Trying to sort this out…please amend and correct as needed…
1. The NCAA cannot inhibit athletes from making NIL money or transferring at will.
2. Universities cannot offer financial inducements to players or recruits. (Does this include boosters?)
3. But universities CAN set up “collectives” (which is a very communist word) to provide NIL opportunities and income and to advise/coach athletes on making and managing money.
4. But the teams’ coaches, staff and administrators must not connect the players to those collectives. So the money athletes are offered is theoretically disconnected from their coaches’ evaluations of their production and potential. (This makes sense if Mertz gets an F-150 for his face on a Gainesville Ford billboard. It makes no sense if there are bidding wars as reported.)
5. Criticizing Stricklin, Napier etc. for not paying players enough, or budgeting enough for paying them, is misguided because they cannot do that (although their success depends on it.)
6. Given all of the above, there is no current path for putting players on contracts that control transferring, have non-compete clauses, etc. or induce them to commit to stay for 2-3 years. The university cannot involve the collective in any such agreements.