I think what has everyone frustrated, though, is that the NILs aren't actually about advertising. The Rock gets paid for his name, image, and likeness when a company actually uses one or more of those things. These offers to high school kids are just payments to come play for that school.
OK, and I can understand that.
But what those people fail to acknowledge is that everyone, at some level, is paid for potential. If not, every contract would be backward-looking and based solely on past performance.
Again, in other sports (soccer, tennis, golf, etc.) there are teen athletes who get endorsement deals when they have not yet won tournaments or titles.
I can still acknowledge that there is some "disguised bull****" running through the current NIL system, particularly in college football. Absolutely.
But I'd also say that...it's going to be incredibly hard to draw lines, and even harder to put the genie back in the bottle. Which is essentially what would happen if any of these Gaytor "ideas" (or other ideas floating around) were enacted.
We could also view it on another level. That compensation (whether direct salary or indirect NIL) is an attempt to compensate for risk and potential injury and the possibility that a particular athletic skill may only last for a short time, or may be impaired to a level where that person is unable to continue and unable to be compensated for it at a higher level.
I see the inconsistencies. I see the hypocrisy. I'm not sure of any fantastic alternative.
By the way...for YEARS...I supported the concept of NCAA TV money and merchandise money being put into a 5-year trust fund that would then start paying out to former college athletes after they left school. That could have gone a long way towards heading off the current NIL-pocalypse.
Now? Good luck.