...
With the inception of so many alternatives to college for high school basketball players, the NCAA is being forced to adapt or die. I think the end game will be paid employees, but I am not sure how I feel about it for various reasons, especially for the athletes that are not going to go pro after college.
I think this could go the other way. With other choices available for the 1-2 and done crowd, the NCAA could tighten the rules to push the game back toward college student athletes.
I'd add rules about NIL at the NCAA level. They are hard to add at a school or even conference level, even when everyone wants them, because they make the offer less attractive than the competitors. Some rules might be:
* Players who are not available to the team, other than for medically certified injury, are not eligible to be paid.
* Players who transfer, other than for graduation, must pay back 1/2 of the NIL received over their entire stay.
90%(?) of NIL money gets paid to escrow accounts, with the balance to be settled upon departure.
In another direction, I'd be fine with rules that pushed back toward *student* athletes. E.g. Freshman don't play. Let them adjust to college life and being a student. Maybe even raise the minimum GPA for Freshman to have continued eligibility to help them actually become students. (Don't like it, go another route.) If Freshman can't play, I'd see if I could legally add no NIL for Freshman.
Whether or not you think this will improve the game depends on what you want to see. I want to see student athletes who play 3-4 years. I'll take the improved offensive and defensive schemes and team play that develops when players are together for years vs. the transitory athletic freaks. I can always watch the NBA for those (and I rarely do). I had a lot of respect for Bo Ryan's teams and methods.