In a revelation that has stunned the college sports world, University of South Carolina basketball standout Chloe Kitts recently disclosed that her $73,000 annual earnings aren’t enough to cover her daily living expenses.
Despite being a well-known name in NCAA women’s basketball and earning income through her athletic success and sponsorships, Kitts says she finds herself financially stretched—a claim that has ignited widespread debate about how student-athletes are being compensated in today’s collegiate sports system.
Kitts, recognized for her significant impact on the court, shared her frustration during a recent interview. While $73,000 may appear to be a comfortable salary for a college student, she explained that the realities of being a high-performing athlete come with considerable financial demands. From travel and training expenses to the basic costs of living such as rent, groceries, and transportation, Kitts said her income doesn’t stretch far enough.
“I know $73,000 sounds like a lot,” Kitts said, “but when you break it down, especially with the expectations and requirements placed on us as student-athletes, it’s not nearly enough. It’s overwhelming trying to stay afloat financially while giving everything to my sport and my education.”
Her candid remarks have struck a nerve, prompting conversations about how fairly the NCAA compensates its athletes, particularly as the league generates billions of dollars each year through television contracts, merchandise, and ticket sales. Many critics argue that despite these profits, student-athletes like Kitts are left to deal with a financial system that doesn’t fully reflect the value they bring to their programs.
In recent years, changes to NCAA policies have allowed athletes to earn money through their name, image, and likeness (NIL), opening doors for sponsorships and brand deals. However, these opportunities aren’t guaranteed or consistent for all athletes. While Kitts has managed to secure a few endorsements, she stressed that the income from those deals is not enough to rely on.
“Endorsements can help, but they’re unpredictable,” she explained. “They come and go. You can’t build a budget around something that might not be there next month.”
Kitts’ comments bring attention to the broader issue of inequality within the NIL system. Star athletes at top-tier programs in high-profile sports are more likely to benefit from large endorsement deals, while many others are left with minimal to no NIL earnings. This disparity underscores the importance of creating more equitable support systems for all athletes, regardless of their sport or marketability.
The cost of living also plays a major role. In many college towns, the price of rent, food, and transportation has skyrocketed. Student-athletes often have limited time to seek part-time work due to rigorous schedules that include classes, practices, games, and travel. The result is a system where athletes are expected to perform at a professional level without being paid accordingly.
Kitts’ story has prompted several current and former athletes, sports analysts, and advocates to speak out. Many believe it’s time for a structural overhaul of the NCAA’s approach to athlete compensation. One sports commentator remarked, “These are elite athletes who are essentially working full-time jobs. They deserve to be compensated in a way that reflects that.”
Financial experts and former student-athletes have echoed the need for more comprehensive financial support. Suggestions include raising base salaries, offering more consistent NIL earning opportunities, and providing financial literacy education to help athletes manage their incomes better. There’s also a push for the NCAA to offer better health insurance, housing assistance, and post-career support for athletes transitioning out of college sports.
Despite the challenges, Kitts said she remains committed to her sport and education. She emphasized that her intention in speaking out wasn’t to complain, but to advocate for change—not just for herself, but for other athletes facing similar struggles.
“I love the game, and I’m thankful for everything it’s brought me,” she said. “But it’s hard to stay focused on basketball when you’re stressed about whether you can afford rent next month.”
Her remarks have led many to reflect on the true meaning of amateurism in college sports. If college athletes are bringing in millions for their schools and leagues, does it still make sense to classify them as “amateurs” and limit their compensation? For many, Kitts’ experience reveals the flaws in a system that claims to support its athletes but leaves them struggling behind the scenes.
South Carolina fans and broader supporters of women’s basketball have rallied around Kitts, praising her bravery and calling for reform. The Gamecock community, known for its passionate following, has shown strong support, recognizing that Kitts’ openness is helping bring necessary awareness to an ongoing issue.
Ultimately, Chloe Kitts’ story is more than just a headline—it’s a glimpse into the harsh financial pressures faced by student-athletes today. Her willingness to share her reality has sparked an important dialogue around the fairness of athlete compensation in the NCAA. As the conversation continues, many are hopeful that meaningful changes will follow—changes that ensure all athletes, regardless of their fame or endorsement potential, have the resources they need to succeed both on and off the court.
The NCAA has long promised to act in the best interest of its athletes. If that’s truly the case, then stories like Kitts’ should be the wake-up call needed to address the imbalance and offer a future where no student-athlete has to choose between excelling in their sport and meeting their basic needs.
