In a much-anticipated ruling in college athletics, an arbitrator upheld a College Sports Commission decision denying the NIL deals of 18 Nebraska football players worth millions of dollars.

The case was the first major test of an NIL enforcement process that the Power 4 conferences established following last summer’s House vs. NCAA settlement. It involved PlayFly Sports, a multimedia rights company that has partnerships with Nebraska and dozens of other athletic departments. The CSC, which reviews all major third-party NIL deals, denied the Nebraska players’ deals because it considers PlayFly an “associated entity” of the school, much like an NIL collective.

Attorneys for the players subsequently took the case to arbitration, as required by the House settlement. The CSC announced Monday that the arbitrator affirmed its interpretation of PlayFly as an associated entity, and that the deals did not satisfy a “Valid Business Purpose.” The CSC said the deals amounted to “warehousing,” where a company purchases an athlete’s NIL rights without having secured a specific brand deal for which the athlete must perform services.

Shortly after the announcement, Bryan Seeley, CEO of College Sports Commission, spoke with reporters while attending the ACC’s Spring Meetings at The Ritz Carlton in Amelia Island, Fla.

“I hope and expect that people at schools, people working in college athletics, will look at this ruling as a positive development to bring enforcement to this space,” he said. “I do think most people working in college athletics want robust enforcement. Not everyone, but most people. And so even if it’s not precedential, the fact is, it’s influential in people’s minds about how they think about enforcement.

“So to me, it was a good day.”

But more tests of the CSC await. As of April 30, 21 deals had been consolidated into three pending arbitration cases. Attorneys for individual athletes with more specialized or limited arguments could produce unfavorable outcomes for the CSC.

Additionally, Nebraska law prohibits any organization from penalizing a college athlete because he or she was paid for use of their NIL rights. The Nebraska attorney general could take action to prevent the CSC from enforcing penalties against Nebraska athletes who received payment as a result of their deals with PlayFly.

The Athletic has reached out to the attorney general’s office for comment, and this story will be updated if they respond.

News in NIL land: An arbitrator had upheld the College Sports Commission’s decision denying deals Nebraska players made with Playfly.

They deemed the school’s MMR partner an “associated entity” like collectives.

Now we wait and see if a state politician will sue on their behalf

— Stewart Mandel (@slmandel) May 11, 2026

Seeley believes the players already have new deals in the works that will comply with the rules and allow them to get paid without requiring litigation. The CSC has agreed to expedite its rulings for any new deals the Nebraska players submit, Seeley said.

And later this month, U.S. Magistrate Judge Nathanael M. Cousins is scheduled to address a motion filed by the House plaintiff attorneys seeking to exempt multimedia rights companies such as PlayFly from status as associated entities. If the judge agrees, the arbitrator ruling against Nebraska could lose much of its impact.

“I think it hopefully instills some faith in this system, but we still have a lot of work to do to get to where the schools want enforcement to be,” said Seeley.

The CSC system began on July 1 in conjunction with the advent of revenue-sharing in college athletics. Under the terms of the House settlement, schools could directly distribute up to $20.5 million to their athletes in 2025-26. Those deals do not require approval. However, any third-party deals the athletes receive in excess of $600 must be submitted to the CSC’s NIL Go platform to determine whether they comply with the rules.

According to a report last week, the CSC cleared more than 5,500 deals worth a total value of $75.85 million between March 1 and April 30, nearly double the $39.29 million cleared in the previous two-month period. Another 442 deals worth a total value of $26.87 million were not cleared.

In total, it has cleared 26,556 deals worth a total value of $242.35 million since implementing the system last summer, while denying 1,153 deals worth a total value of $56.17 million.