I think the whole thing will be telling in terms of who has the power within the NCAA. They've already made it clear that they want no part of moving to an employer-employee relationship (or equivalent), and I think that those who shape institutional policy are openly hostile towards collective bargaining. But the direction that things are going in will clearly destabilize the hierarchy within the NCAA itself, and I don't think the big money movers and shakers are going to be happy with that. In a context where the traditional TV rights structure is crumbling how interested do you think the people who pay the bills are in another few FAU/SDSU Final Four matchups in the upcoming years? I feel like if the NCAA isn't smart enough to figure that out on their own they will, at the very least, be hearing about it from people who can figure it out for them.I mean, money for team control is the basic framework of a negotiation for all athletes in all sports.
A lot of hurdles between here and there, but it definitely feels like a CBA with a college player's union is the only happy ending to this.
If it becomes a staring contest between the players and the NCAA I feel like you guys will get what you want and the players will bear the burden of restoring order. The stakes for the players are not symmetrically divided, and there will be a lot of pressure from influential third parties that will make it an uphill battle for any group of players who tries to push for meaningful collective bargaining. And then you've got the courts, which I think will generally be inclined to protect the institution of college athletics given the stakes involved.
None of this is going to happen quickly, imo.