What's a Reasonable Fee for an Agent to Charge a College Athlete for an NIL Deal?

In our series of articles and videos covering agents operating in the college sports ecosystem, this article addresses agent fees that are reasonable for NIL deals.

If you just listen to media reports and Twitter posts, every deal a college athlete signs is an "NIL deal." Rarely is a distinction made as to whether the deal is an NIL/marketing deal (true NIL deal), or if the "NIL deal" is actually tying the athlete to a specific school (actual Rev-Share deal). That distinction makes all the difference.

True NIL Contract & Legitimate Percentages

If the payment under the contract is tied to marketing value (a brand endorsement, a licensing arrangement, a merchandise deal, appearances, deliverables), then a marketing-style commission makes sense because the agent is (at least in theory) creating and negotiating commercial value. That’s called “sweat equity,” where the agent is working hard to secure a brand deal on behalf of their client.

CLEMSON, SC - NOVEMBER 08: Clemson Tigers head coach Dabo Swinney during a college football game between the Florida State Seminoles and the Clemson Tigers on November 8, 2025 at Memorial Stadium in Clemson, S.C. (Photo by John Byrum/Icon Sportswire)

These contracts cannot require a player (either expressly or impliedly) to play for a particular school, and must follow all of the criteria under the House settlement to qualify as a true NIL deal. That means the deal must be for a valid business purpose, entered into by a business that offers goods or services to the general public for profit, and the athlete can transfer schools without breaking the deal.

If the deal is a true NIL deal, then it would be reasonable for the agent to charge 10-20% of the value of the contract for their services. That range tracks what professional athletes are charged by certified, regulated agents in the NFL and NBA.

Collective NIL Deals & Legitimate Percentages

Collectives are the entities that were formed at every major Division I school (following the 2021 Supreme Court decision in Alston) to pool money to pay players to play for a particular school.

Under the House settlement, deals made by the collectives are no longer allowed to be pay-for-play deals. Collectives are still pooling money to pay players, but they are rebranding the payments. Many collectives have filed for 501(c)(3) status and request donations from alumni and fans of a particular team. The collectives then pay athletes for what are essentially meet-and-greets and/or “work” at an animal shelter or hospital in the local area.

The collectives still serve as central, albeit sometimes controversial, drivers of NIL activity for a specific school, often influencing recruiting, transfer portal decisions, and team retention by providing high-value deals. The House settlement allowed these collectives to remain as a major player in this new era.

If we’re being honest, collective deals are NIL deals in name only. They still function as a supplement to any Rev-Share contract a college athlete signs. And if the contract is ultimately a Rev-Share contract (requiring an athlete to remain at a particular school), then the agent should charge the lower, 3-5%, commission.

But in today’s market, agents representing college athletes typically charge just one percentage for all deals the athlete signs, and that percentage can be up to 20% (with one coach reporting an agent charged an athlete 30%). Deals need to be differentiated and the price an agent charges needs to correspond to the type of deal that is being signed, no matter how the deal is labeled. Deals that are labeled “NIL” even though the terms clearly reflect “Rev-Share” should be priced accordingly.

[Next up in the Agent Series: Should College Sports Agents Charge 20% for Rev-Share Deals?]