quickly to ensure they remain competitive—both on the field and in the evolving market for athlete compensation.
