SEC “Affiliation Agreement,” Deloitte’s NIL Go, Braham v. NCAA, & More | NIL Newsletter #333
Welcome to the NIL Newsletter by Optimum Sports Consulting - providing valuable, actionable NIL resources for athletes, administrators, agencies and other sport professionals.
Keep up to date on all of our newsletters and content by checking out past Optimum Sports Consulting Newsletters and following us on Twitter!
This Monday Newsletter Includes:
1. SEC Unanimity on a House-era “Affiliation Agreement” and the Coming College Sports Commission
2. Deloitte’s NIL Go Clearinghouse Draws Conflict-of-Interest Heat and What it Signals for Revenue-Share Compliance
3. Cooper Flagg’s Staggering $28 million NIL year at Duke Sets a New Benchmark
4. New AD & GM Hires
5. Legal Updates (Braham v. NCAA) and What’s Coming Up for NIL
🏆Major News
All 16 SEC Schools Sign Onto the College Sports Commission “Affiliation Agreement”
SEC commissioner Greg Sankey confirmed that every league member has endorsed the draft pact, obligating schools to follow the House settlement’s $20.5 million cap and roster-limit rules even when a state statute (read Tennessee’s “shield law”) says otherwise.
Schools are also required to submit future NIL contracts to the Deloitte-run clearinghouse and the new College Sports Commission (CSC).
Lastly, they are to waive litigation rights against the CSC or the conferences. If not, refusal means loss of SEC membership and scheduling.
These factors are important for a few reasons. Consider, for example, pre-emption by contract. The SEC is betting private agreements can override conflicting state laws where Congress has not. Expect a constitutional skirmish over whether “you can’t sue us” clauses are themselves an antitrust restraint.
Moreover, by funneling disputes to CSC arbitration, the league hedges against another recruiting-injunction loss like the one Tennessee AG secured in 2024.
Lastly, with the Big Ten, ACC, and Big 12 execs attending the same spring-meetings briefings, look for copy-and-paste language within weeks (i.e., this can serve as a template for the other Power Four Schools).
Deloitte’s NIL Go Clearinghouse Faces Scrutiny as Its Consulting Arm Courts Athletic Depts
Sportico reports that while Deloitte readies NIL Go—the database that will vet every athlete deal above $600 under the House settlement—it is simultaneously pitching six-figure consulting projects to athletic departments (Kansas, East Carolina, Texas A&M) on how to comply with the very rules NIL Go will police.
Plaintiffs’ counsel say Deloitte decisions are reviewable by arbitrators and Judge Wilken, but watchdogs argue the firm’s dual role could chill whistle-blowing, offering some interesting conflict-of-interest optics.
Athletic departments must choose a payment/tax/compliance stack before July 1. Deloitte, Huron, and private platforms (e.g., Scout) are vying to become the AD’s payroll + cap-management backbone. Belzer’s column warns that a bad choice “is not a payroll glitch, it’s a Title IX lawsuit.”
As it pertains to bright-line promises, conference counsel says Deloitte’s engagement letter with CSC will bar cross-selling; expect those firewalls to be tested the first time NIL Go flags a deal Deloitte’s campus unit helped structure.
📌Other Notable Stories to Follow
Cooper Flagg’s $28M freshman haul dwarfs his projected $13.8M NBA rookie salary — Fanatics + New Balance headline the deals, giving Power-Four hoops staffs a new NIL ceiling to pitch. 🔗 LINK
AD carousel heats up — Georgia Tech’s J Batt (pictured above) is set to take over Michigan State, while Arkansas State taps former Houston AD Chris Pezman; both hires were driven by fundraising/NIL competencies. 🔗 LINK
Missouri basketball to hire Tim Fuller as program GM — another sign that roster/NIL management is moving from ops staffs to front-office style executives. 🔗 LINK
ESPN’s College World Series & WCWS tech rollout — ump-cam, live drones, and ABC windows underscore why baseball/softball media rights are a future NIL value driver. 🔗 LINK
Upset-heavy NCAA baseball regionals — No. 1 Vanderbilt and No. 2 Texas bounced; super-regional match-ups set for June 6-9. 🔗 LINK
📅What’s Coming Up Next for NIL
June 6-9: NCAA baseball super-regionals (ABC/ESPN); revenue-share exposure for brands on national TV
June 11: Kai Johnson v. NCAA preliminary-injunction hearing, Missoula — first Division II-to-I eligibility fight in Ninth Circuit
June 13-22: Men’s College World Series, Omaha (first ABC Saturday slot)
June 15: Universities’ NIL compliance reports for 2024-25 due
July 1: Anticipated effective date for House settlement rules and new Texas NIL law; payroll systems go live
July 1: Florida's new law capping agent commissions at 5% of NIL earnings becomes effective
July 26: EA Sports to release "College Football 26" with increased NIL compensation for players
⚖️Legal Updates
Braham v. NCAA: JUCO Transfer Takes the Fight West
Nevada WR Cortez Braham Jr. sues the NCAA for a seventh season, seeking a preliminary injunction that would let him play in 2025 and capture an estimated $500K in NIL deals; his complaint attacks (1) the JUCO-year cap, (2) the “five-year/four-season” limit, and (3) the 2.5 GPA transfer rule as illegal restraints of trade.
