I serve as legal counsel for many agents. Let me explain why the 5% agent cap in the Cruz-Cantwell Protect College Sports Act is bad policy.
It's a price control that fails to distinguish between lower-effort school or collective agreements and the far more labor-intensive work required to source, negotiate, and service genuine third-party brand deals.
Most true
#NIL endorsement opportunities are modest in value. At 5%, an agent's compensation on an $8k deal would be $400. After accounting for the time spent identifying the opportunity, conducting due diligence on the brand, negotiating the terms, and providing ongoing fulfillment support, that figure doesn't come close to covering legitimate overhead or rewarding the expertise that separates competent representation from amateur efforts.
Agents who specialize in this space routinely operate at commission rates between 10-20% on brand deals because the work is closer to traditional talent or entertainment representation than to the union-capped commissions on multimillion-dollar pro player contracts.
A flat statutory ceiling also interferes with the freedom of contract that should govern the relationship between the athlete and advisor of his/her choice. If a high-profile QB with significant national-market potential wants to pay a premium for an agent who can deliver blue-chip corporate partnerships and manage a personal brand across multiple platforms, the market (not Congress) should set that price.
The cap risks driving experienced agents out of the NIL space altogether, leaving athletes to either go unrepresented or turn to less reputable operators who may skirt the rules.
Registration, mandatory disclosure of all material terms, fiduciary standards, and a robust private right of action against fraudulent conduct are legitimate tools for preventing exploitation. But the % cap misses the mark.