A Portal to Power: Has the Transfer Portal in the NIL Era Made NCAA Men’s Basketball More Top-Heavy?

By Kevin Li and Jason Cheung

Introduction

Over the past few years, the landscape of college basketball has shifted dramatically. Since the NCAA implemented the one-time transfer rule and the Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) era began in July 2021, student-athletes have gained unprecedented flexibility and financial opportunity. As a result, the transfer portal has exploded in activity, particularly benefiting the biggest programs in the sport. Critics argue that high-major programs, already dominant in recruiting and resources, have now added another tool to poach top players from smaller schools. Meanwhile, mid-major programs struggle to keep their talent, watching their best athletes leave for a shot at brighter lights and bigger paydays. 

The increasing dominance of powerhouse programs was highlighted by the 2025 NCAA Tournament, where all four #1 seeds advanced to the Final Four—a rare and telling outcome. This article dives into an in-depth statistical analysis to investigate whether these structural changes have made Division I men’s college basketball more top-heavy, and whether the days of March Madness Cinderella stories may be fading.

Methods

To measure if the NCAA is more “top-heavy” in the present NIL era, we will use a variety of data and methods to assess recent performance by the six high-major conferences: the ACC, Big 12, Big East, Big Ten, Pac-12, and SEC. (Note: Data for the Pac-12 was recorded until it disbanded in 2024. We do not consider the Pac-12 as a conference when looking at 2025 statistics in this article). We define the start of the NIL era as 2021, so statistics recorded in 2021 or after are considered to be in the NIL era.

We use several metrics to analyze trends. First, we consider KenPom (Kenpom.com) end-of-season rankings to gain a more analytical view of team strength, comparing average rankings across high-major conferences over time. We also use the end-of-season AP Poll (collegepollarchive.com) rankings for each year to evaluate how many teams from high-major conferences make up the nation’s top teams. Finally, we examine NCAA Tournament data—specifically, the percentage of Sweet Sixteen teams that come from high-major conferences. To further assess balance within this group, we calculate the average seed of all remaining teams in the Sweet Sixteen, with the assumption that high-major teams are generally seeded lower at the start of the tournament, to help us determine whether these teams have the ability and skill to make it to this point of the tournament, or if higher seeds are getting in the way and causing upsets. Together, these metrics provide a multi-angle view of how the NIL era may be strengthening high-major programs.

Results

End of Season KenPom Rankings

This graph displays the average KenPom ranking across each high-major conference at the end of the NCAA season. The rankings reflect NCAA tournament performance as well. A data point that is lower on the graph is better for a conference, as a lower average ranking (closer to 1) is favorable.

Figure 1. Average End-of-Season KenPom Ranking for Each High-Major Conference from 2018-2025

Overall, the results are very mixed. Since 2018, three conferences (ACC, Big East, Big 12) have seen their average ranking increase when comparing 2018 to 2025. On the other hand, the other three conferences (Big Ten, Pac-12, SEC) have seen their average ranking decrease. However, since the inauguration of the NIL era (2021), this distribution changes slightly. Four conferences (ACC, Big East, Big 12, Pac-12) had an increase in average ranking when comparing 2021 to 2025, while two conferences (Big 12, SEC) saw their average ranking decrease between these years.

For this next graph, all KenPom rankings across all the high-major conference teams were combined into one single value for each year, representing the average KenPom ranking of high-major all conference teams. This trend was observed from 2018-2025, with a lower ranking again being favorable in this case.

Figure 2. Average End-of-Season KenPom Ranking of High-Major Conference Teams from 2018-2025

Comparing the starting and ending years, the average ranking for high-majors decreased. Additionally, when comparing the start of NIL (2021) to 2025, the average ranking decreased too over this time span. One thing to note, however, was that in 2022 and 2023, the average ranking of these high major conferences increased significantly before dropping back down in 2024 and 2025.

Using average KenPom rankings, considering all the high-major conferences individually and as one average ranking for all teams, led to interesting takeaways with regard to high-major team performance in the NIL era. When looking at each conference individually, more conferences have seen their average ranking increase from 2021 to 2025. However, the overall average ranking of high-majors has decreased since 2021, despite there being sharp increases in this metric in 2022 and 2023. The increase in average rank in these years is contrary to what we might have expected in the post-NIL era, as high major teams should theoretically be improving and thus decreasing their average ranking. However, this increase could have been an effect of growing pains due to the new NIL rules; teams that potentially looked good on paper with new transfers might have lacked chemistry due to an influx of different players that were unfamiliar with the school and the coach’s playstyle. In the past two years, the average ranking of high major teams has decreased, and this could be attributed to the transfers settling in and building chemistry with their new program, or improvements on the coaches’ side on how to better integrate new players into their system. Either way, it will be interesting to watch how this metric changes in the years to come. 

