The NIL Standard uses a proprietary multi-factor model to estimate every player's annualized NIL market value. These are independent estimates, not official financial disclosures.
The foundation of every valuation is football. We assess a player's projected career trajectory using draft modeling, on-field production data, and independent talent ratings. Players with stronger professional outlooks command higher NIL valuations — because brands, collectives, and programs are investing in future visibility.
Not all positions carry equal weight in the NIL marketplace. Quarterbacks consistently command the largest deals, followed by premium offensive tackles, edge rushers, and skill positions. Our position-specific base values are calibrated annually using coaching surveys, GM interviews, and transfer portal deal data. Tight ends are valued as a two-starter position, reflecting the modern game's reliance on multi-TE offensive sets.
Where a player plays matters. Programs with larger fanbases, stronger NIL collectives, and higher revenue generate more NIL opportunity for their athletes. A player's valuation accounts for the financial ecosystem of their specific program.
We use a three-tier talent evaluation system. The primary signal is on-field production — season-level statistical performance ranked against all FBS players at the same position. When production data isn't available (common for offensive linemen and incoming transfers), we use independent talent ratings as a calibrated fallback. For players without either signal, we fall back to their recruiting pedigree.
A player's remaining eligibility and time in college affect their market leverage. Our model adjusts for class year, recognizing that mid-career players with established tape often command the strongest position.
A player's role on the team — starter, backup, or reserve — directly affects their valuation. Starters command full market value. Backup players at single-starter positions (like quarterback) face steeper discounts than backups at multi-starter positions. We source depth chart data from independent scouting services and update it throughout the season.
Personal brand matters in NIL. We incorporate a player's social media following as a measure of their direct marketing value to sponsors. Social reach is a meaningful bonus but is intentionally capped — The NIL Standard is a football-first valuation.
The NIL Standard also values elite high school football recruits — the four-star and five-star prospects who make up the next generation of college talent.
Valuing recruits requires a different approach than valuing college athletes. High school players don't have college production data, snap counts, or draft projections. Instead, we rely on the signals that actually drive the recruiting market:
Composite scores published by major recruiting services are the foundation of every recruit valuation. They represent the best available assessment of a prospect's talent and potential. Higher-rated recruits consistently command larger NIL packages, and our model reflects that relationship.
Position matters just as much for recruits as it does for college athletes. Quarterback and offensive tackle recruits consistently command the largest deals, followed by premium skill and defensive positions — mirroring the same positional economics that drive the college and professional markets.
A five-star recruit committed to a powerhouse program with a strong NIL collective and large fanbase has a different market than the same player who is uncommitted or headed to a smaller program. Our model accounts for the financial ecosystem a recruit is entering.
Recruits closer to arriving on campus — signed seniors about to enroll — are valued higher than younger prospects whose commitments and development are less certain.
We only value four-star and five-star recruits. Below that threshold, the high school NIL market is too thin and unpredictable to model with confidence. We believe it's better to show no number than a misleading one.
Once a recruit enrolls in college and begins accumulating real playing time, their valuation naturally transitions from our recruiting model to our college athlete model as production data, depth chart positioning, and draft projections become available.
When we have a real, reported NIL deal for a player, we use that figure as their valuation instead of our algorithmic estimate. Real market data is always more accurate than any model.
We accept reported figures through three channels: public reporting from credible outlets, direct submissions from players or their representatives (agents, collectives, family members), and on-the-record statements from program-affiliated parties. Public sources are attributed on the player's profile with a link. Private submissions move the published number without publishing the source. Either way, the player and their representatives know what we're going to publish before it goes live.
To submit a deal: Report it through /verify →
Our valuations are derived from an algorithmic model that incorporates production data, depth chart positioning, market signals, and a curated override layer. As these inputs evolve — new transfer activity, depth chart adjustments, reported NIL agreements, model recalibrations — our valuations refresh accordingly.
If a social card and a live team page show different numbers, both are accurate as of their respective dates. The team page is always current.
Not every NIL valuation model measures the same thing. A production-weighted model like ours asks: what is this player worth based on what they do on the field, what role they play, and what their draft trajectory looks like? A brand-weighted model asks: what is this player worth based on who is following them, who knows their name, and what the market is willing to pay for their story?
Both signals are real. They just answer different questions.
This means you will see cases where our number is higher than the consensus — typically returning starters at non-blue-blood programs, high-production interior linemen, or draft-trajectory players whose social reach has not caught up to their tape. And you will see cases where our number is lower — typically recruits and transfers whose brand arrived before their production, or players whose public profile outruns their current on-field role.
We believe both directions of divergence are features, not bugs. If every model agreed on every player, there would be no market — just a price sheet. We publish our number because we think the math behind it is defensible. You decide what to do with it.
Team-page roster tables show players valued at $25,000 or above. This is a display policy, not a valuation change — every player remains in our database, contributes to the team total, has a profile page, and shows up in site search.
A typical roster carries dozens of deep-depth and walk-on players whose projected NIL value sits well below the meaningful market range. Showing all of them next to a program's headline contracts dilutes the signal. The floor keeps the table focused on the players whose values matter to the discussion.
A player whose estimated NIL value is below $25,000 is hidden from the team-page roster list. The same floor applies across football and basketball. It does not apply to player profile pages, the transfer portal page, site search, or the sitemap — a hidden player is still fully reachable everywhere else.
Recruits and other players whose number is shown as a privacy treatment (not as a dollar amount) are exempt and continue to display. The rule is "is a dollar amount being shown?", not "is the value above $25,000?" — players who already have a different rendering pass through untouched.
When every player at a position falls below the floor, the group rolls up into a single summary line so the depth is visible without scrolling individual rows. Example: "K — 3 players, all below display threshold ($147K included in team total)."
Any team page where at least one player is hidden shows a footer line reconciling the shown count, the hidden count, and the hidden total. The hidden value is included in the team-total figure at the top of the page — totals never change when the floor is applied.
The direct profile URL always works. Site search returns hidden players the same as any other. Insight articles continue to mention starters and depth players by name when the story calls for it.
No model is perfect. NIL is a young, rapidly evolving market with limited public data. Our valuations are estimates — informed by the best available data and a rigorous methodology, but not guarantees of what a player will or should earn. For most starters at tracked programs, our valuations fall within the range that market participants — agents, collectives, and programs — would consider reasonable for a player of that role and profile, and we calibrate our recruit valuations against independent benchmarks.
We're transparent about our approach because we believe the NIL market works better when everyone — players, families, collectives, and programs — has access to credible, independent valuations.
Questions about our methodology? Explore player profiles to see the model in action.
View Player Valuations