Sourced, not asserted
Proslync does not issue eligibility rulings or legal advice. It structures deals against public rules and settlements, and it labels what is a fixture. Here are the authorities that shape the compliance posture, each one linked, and the public NIL conversation as it moves.
The authorities
Final court approval on June 6, 2025. Division I schools may now pay athletes directly for NIL, subject to an annual cap set as a share of athletic-department revenue. This is the obligation the AD office now answers for.
NACUBO settlement summary ↗Bylaw 22.1.1 covers institutional involvement in athlete NIL, permitting written license and endorsement agreements within a student-athlete’s period of eligibility. This is the rule surface the deal record is built to file against.
NCAA.org rule changes ↗Athletes must report NIL contracts of $600 or more to the designated clearinghouse for review. Proslync structures a deal so that disclosure is a field on the record, not an afterthought.
NCAA.org ↗Independent tracking of college-athlete NIL policy across the sector. Useful context for how the rules keep moving and where the open questions sit.
knightcommission.org ↗NIL law varies by state, and per-school policy varies on top of it. In the current demo, per-state and per-school policy is a labeled fixture; the production posture reads the applicable statute for the athlete’s school.
The scoring demo runs on fixture athletes and public reach figures, labeled as such. No live social scraping, no guaranteed reach, no customer performance data. Proslync is pre-revenue with no school under contract.
The conversation, live
The rules keep changing in the open. This pulls current public headlines about name, image, and likeness, links each to its publisher, and dates them, so the sourcing claim is something you can check right now.
The Conversation
ESPN
About Nike
The Christian Science Monitor
George Mason University Athletics
The Hill
Headlines from public news about name, image, and likeness, refreshed on an interval and linked to the original publishers. This is the public NIL conversation, not Proslync data.
The scoring is published
The ProsMatch engine rolls five weighted domains into one Match Score. The weights are fixed and visible, so a reviewer can see what moved a recommendation before trusting it. A weighting framework can be audited; a black-box ranking cannot.
AASFan-base alignment
25%
SMISSocial media and influence
20%
LGRSLocality and geography
20%
APESAthletic exposure
20%
BVCSBrand values and character
15%
Proslync is independent of the NCAA, the CSC, and individual schools. It issues no eligibility ruling and no legal advice. Public-record links point to third-party sources; a live headline is the publisher’s, not Proslync’s.
