Why are so many college basketball players from other countries?

Michigan Wolverines star Vladislav Goldin, who is from Russia. | Matthew Stockman/Getty Images

Vox reader Brian Diederich asks: Why and how do so many collegiate basketball teams — both men’s and women’s — now have so many international student-athletes?

If you’ve turned on March Madness this year, you’ve witnessed the most international players ever in college basketball’s signature competition. 

Across both the men’s and women’s brackets, 264 athletes — 15 percent of all NCAA players in the tournaments — hailed from outside of the US. They are a cross-section of humanity, representing 45 countries in the women’s tournament and 52 in the men’s. 

The number of overall international college basketball players more than doubled from 2010 to 2025. It is a trend across sports: 25,000 of all US college athletes were born in another country.

Forty years ago, US schools put little thought into recruiting players from Africa or Europe. A handful of players started to come to the US to play college ball in the 1980s, as the NBA was becoming more popular and thinking more globally. But international players were almost exclusively identified by word of mouth, recommendations from a friend of a friend. Sometimes, the US coaches wouldn’t even see any game tape before signing a player to a scholarship; in 1984, Dutch player Rik Smits got a scholarship offer from Marist University based on nothing but his height (7’4”); he says the coach never even saw him play.

But today, the NBA and NCAA have built out an international pipeline for players, while the internet has made it easier than ever to scout from abroad. A lot has changed.

What has driven more international recruitment in college basketball?

NBA legend Hakeem Olajuwon, who came to the US in 1980 to play NCAA basketball, is a pivotal figure in this evolution. Then a relatively unknown Nigerian teenager, he was offered a chance to try out for the University of Houston’s team because a coach had heard from an acquaintance that Olajuwon was a promising prospect. After his star college career and a successful transition to the pros, Olajuwon had set the blueprint. 

Olajuwon became one of the NBA’s best players in the ’80s and ’90s, winning an NBA MVP and two championships. His rise was paralleled by Jamaica’s Patrick Ewing, who moved from Kingston to play high school basketball in the US before attending Georgetown and then going on to make the New York Knicks one of the consistently best in the league. Smits played for 12 seasons and made one All-Star team. 

Their success, and the next generation of players who followed, pushed the NBA — and, with it, college basketball — on the path to globalization. By the turn of the century, even elite prep schools were starting to recruit international players.

A recruiting arms race got underway in the ’80s and ’90s, and then an NCAA rule change in 2010 made it easier for more international players to come to the US.

Basketball is typically one of the most popular and most profitable athletic programs that a university will have, second only to football if the school has a football team — and for some schools, like Duke, basketball still maintains primacy. The pressure to compete is intense. If you’re at the University of North Carolina and you see your top rival, the Blue Devils, recruiting abroad, you are going to start doing the same thing. International recruitment went from happenstance in the ’80s to an indispensable recruitment tactic that teams across the NCAA used to keep up.

In 2001, the NBA and NCAA doubled down on the strategy and set up a formal pipeline, the Basketball Without Borders program, to get promising international players in front of American scouts. The NBA has more recently set up academic training camps that teach basketball skills while also offering more general education classes to prepare participants for a US college experience.

The program proved to be a success. One of Basketball Without Borders’s graduates is Joel Embiid, a Cameroonian player who came to basketball as a teenager, played as a Kansas Jayhawk, and won an MVP at the professional level in 2023.

Technology helped revolutionize basketball recruiting. In 1984, Rik Smits’s Marist coach had to hope that somebody had recorded Smits playing on some grainy VHS tape and then physically get his hands on that tape. Without that, he had nothing to go on but height. Today, player highlights from all over the world are uploaded to YouTube — where American coaches can view them easily at any time, and players can even build hype on social media to get attention from recruiters.

Those recruiters are offering players not only the chance to come to the US for an education — they’re also offering a financial opportunity. 

How has money in college sports affected international recruitment?

Money is changing everything about what it means to be a college athlete — including for international players. 

An opportunity to make money for themselves — and not just for the schools — is steering even more foreign basketballers to US colleges. NCAA athletes can now earn money through endorsements and other activities thanks to the Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) rule that took effect in 2021. 

In the ’90s and early 2000s, as international recruitment was spreading, playing college basketball wasn’t necessarily the smart move for the most elite foreign players. They could instead play in the expanding overseas professional leagues, earn a salary, and then enter the NBA draft without ever attending a US school. And that path was well trod: Luka Dončić, the subject of a media frenzy after his trade to the Los Angeles Lakers, played in the EuroLeague and leapt to the NBA in 2018 — three years before the NIL provision took effect.

But today, you can make real money playing college basketball in America and earn a salary that rivals those of foreign professional leagues. International players do have to jump through some extra hoops, as students on an immigration visa earning money raises legal questions, but athletes and their sponsoring institutions are quickly becoming savvy about how to navigate that issue.