AP End of Year Poll

We also looked at the number of high major teams in the AP end of year poll, which ranks the top 25 teams at the end of the season. If there was a greater number of high-major teams in this poll, this meant that in general, the high-major schools did well in the season.

Figure 3. Number of High-Major Conference Teams in the Final AP Poll from 2018-2025

From 2018 to 2025, the number of teams in this poll increased from 19 to 22. Additionally, from the start of the NIL era to this past season, the number also increased from 20 to 22. Interestingly, this past year saw the largest number of high-major teams in the AP Poll out of all the years covered.

Looking at the number of high-major teams in the AP end-of-year poll provides a bit more evidence to the claim that the NIL era has helped strengthen high-major schools. The increase from 20 to 22 teams since 2021 can be attributed to the NIL era helping the high major teams improve overall. Additionally, 2025 having the largest number of high-major teams in the AP Poll out of all the years we looked at further supports the idea that these programs are solidifying dominance and potentially provides a preview on what is yet to come.

March Madness Performance

*Note: March Madness was cancelled in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, so no data was recorded for these years.

Composition of Sweet 16 Breakdown

For this metric, we looked at the teams remaining entering the Sweet 16 of the NCAA tournament each year and analyzed how many of them belonged to high major conferences. A greater number of high-major teams remaining is favorable, as it means that these teams were strong enough to make it to this point in the tournament.

Figure 4. Number of High-Major Conference Teams in the Sweet Sixteen from 2018-2025

From 2018 to 2025, the number of high-major teams in the Sweet Sixteen increased from 13 to 16. Additionally, from 2021 to 2025, there was an increase from 12 to 16 teams that made it to this stage in the tournament. There was a dip from 13 to 11 teams from 2022 to 2023, but since 2023, this number has increased steadily.

A greater number of high-major teams in the Sweet Sixteen signifies that these teams are stronger, as they are able to advance far in the tournament. Therefore, since this value has increased since 2021 (the start of the NIL era), it suggests improved tournament performance by the top conferences, as they are becoming strong enough to consistently play well and make it to this stage in the tournament (and even make up all sixteen spots in this past year).

Sweet 16 Seeding Breakdown

Finally, we took all of the seeds of the teams remaining entering the Sweet 16 of the NCAA tournament and found the average value of that group of seeds each year from 2018-2025. This was done with the assumption that high-major teams are generally seeded lower at the start of the tournament, so a lower average seed would signify that these high-major teams are strong as they have survived and advanced to this point.

Figure 5. Average Seed of Remaining Teams in the Sweet Sixteen from 2018-2025

This metric was used to identify if there had been any change in the composition of the seeds that made up the Sweet 16 since the NIL era began. For example, if the average seed had dropped significantly since 2021, that would be significant since it would characterize more of these “better” high-major teams making it further on in the tournament. As illustrated by this graph, there was a significant drop in average seed between 2018 and 2019, and this was the lowest average seed recorded during this measured time span. No data was recorded in 2020 due to COVID-19 causing the tournament to be cancelled, but picking back up in 2021, the highest average seed during this measured time span was recorded this year. The average seed value steadily decreased each year until 2024, then saw a slight increase from 2024 to 2025. 

Looking at the big picture, the average seed of the remaining teams in the Sweet 16 has decreased from 2018 to 2025, as well as from 2021 to 2025. Evidently, teams that are entering the tournament being highly-rated are able to continue their success, which is likely as a result of NIL deals that bring the best players to these top programs and separate them from other mid-major schools, allowing them to perform better and go farther in the tournament.

Conclusion

Overall, the data suggests a trend toward increased high-major dominance since the start of the NIL era. (since 2021). By looking at high-major team performance in the end of season KenPom rankings, AP End of Year Poll, and both the Sweet 16 team composition and average seed of remaining teams, we see that these programs appear to be consolidating power. This trend makes sense given how NIL has shifted the balance of power. High-major schools have more money, bigger platforms, and stronger recruiting reach, which allows them to attract top players (often pulling talent from smaller schools). These new additions improve performance, which brings more attention, more sponsorships, and even more NIL money. That cycle feeds itself, widening the gap between high-major and mid-major programs. While NIL is still relatively new, the early signs point to growing dominance from high-majors, and it’ll be worth tracking how much further that gap grows in the coming years.