Braham doesn’t just challenge the “Four-Seasons-in-Five-Years” cap; he also targets the 2.5 GPA rule for 2-4/4-2-4 transfers as an anticompetitive barrier to entry. JUCO athletes, he argues, are fenced out of the D-I labor market by standards that (a) exceed the 2.0 GPA required of four-year transfers and (b) bear no demonstrable link to academic success. That dual assault invites the court to ask whether any of the NCAA’s stated pro-academic justifications are less-restrictive alternatives under the Rule of Reason.
The Ninth Circuit is already skeptical of NCAA restraints, as cases like O’Bannon and Alston both sprang from this circuit, which has held that amateurism offers no blanket antitrust shield. A Braham win would deepen a growing circuit split, upping the odds the Supreme Court revisits college-sports antitrust soon.
Nevada’s refusal even to file a waiver lets Braham frame the NCAA system as a closed shop where the gatekeeper (the school) can duck responsibility and shift litigation costs to athletes—a fact pattern that looks a lot like concerted action under § 1 of the Sherman Act.
Detailed projections, plus Braham’s WR1 status, make the economic injury quantifiable and persuasive at the injunction stage. Moreover, a win could usher in a wave of sixth- and seventh-year seniors just as the $20.5M revenue-share cap hits, crowding ledgers, and forcing the future College Sports Commission to craft “designated-player” carve-outs or face instant non-compliance.
Also, dismantling the GPA barrier opens a larger and cheaper recruiting pool for cap-strapped mid-majors, but Power-Four giants could exploit extra-year slots to stockpile proven stars, widening the talent divide.
Expect arguments about competitive balance (27-year-olds vs. 18-year-olds) and calendar certainty. Courts must decide if those are genuine pro-competitive benefits or mere operational convenience. A TRO/PI hearing should land before fall camp. Even a temporary injunction gives Braham a season and bolsters plaintiffs pressing for a unified, post-House eligibility code, adding political heat for a federal safe-harbor bill.
Bottom line, Braham is more than a “one-more-year” plea. It stress-tests the NCAA’s ability to defend disparate eligibility rules post-Alston; the durability of the House-era roster and revenue models; and the judiciary’s willingness to keep rewriting college-sports law in the absence of Congress. A plaintiff victory would accelerate the march toward fully professionalized roster management and make JUCO litigation the next big domino after NIL, transfers, and revenue sharing.
Texas Fast-Tracks HB 126; Revenue Sharing Green-lit the Moment Abbott Signs
When Gov. Greg Abbott signs House Bill 126—expected as soon as this week—the Lone Star State will become instantly House-compliant. Because both chambers cleared the bill by a two-thirds super-majority, the statute takes effect immediately upon signature, not on the usual Sept. 1 start date.
Any future NCAA rule, federal court order, or CSC bylaw can supersede Texas law without another trip to Austin. Lawmakers designed the statute to be “set-and-forget,” sparing ADs an annual legislative scramble.
By deleting the old ban on direct athlete pay, HB 126 lets Texas, Texas A&M, and every other in-state program execute House-era contracts on July 1. A&M coach Mike Elko warned at the SEC Spring Meetings that not paying would be “a significant disadvantage for our football programs”—that pressure drove the expedited vote.
No athlete younger than 17 may sign an NIL contract with a school or third party, a guardrail aimed at middle-school phenoms and 9th-grade football recruits.
Schools may share up to $20.5 million annually (the House cap) and can continue to funnel outside collective money, provided deals clear the Deloitte-run NIL Go system.
Florida (agent-fee cap), Georgia (school-facilitated NIL), and shield-law pioneer Tennessee now face fresh recruiting headwinds unless they, too, fast-track statutory tweaks or sign the Power-Four “affiliation agreements.”
🗣Hear from Leaders on NIL
“This is the reality for a lot of schools across the country. Until #housevncaa settlement is approved, this will continue.” (Regarding how the House Settlement is affecting the University of Alabama).
— @onuss_
🔗 Tweet“The $1M that NiJaree Canady was paid to play 🥎 at Texas Tech was money well spent…”
— @WinterSportsLaw
🔗 Tweet
Thanks for Reading!
Keep up to date on all of our newsletters and content by checking out past Optimum Sports Consulting Newsletters and following us on Twitter!