Between January and February of 2026, the College Sports Commission's NIL Go clearinghouse cleared 3,704 deals worth roughly $39 million. In the same window, it rejected 187 deals totaling $14.36 million. The rejected figure is not a rounding error. It represents a meaningful share of the total value moving through the system, and it is concentrated in the category of deals most closely tied to recruiting.
The numbers behind the strain
CSC CEO Bryan Seeley has acknowledged the system was not designed for the volume of school-affiliated deals it now sees. Roughly 63% of all NIL deals submitted in early 2026 involved entities tied to schools, including collectives, multimedia partners, and apparel groups. Those deals accounted for 78% of total dollar value flowing through the clearinghouse, according to CBS Sports' reporting on the clearinghouse.
Roughly half of all cleared deals resolve within 24 hours, and 70% resolve within seven days. The friction is not evenly distributed. It is concentrated in the category where most recruiting-adjacent offers live.
Why the rules are still being argued
A central piece of the dispute is what qualifies as an "associated entity" under the House settlement. Multimedia rights companies and national brand sponsors typically operate across multiple schools and conferences. Class counsel for the plaintiff athletes argues those companies fall outside the CSC's review authority. The CSC has taken a broader view.
That definitional fight is scheduled for a May 27 hearing before U.S. Magistrate Judge Nathanael Cousins. The outcome will shape which deals require clearinghouse review and which do not, and how quickly the rest of the 2026 calendar moves through the system.
What this means for families weighing offers
Three things are worth understanding when an NIL component enters a recruiting conversation.
- Proposed is not the same as cleared. A dollar figure mentioned by a coach or a collective is a proposed deal, not an enforceable one. Clearinghouse review can adjust it, delay it, or reject it.
- The friction is real, but partial. Most cleared deals move quickly. The slowdown concentrates in school-affiliated arrangements, which is also where the recruiting-related deals tend to sit.
- The legal frame is still being written. Schools, conferences, and class counsel are still negotiating CSC enforcement scope. A package described one way in May may look different by July, depending on how the underlying rules settle.
The advisory takeaway
None of this means NIL offers should be ignored or treated with suspicion. It means the language families hear during recruiting is moving faster than the legal infrastructure that supports it.
A clear NIL conversation, then, is one that separates three things: what a coach or collective has described, what the clearinghouse has cleared, and what is enforceable under the settlement terms in their current form. For families evaluating programs this cycle, that distinction is the most useful question to bring into any room: what stage of the process is this offer actually in?