Does Social Media Following Actually Drive NIL Value?

Every NIL explainer aimed at recruits and parents says the same thing: build your brand, grow your following, the money follows. termiNIL's own numbers say otherwise. The site's highest-valued quarterback has fewer followers than 4 of the next 24 players on the board, and the player with the single largest following in the group ranks second, not first.

Social media reach is real input into termiNIL's model — it is one of six factors, alongside position base, role, production grade, team and market. The question worth answering with data, rather than assumption, is how much it actually moves the number relative to the other five.

Not much, on the evidence of the position where the model's numbers are largest and the comparisons are cleanest: quarterback.

Does social media following actually drive NIL value?

Line up the top 25 quarterbacks by value against their follower counts and the two orderings barely track.

Julian Sayin tops the position with under a third of Arch Manning's following. Michigan's Bryce Underwood has the second-most followers of any quarterback in the group, 311,460, and ranks 14th by value. Following and value move independently, not together.

Why does the No. 1 quarterback have fewer followers than the No. 2?

Sayin ($6.24M) and Manning ($6.21M) are effectively tied — the gap between them is well under 1%, inside the model's rounding. What separates them isn't reach; Manning's 718,598 followers are more than three times Sayin's 227,445. It's production grade: Sayin grades out at 100 (A+), Manning at 98 (A+), and that marginal edge is enough to hold the top spot despite the follower gap running the other way.

That is the pattern across the six-factor model, laid out in full in termiNIL's valuation methodology explainer: production grade and the team multiplier, which scales with program revenue, brand and market size, do more of the work than social reach. A player can lead the position on value while trailing badly on followers, because grade and team exposure are weighted to matter more.

Is there any relationship between followers and value at all?

A weak one at best. Sorting the same top 25 quarterbacks by follower count instead of value scrambles the list. The player with the median follower count in the group, Utah's Devon Dampier at 67,513, doesn't sit near the middle of the value ranking — he's 19th of 25. If following predicted value, the median follower count would land close to the median value rank, and it doesn't.

The clearest single case is Texas Tech's Brendan Sorsby: 32,952 followers, fewer than 19 of the other 24 quarterbacks in the top 25, and still the No. 6 most valuable quarterback in the model at $5.13M. Grade and team context are carrying that number, not audience size.

Does the same pattern hold outside quarterback?

Mostly. At wide receiver, Ohio State's Jeremiah Smith leads the position in both followers (1,586,372, by far the most of any receiver in the model) and value ($2.89M), so the very top does line up. Two spots down, the pattern breaks the same way it does at quarterback: Miami's Malachi Toney ($2.63M) has 438,816 followers, more than 8 times Texas A&M's Mario Craver's 53,812 — yet Craver is valued at $2.44M, only about 7% below Toney. Both receivers grade out at a perfect 100; an 8-times gap in followers produces less than a tenth of that in value.

What about a player with almost no following?

USC's Jayden Maiava has the fewest followers of any quarterback in termiNIL's top 25, 13,958, roughly 2% of Arch Manning's count. He's still modeled at $4.28M — more than 7 times the FBS quarterback median of $585K. A small following is not a ceiling on value when grade and team exposure are strong enough to carry the number.

So what does move the number?

Mostly two of the six factors: production grade and team multiplier. Grade reflects on-field output, weighted more heavily the more of the offense a player touches, which is why it separates quarterbacks so sharply from each other in the first place. Team multiplier scales with program revenue, brand and market size, and it applies at close to full strength for a starting quarterback regardless of how large his personal following is. Social reach still counts — it's one of six inputs, not zero — but on this evidence it is not the lever most players and their representatives seem to think it is.

The full six-factor breakdown, plus follower counts, grades and rank for every quarterback in the model, is in termiNIL's quarterback rankings and on the termiNIL terminal.

Keep reading