Photo of Philip Nickerson

Philip represents clients in sectors such as financial, tech, real estate, and energy in a range of litigation matters. He is experienced in matters involving trade secrets, government investigations, commercial contracts, construction and product defect.

The College Sports Commission (CSC) has circulated a 10-page University Participation Agreement that would dramatically reshape NIL and direct-payment enforcement. The biggest shift: schools would waive their right to challenge CSC rulings in court and funnel all disputes into the arbitration system created by the House settlement. The agreement only takes effect if every school signs.

The College Sports Commission (CSC) has circulated a 10-page University Participation Agreement that would dramatically reshape NIL and direct-payment enforcement. The biggest shift: schools would waive their right to challenge CSC rulings in court and funnel all disputes into the arbitration system created by the House settlement. The agreement only takes effect if every school signs.

Background

The movement to allow student-athletes to profit from their name, image, and likeness (NIL) continues to sweep across the nation, reshaping amateur athletics from coast to coast. What began as a collegiate phenomenon has steadily made its way into high school athletics, with nearly every state now allowing young athletes to benefit from their NIL in some form.[1]

Background: From the Trial Court to the Appeal

Diego Pavia’s journey to a NCAA Division I starting quarterback position was anything but conventional. After leading his junior college (JUCO) team to a national championship, Pavia transferred to first one, then a second, Division I school. By 2024, Pavia became a breakout star in the SEC, leading his school to a historic win and drawing attention from NFL scouts. He also began receiving lucrative offers tied to his name, image, and likeness, yet his eligibility was in doubt.

Former University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV) football player Tatuo Martinson is the latest NCAA athlete to successfully convince a federal district court to enjoin the NCAA from enforcing its “five-year eligibility rule” against a former junior college (JUCO) athlete. Martinson joins Diego Pavia,[1] Jett Elad,[2] Cortez Braham Jr.,[3] and four West Virginia University football players[4] as having prevailed on this issue, in contrast to James Coley Jr.,[5] Jagger Giles,[6] and Jackson Hasz,[7] who had similar efforts rebuffed by the NCAA.

This week, the College Sports Commission (CSC) released its first NIL Deal Flow Report, providing a snapshot of activity across its NIL Go platform, though the rollout of the data was not without issue. The report captures platform and deal activity from June 11, 2025 — the date the platform launched — through August 31, 2025. The CSC released its initial report on September 4. On September 5, the CSC issued a corrected report, indicating that the misreported results were attributable to errors made by its outside consulting firm.

On July 16, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, in a 2-1 decision, overturned a preliminary injunction that would have granted University of Wisconsin cornerback Nyzier Fourqurean a fifth year of eligibility. The NCAA’s “Five-Year Rule” limits student-athletes to four seasons of competition within a five-year period. Fourqurean played four seasons: two at Grand Valley State University and two at the University of Wisconsin. The University of Wisconsin requested a waiver of the Five-Year Rule from the NCAA, citing circumstances that reduced Fourqurean’s playing time in his first season.

On April 25, U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi ordered the NCAA not to enforce its Five-Year Rule against Rutgers University cornerback Jett Elad.[1] The impact of name, image, and likeness (NIL) agreements on the new world of Division I sports underpinned two key findings in the opinion: (1) the NCAA’s junior college rule (JUCO Rule) is subject to federal antitrust laws; and, (2) Elad had a likelihood of success on the merits because Division I student-athletes have a greater ability to benefit from NIL agreements compared to non-Division I athletes.