In May 2025, as part of a settlement of litigation involving college football, a new entity was created called the College Sports Commission (“CSC” or “Commission”). See news media reports here and here. Among many other purposes, the CSC will monitor and approve name, image, and likeness (“NIL”) agreements for college athletes. As the term implies, NIL rights are the rights owned by an individual to their name, image, and likeness. Generally speaking, a person has a right to prohibit others from using their name, image, and likeness and to be paid for such use. NIL rights can be valuable as, for example, many cinema stars and professional athletes allow use of their names, images, and likenesses in exchange for millions of dollars in payments.

NIL rights have been a major issue in college sports since colleges and universities receive billions of dollars for the rights to broadcast games and competitions. The athletes “do all the work” but, until recently, received none of the money.

That changed. College athletes have been able to monetize their NIL rights for several years now. However, the process of providing NIL rights for athletes has been chaotic, and there have been cases where NIL rights agreements have been less than fair for the athletes involved.

Consequently, one of the most important tasks of the CSC is to evaluate the fairness of NIL agreements. In this regard, the CSC has published a list of 12 factors that will be used by the Commission to evaluate the fairness of NIL agreements. “Fairness” is basically defined as whether the compensation provided in the agreement to the athlete is reasonable and aligns with compensation paid in similar deals. The Commission is empowered to approve or reject NIL agreements. In summary, the 12 factors are as follows:

• Marketability and social media reach of the athlete
• Athletic performance and public profile
• Type and scope of “deliverables” — “deliverables” are a marketing term covering obligations of the celebrity/athlete with respect to types and number of appearances (such as in-person, over-the-phone, social media, etc.), and other types of permitted NIL use (such as cardboard cutouts, etc.); in general, higher payments are warranted for more deliverables
• Market channels (such as geographic area or the internet) and demand
• Length of deal
• Renewal or extension terms
• Any exclusivity
• Market comparables — which is to say, what are other similarly-situated athletes getting paid?
• Booster and donor involvement
• Timing
• Quality and completeness of documentation
• Other issues that might be considered “red flags”

Note that if there is a disagreement about whether an NIL rights agreement is fair, arbitration is provided as a dispute resolution. Since, with respect to college athletes, any NIL rights deal involves three parties (the athlete, the party desiring to pay for the NIL rights, and the college/university), any of the three may start an arbitration. However, if a deal is disapproved by the Commission, re-negotiation is an alternative to filing an arbitration.

Legal Background: How NIL Rights Became a College Sports Reality

For decades, the NCAA’s “amateurism” rules prohibited college athletes from receiving compensation for their name, image, and likeness. That changed decisively in NCAA v. Alston, 594 U.S. 69 (2021), where the Supreme Court unanimously held that certain NCAA compensation rules violated federal antitrust law. In the wake of Alston, the NCAA suspended enforcement of its amateurism rules, and most states enacted NIL statutes. As of 2025, virtually all college athletes in the United States have the right to monetize their NIL.

The House v. NCAA settlement, preliminarily approved in October 2024, went further — establishing a revenue-sharing framework that allows schools to pay athletes directly, subject to oversight by the newly created College Sports Commission (“CSC”). The CSC’s NIL fairness framework sits within this broader settlement structure.

Understanding Each of the 12 CSC Fairness Factors

1. Marketability and Social Media Reach

This factor examines the athlete’s existing audience and potential brand reach. Follower counts, engagement rates, platform diversity, and demographic data are all relevant. An athlete with 500,000 TikTok followers commands a different market rate than one with 5,000. Athletes should understand their own metrics before entering negotiations.

2. Athletic Performance and Public Profile

On-field, on-court, or on-track performance directly affects an athlete’s marketability. Awards, statistics, team standing, and media coverage all factor in. Athletes should document their performance data as part of their negotiating position.

3. Type and Scope of Deliverables

The more obligations an athlete assumes — appearances, social media posts, video content, licensing rights — the higher the compensation should be. Contracts that provide broad deliverable rights at fixed low rates are a red flag. Attorneys reviewing NIL agreements routinely look for deliverable provisions that are open-ended or that can be expanded unilaterally by the brand partner.

4. Market Channels and Demand

Geographic scope matters. A local restaurant endorsement has different economic parameters than a national brand campaign. Athletes should understand whether their deal is local, regional, or national — and be compensated accordingly.

5 and 6. Length of Deal and Renewal Terms

Longer deals carry more risk for the athlete. Circumstances change — performance, popularity, and personal situations all evolve. Agreements with automatic renewal provisions, evergreen terms, or de facto perpetual rights should be scrutinized carefully.

7. Exclusivity

Exclusivity provisions prohibit athletes from entering competing NIL deals during the agreement’s term. Exclusivity has real economic value for the brand and real opportunity cost for the athlete. Any exclusivity provision should be compensated at a premium, narrowly drafted, and time-limited.

8. Market Comparables

The CSC evaluates whether an agreement’s compensation aligns with what comparably situated athletes receive. Athletes and their advisors should research market rates for NIL deals in their sport, conference, and tier of competition. Published NIL valuation databases can provide useful benchmarks.

9. Booster and Donor Involvement

The CSC is specifically watching for booster-funded NIL agreements that function as disguised pay-for-play arrangements — a significant compliance concern under the House settlement. Agreements that appear to be funded by school boosters or collective entities are subject to heightened scrutiny.

10. Timing

NIL deals entered at unusually convenient times — immediately before signing a letter of intent, or during a transfer portal window — raise questions about whether the deal is genuinely commercial or is being used as a recruitment inducement.

11. Quality and Completeness of Documentation

The CSC expects well-drafted, professionally documented agreements. Oral agreements, informal arrangements, and poorly drafted contracts are red flags. Athletes benefit from having legal counsel review any NIL agreement before execution.

12. Red Flags

The catch-all factor covers unusual circumstances that suggest the deal does not reflect a genuine arms-length commercial transaction. Vague deliverables, undefined compensation, missing parties, or unusual payment structures all qualify.

Practical Guidance for Athletes Entering NIL Negotiations

• Retain an attorney to review any NIL agreement before signing
• Understand the CSC review process — know that the Commission can disapprove your deal
• Build your negotiating position with data: follower counts, engagement analytics, performance statistics
• Push back on overly broad deliverable provisions and unlimited exclusivity
• Understand the arbitration process for disputed rejections
• Keep records of all NIL agreements for compliance purposes

Contact Revision Legal

If you have questions about NIL and sports law, the experienced attorneys at Revision Legal can help. We represent businesses, entrepreneurs, and individuals across the country. Contact us through the form on this page, visit our NIL and sports law practice page, or call us at (855) 473-8474.