The original plan was conservative. Subway partnered with NIL Club (a platform created by YOKE) to conduct a nationwide campaign with college athletes, with a very basic goal: activate about 150 student-athletes and use athlete-created content to determine if authentic, athlete-created content could reach Gen Z at a national level. Internally, Subway expected to achieve 350,000 impressions. This target was in line with what most NIL activations typically deliver.
That benchmark did not hold.
When the campaign finished, 174 student-athletes had created 183 posts, totaling 1,071,174 impressions, exceeding Subway’s original estimate by more than 300%, and generating engagement results that required a closer examination of what occurred and why.
This was not a celebrity endorsement. This was not a Heisman Trophy finalist, nor was it a first-round pick in the NFL Draft. The result was not an NIL headline featuring a multi-million dollar contract. This was a quieter development, but it could be more significant: Scale – not Star Power – may be the most underappreciated component of NIL.
What the Campaign Was Expected to Do – and What It Actually Did
Subway’s projections reflected standard NIL assumptions. Fewer athletes. Moderate engagement. This exercise was a trial run.
The outcome looked different.
Subway NIL Campaign
Projected vs. Actual Performance
| Metric | Projected | Actual | Above Projection |
| Participating athletes | 150 | 174 | +16% |
| Total posts | 150 | 183 | +22% |
| Total impressions | 350,000 | 1,071,174 | +206% |
| Likes | 12,000 | 25,034 | +109% |
| Comments | 1,200 | 2,301 | +92% |
| Shares | 600 | 2,606 | +334% |
| Saves | Not projected | 454 | — |
In percentage terms, impressions landed 206 percent above expectations, while shares exceeded projections by more than four times. Shares matter because they represent voluntary distribution. Viewers were not only watching the content. They were attaching it to their feeds.
No single post carried the campaign. There was no viral spike. Instead, reach accumulated steadily through volume.
Instagram Reels accounted for 720,399 impressions, TikTok contributed 221,170, and Instagram Stories added 129,605. Short-form video was not a supplement. It was the engine.
Why Did the Content Outperform?
The athletes involved were not given scripts. They were not asked to stage moments. The content was filmed where student life actually happens: dorm rooms, sidewalks, locker rooms, and training facilities. Subway was present but rarely centered. The product appeared as part of the routine rather than the performance.
That distinction matters to Gen Z. The generation that grew up online does not struggle to identify advertising. It struggles to be tolerated. Content that feels engineered is ignored. Content that feels familiar spreads.
College athletes sit in a unique cultural position. They are visible without being distant. They are aspirational without being untouchable. Their audiences are classmates, teammates, friends, and peers who recognize the environment immediately.
The highest-performing videos shared the same traits. Short openings. Casual humor. Minimal editing. No overt selling. The message was implicit: this moment is already part of life.
When Authentic Moments Resonate Across Audiences
The primary reason the campaign reached such distances came directly from the best-performing video posts made at the individual level.
The most-viewed video on TikTok was made by Natalie Wagner, whose post didn’t use special visual effects, editing techniques, or even scripted delivery; instead, it portrayed something almost every college student and student-athlete can relate to: the 3 pm crash.
Natalie’s video portrayed a mid-afternoon weightlifting session, followed by the looming deadline for a paper. Rather than portraying Subway as a product being marketed, this content showed how she used a sandwich to take a short break between two competing responsibilities. Natalie’s viewers found this experience relatable and non-performative. Natalie wasn’t telling her viewers what to purchase; she was showing them a representation of their day on camera.
On Instagram, a separate post by Valerie Michelle Van Dijk (@ihoop.valerie) ranked among the top for engagement, with 179,000 followers. Valerie’s reel highlighted the space between commitments rather than the commitments themselves. She stated that while she is attending classes and practice, she needs to maintain a high level of energy. The video portrayed food as fuel and referenced the Grilled Chicken & Avocado sub from Subway’s Fresh Fit menu as one of the ways she keeps herself energized throughout the day when she has multiple demands on her.
Both videos shared a commonality: they lacked the greatest production quality or the largest number of views; they addressed an immediate pressure point that student-athletes recognize (long days, little downtime, and the need for practical solutions that fit into a real schedule). Neither video had marketing slogans; neither seemed staged; and both felt like part of a normal routine.
