Southeastern Conference
Power 4Women's Basketball · 16 teams · 173 scored athletes
Last updated: October 22, 2026 · refreshed daily
Avg NIL Score
Teams
LSU Tigers
9 scored players
69.3
Avg
South Carolina Gamecocks
10 scored players
68.5
Avg
Mississippi State Bulldogs
11 scored players
64.3
Avg
Vanderbilt Commodores
9 scored players
63.5
Avg
Tennessee Lady Volunteers
13 scored players
62.3
Avg
Ole Miss Rebels
13 scored players
59.7
Avg
Kentucky Wildcats
8 scored players
58.4
Avg
Oklahoma Sooners
12 scored players
58.1
Avg
Arkansas Razorbacks
7 scored players
57.6
Avg
Georgia Lady Bulldogs
12 scored players
57.1
Avg
Alabama Crimson Tide
15 scored players
57.1
Avg
Texas Longhorns
10 scored players
56.2
Avg
Missouri Tigers
9 scored players
54.6
Avg
Florida Gators
10 scored players
53.8
Avg
Auburn Tigers
13 scored players
46.5
Avg
Texas A&M Aggies
12 scored players
43.5
Avg
Top Athletes
Mikayla Blakes
G · Vanderbilt Commodores
MiLaysia Fulwiley
G · LSU Tigers
Joyce Edwards
F · South Carolina Gamecocks
Jada Williams
G · LSU Tigers
Madison Booker
F · Texas Longhorns
Clara Strack
C · Kentucky Wildcats
Mikaylah Williams
G · LSU Tigers
Doneelah Washington
F · Ole Miss Rebels
Kiyomi McMiller
G · Florida Gators
Aubrey Galvan
G · Vanderbilt Commodores
Methodology
The NILmetrics Score is a 0-100 rating that combines on-court performance, market demand signals, social presence, and risk assessment into a single number. Like Elo for chess or KenPom for basketball, it measures a player's relative standing in the college basketball NIL market — not a guaranteed dollar value or future deal price.
Performance weighs recent box-score production. Market reflects program tier, conference visibility, and demand signals. Social captures verified follower scale. Risk Assessment rewards durable availability over a full sample (a higher score means lower risk). Scores recalculate daily after the overnight game sync, with a full data refresh every Sunday.
Methodology note: women's basketball calibration is developing as the dataset grows. Treat scores as directional while the sample expands.
Read the full methodology →