Forward Look
Will GLP-1s Change the Economics of College Sports?
A macro consumer trend is already forcing food companies, restaurants, and consumer brands to rethink demand. Should athletic departments be asking the same questions?
By Kyle Ems
College athletics has spent the past five years adapting to some of the biggest structural changes in its history: NIL, the transfer portal, conference realignment, revenue sharing, collectives, and the rise of general managers.
But another trend is quietly reshaping consumer behavior across the United States.
GLP-1 medications.
Drugs such as Ozempic, Wegovy, and Zepbound are changing how millions of Americans eat, shop, and spend. Grocery companies are reformulating products. Restaurants are rethinking menus. Consumer packaged goods companies are studying purchasing patterns.
Which raises an interesting question: will GLP-1 medications eventually change the economics of college sports?
I am not suggesting they will.
I am suggesting athletic departments should begin asking the question.
Every Industry Is Asking the Same Question
Nestlé is creating products specifically for GLP-1 users. PepsiCo is studying how consumer purchasing habits are changing. Restaurant operators are experimenting with smaller portions and higher-protein menu options.
Consumer packaged goods companies are investing millions trying to understand how one class of medications could reshape the way Americans eat.
Should college athletics be asking the same questions?
The Numbers Suggest This Is More Than a Healthcare Story
According to Gallup, current GLP-1 use for weight loss nearly quadrupled from approximately 3% of U.S. adults in 2024 to 11% in 2026. Gallup also found that awareness of GLP-1 medications has reached 91% of American adults, suggesting these medications have moved well beyond niche healthcare conversations and into mainstream consumer behavior.
Gallup Snapshot
|
3% Current GLP-1 use for weight loss in 2024 |
11% Current GLP-1 use for weight loss in 2026 |
Current use nearly quadrupled in just two years.
Reuters has reported that companies including PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, Kraft Heinz, and General Mills are investing in consumer research, reformulating products, introducing higher-protein offerings, and evaluating changing purchasing habits because they believe GLP-1 medications could permanently reshape food demand.
EY-Parthenon has also estimated that diet changes tied to GLP-1 use could reduce snack sales by as much as $12 billion over the next decade, according to Reuters reporting.
Why College Athletics May Be Different
This is where the conversation becomes more nuanced.
College football fans are not necessarily representative of the average American consumer.
Many season ticket holders, donors, suite holders, and traveling alumni have substantial discretionary income. They routinely spend thousands of dollars every season on tickets, parking, travel, hotels, donations, tailgating, and merchandise before ever purchasing food inside the stadium.
For many fans, concessions are not simply about satisfying hunger. They are part of the experience.
Parents buy popcorn for their children. Friends split nachos. Alumni grab a beer before kickoff. Families create traditions around game day.
The Counterargument
College football is an experience — not just another consumer transaction.
But Small Changes Can Become Big Numbers
Now consider a hypothetical stadium with 50,000 seats and six home football games.
If every game sells out, that is 300,000 fan visits per season.
Illustrative Scenario
How a Small Per-Fan Change Compounds
50,000 Seats |
6 Home Games |
300K Annual Fans |
-$0.50 Per Fan |
-$150K Per Year |
Five-Year Cumulative Impact
$0.50 less per fan = $750,000
$1.00 less per fan = $1.5 million
$1.50 less per fan = $2.25 million
$2.00 less per fan = $3 million
Formula: 50,000 fans × 6 home games × reduced average spend × 5 seasons.
That example is intentionally simple. It does not account for revenue share with concession partners, sport-by-sport differences, premium areas, postseason games, inflation, or changing attendance.
But that is the point. Even modest changes in average spend can become meaningful once they are multiplied across tens of thousands of fans, multiple home games, and multiple seasons.
Concessions May Be the Least Interesting Part
The bigger question is not whether hot dog sales decline.
The bigger question is whether GLP-1 medications could influence the broader business model around game day.
Questions worth asking:
- Could premium hospitality menus shift toward higher-protein and smaller-portion offerings?
- Could suite catering packages evolve?
- Could beverage and snack sponsors adjust stadium activation strategies?
- Could alcohol become a larger share of concession revenue?
- Could food service partners redesign product mix?
- Could healthier brands find new sponsorship openings in college athletics?
Those questions have not received much attention. They probably should.
How Schools Can Prepare
Athletic departments do not need to redesign concession stands tomorrow. But they can begin collecting better information today.
The Real Lesson
This article is not really about GLP-1 medications.
It is about how athletic departments think.
The future of college athletics will not be shaped only by NCAA legislation, conference realignment, or media rights negotiations. It will also be shaped by demographic shifts, healthcare innovations, consumer preferences, technology, and economic conditions.
The most successful athletic departments will not simply react to those trends. They will recognize them before everyone else does.
The next advantage in college athletics may come not from spending more, but from understanding the business better.
Sources
Gallup — “GLP-1 Usage Reaches New High”
The Wall Street Journal — PepsiCo’s CEO on GLP-1s, consumer demand, and inflation
The Wall Street Journal — Nestlé adjusts food recipes for GLP-1 consumers
Reuters — Big Food invests as obesity drugs reshape U.S. demand