Key Takeaways
- The Big Ten rule is effective immediately and limits institutional facilitation of third-party NIL agreements when the institution’s relevant aggregate NIL amount would exceed approximately $49 million.
- “Facilitate” is defined broadly and may include action by the institution or someone acting on its behalf to encourage a third-party NIL transaction.
- The rule includes data, attestation and enforcement components, including certifications by senior institutional and athletics personnel and potential financial penalties or disciplinary measures for violations.
- The rule applies only to institutional action and does not replace existing NCAA or College Sports Commission requirements or restrict student-athletes from independently pursuing NIL opportunities.
The New Big Ten Rule
On Oct. 28, 2026, the Big Ten announced that its Council of Chancellors and Presidents adopted a rule restricting member institution involvement in third-party name, image and likeness (NIL) agreements. The conference framed the measure as preparation for anticipated passage of the Protect College Sports Act (PCSA), explaining that it requires institutions to “initiate the financial and operational mechanisms necessary to comply with PCSA limits in advance of upcoming signing and transfer portal windows.”
Under the rule, a member institution may not facilitate an NIL agreement between a current or prospective student-athlete and a third party if (1) it is adding that agreement’s value to the institution’s direct revenue-sharing payments under the House v. NCAA settlement, and (2) all third-party NIL agreements between its student-athletes and associated entities or individuals would cause the total to exceed $49 million for the 2027-28 cap year.
“Facilitation” under the rule is defined broadly as any action by the institution or someone acting on its behalf “in furtherance of encouraging a commercial transaction between a student-athlete and a third party.” The rule provides a non-exhaustive list of examples demonstrating the breadth of “facilitation,” such as: identifying a student-athlete to a third party for potential NIL opportunities, suggesting any range of compensation or serving as a marketing agent. The rule excludes from the aggregate total NIL agreements between student-athletes and a member institution’s apparel partners if all three parties attest that the member institution did not facilitate the agreement, and a copy of the agreement is provided to the conference. The rule also defines “value” expansively to include “cash, goods, services, in-kind benefits, or any other thing provided to a student-athlete pursuant to an NIL agreement.”
Enforcement and Attestations: Requiring Attention From All Levels
To enforce this new rule, the conference will seek data from the College Sports Commission “sufficient to show the total value of all NIL agreements entered into by student-athletes … for the 2027-2028 academic year as soon as such data is available.” The conference may also request additional information directly from member institutions if it “deems necessary.”
Notably, the attestation obligations under the rule extend well beyond the compliance office. At intervals set by the conference, each institution’s president or chancellor, director of athletics, head and position coaches, and general managers (or individuals in similar roles) must attest that they did not violate or direct a violation of the rule; that they have disclosed to the conference anyone they know or suspect has violated it, whether at their own institution or elsewhere; and that they did not modify, or direct others to modify, any 2026-27 agreement with student-athletes to avoid the rule. Violations may draw escalating financial penalties and other disciplinary measures.
What the Rule Does Not Do
The rule applies only to institutional action. Student-athletes remain free to pursue NIL opportunities independently, and the conference has emphasized that the rule does not displace existing NCAA or College Sports Commission requirements.
Institutions outside the Big Ten are not bound by the rule but may find value in monitoring the rule as a potential template for conference-level NIL governance.
How McGuireWoods Can Help
McGuireWoods continues to follow these developments closely and will provide updates as the situation develops. For guidance tailored to your institution, contact the authors, your McGuireWoods contact or a member of the Higher Education, Sports Industry or Antitrust & Regulation teams.