To viewers, especially athletes, these videos did not appear to be advertisements. These videos appeared to acknowledge what they have been experiencing. The engagement was measured by shares and saves, not just views, due to this perception gap. The videos blended in with the rest of the feed rather than disrupting it.
Together, the Wagner TikTok and Van Dijk Instagram Reel demonstrated a recurring pattern in the campaign. Content that specifically tied into the common, real-life experiences of the target audience’s athletes consistently performed better than broader, less specific content. The campaign’s reach was not driven solely by the popularity of the individuals involved; it was driven by how well the content represented the daily reality of its target audience.
The Infrastructure Behind the Outcome
The campaign ran through NIL Club, developed by YOKE. While the platform itself never appeared on screen, its structure shaped everything.
NIL Club now supports more than 650,000 student-athletes across 20,000 teams, representing a combined social reach of roughly 1.5 billion followers. In September 2025, the platform reported that 50,000+ athletes completed at least one brand partnership within three months of the launch of its Brand Deals feature.
That participation level reflects trust. A November 2025 national survey named NIL Club the most trusted NIL platform among college athletes, citing compliance review, clarity around eligibility, and privacy protections.
Unlike many NIL pathways, NIL Club emphasizes performance-based campaigns. So far, the platform has tracked more than 100,000 verified conversions, which means it has gone beyond impressions and into measurable results.
This approach differs from traditional NIL collectives.
To understand why the Subway campaign matters, it helps to contrast NIL Club with the dominant NIL model: collectives.
Collectives are primarily fundraising mechanisms. They pool money from donors and distribute it to athletes, often tied loosely to appearances, promotions, or general brand alignment. Their reach is typically localized. Their purpose is retention and recruiting.
NIL Club is structured differently. The NIL Club is not a platform for accumulating donations. NIL Club is a platform to disperse content.
Instead of concentrating value in a handful of high-profile athletes, NIL Club spreads opportunity across hundreds. Turning each team into a group of entreprenuers It engages overlapping social circles on campuses across the country rather than focusing on fan bases associated with a single program.
This distinction creates a counterintuitive result. A brand working with dozens or hundreds of smaller college athletes can reach more unique Gen Z users than a deal centered on even the most prominent NIL stars.
Context: Big NIL Deals vs. Broad NIL Reach
Most recent NIL headlines have focused on reaching scale at the individual level. There have been reports of quarterbacks signing seven-figure contracts. Top NIL stars have formed national brand partnerships. Those deals are important. They validate the athletes’ economic value.
But they also concentrate on reach.
A single elite athlete, even with millions of followers, speaks to a narrower audience than hundreds of athletes speaking simultaneously to their networks. Influence becomes centralized. Distribution becomes fragile.
The Subway campaign demonstrated the opposite model. No single athlete needed to overperform. The system worked because of redundancy and repetition. The message appeared in different voices, on different campuses, and in different feeds.
That approach mirrors how sports actually function. Teams matter more than stars. Depth matters more than highlights.
Why Brands Are Paying Attention
The NIL market is now valued at approximately $2.75 billion, and brands are becoming more selective. Rising influencer costs and declining engagement rates have made traditional influencer marketing harder to justify.
What brands increasingly want is not visibility, but credibility. Instead of focusing on impressions, brands should prioritize distribution; they don’t need to force it.
College athletes provide that credibility. Platforms such as NIL Club facilitate the distribution of content.
The Subway campaign showed that authenticity scales when the system is built for it. Instead of chasing viral moments, brands can rely on volume and trust.
What Does This Signal About the Future of NIL?
This campaign did not eliminate collectives. It did not replace superstar deals. But it exposed a gap between perception and reality.
The most efficient way to reach Gen Z may be through avenues other than the most prominent names in college sports. It may be through the largest real networks.
NIL Club’s advantage is not access to stars. It is access to scale without sacrificing authenticity. That combination remains rare in modern marketing.
Final Take
From an investigative standpoint, the Subway campaign was not a marketing surprise. It was a data point that forced a reassessment.
The numbers were too large to dismiss. The engagement is too consistent. The distribution is too broad.
In a landscape dominated by headlines about the highest-paid athletes, this campaign suggested a different truth. Influence does not always come from the top. Sometimes it comes from everywhere at once.
And for brands trying to reach Gen Z, that difference may define the next phase of NIL.