The potential to make money while in school might even convince some players to stay in the college game longer instead of jumping to the NBA as quickly as possible. 

Michigan center Vladislav Goldin, who was born in Russia, helped lead the Wolverines to their Sweet 16 berth last weekend, but he almost wasn’t there at all: He’d declared for the NBA draft in spring 2024, but changed his mind and transferred from Florida International University to the U of M, a more prestigious program with more earning opportunities. 

A decade or two ago, that would have been unthinkable. But the business of college basketball has changed — and so have the players.

This story was also featured in the Explain It to Me newsletter. Sign up here. For more from Explain It to Me, check out the podcast.

Related articles

Trump BLOWS UP in AM and CAN’T CONTROL his RAPID DECLINE

MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on Donald...

Survey: A lot of Bills fans are plowed at home games

We’re closing in on Christmas, so I’ll start out...

Woodworking is all about craftsmanship… #shorts #buffalobills #woodworking #carpentry #carpenter

Subscribe to the Buffalo Bills YT Channel: https://bufbills.co/2Yhjq9j For...

MAGA hammers Trump for ‘humiliating’ assault on states’ rights



President Donald Trump was hit by pushback from some MAGA Republicans —including "War Room" host Steve Bannon — for an executive order limiting states' ability to regulate artificial intelligence technology.

The Hill's Alexander Bolton on Tuesday wrote, "Trump is trying to avoid an open fight with Republicans who want to rein in the titans of AI by reaching out to GOP lawmakers to make the argument that state regulation of the industry could cripple its growth. But Republicans who warn that unregulated AI poses a serious threat to intellectual property, American jobs and children's safety aren't happy the president did an end-run around Congress — even if they're holding back from criticizing the president directly."

Bannon is being especially outspoken.

Although the "War Room" podcaster — who served as White House chief strategist in the first Trump Administration in 2017 — is a major Trump ally, he is often critical of the president's alliances with Silicon Valley tech bros. And he isn't shy about attacking Tesla head Elon Musk.

In a statement, Bannon said of Trump's AI executive order, "After two humiliating face plants on must-pass legislation, now we attempt an entirely unenforceable EO — tech bros doing upmost to turn POTUS MAGA base away from him while they line their pockets."

Outgoing Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) is another MAGA Republican who is critical of Trump's tech alliances.

The Georgia congresswoman recently resigned from the U.S. House of Representatives, effective early January 2026, and believes that Trump has betrayed his America First agenda during his second presidency.

In a post on X, Greene declared, "I will NOT vote for any bill that destroys states' rights and lets AI run wild for the next 10 years. AI will replace jobs, especially in the press. This is not a left or right issue. It's about humanity. I'll go to the mat on this. If you kill federalism, I'm out."


‘More anxious’: Republicans in panic mode after Trump’s lackluster address backfires



Republicans were shocked by President Donald Trump's finger-pointing and have questioned what's next after his lackluster primetime speech.

White House insiders and GOP lawmakers were reacting to responses to Trump's speech, CNN senior White House correspondent Kristen Holmes told viewers Thursday.

"Look, they're all watching everything closely, and they've seen how it's been reviewed. I will say one thing. The White House worked together as a team, as they often do the inner circle to craft this speech. And they needed a speech in which President Trump would stay on message, that was short, that addressed the economy," Holmes said.

Trump blamed former President Joe Biden, a common move he's made in the past — something his team has begged him to stop doing — and tried to say the economy was better than before.

"Now, whether or not you think his message was true, we obviously know that there were numbers that were inflated or just plain wrong. Or if you think that he went off topic, airing his grievances, he did talk about the economy more than we've ever we've seen him in the last several months," Holmes said. "And that is what the White House was intending to do, to try and get the message across that he is aware that things are not in the place that they need to be, and that they are working on it as an administration."

That message did not land well, she said. And Republicans outside the White House had a different response to what the White House had aimed for, "which is try and alleviate people's fears."

Instead, it only ramped up people's worries, especially ahead of the midterms.

"Republicans came out of that speech more anxious that the messaging around the economy was not where it should be going into 2026, and that the party as a whole was not really solidified in that messaging about the economy, especially when it came to all of this blame on the previous administration," Holmes said.

Trump's former campaign advisers have claimed that the president has previously made gains in convincing people he has an understanding of improving the economy. But now things have changed.

"The other thing they said was that it was a lot easier to run when President Trump himself wasn't in power. When you are running against something, you were saying, you can change something," she added. "Now he is facing the same exact circumstances that President Biden was facing at the time, and handling it the exact same way, which, of course, is raising a lot of questions as to where Republicans are going to go from here."