Yep this is it. Do I like that money has become the main face of collegiate athletics? No. Most people probably don't, even though it always has been anway. The sport has certainly lost some of its perception of innocence, whether it ever truly had it or not. That being said, what has been lost in that regard has been gained in the distribution of competition and talent. In just a couple years, anybody who has been paying close attention can see this. NIL is giving some smaller, but very business savvy and alumni rich schools a puncher's chance on Saturdays waaaay more than before, similar to that of the NFL.
It's kind of funny, as much as athletics have began frontrunning universities' images over academics, in an odd roundabout way NIL stokes the flames of academic performance. Want a better team? Get better players. Want better players? Pay more money. Want more money? Have more or higher earning/successful donors. Want more successful donors? Have better job prospects/innovators/entrepreneurs leaving your university. It's a trickle down effect. The free market is acting like the free market should. Capitalism can be insidious, but sometimes if you take a step back you see a bigger picture. People love to say that there has never been more of a disconnect between a university's athletic department and the actual university, but you could make an argument athletic performance has never been more tied to the performance of the school, student body, and alumni. Competition breeds success.
As a younger millennial, all I've ever known is like the same 3-4 schools passing championships back and forth. I never saw the days of schools in the tier of like SMU or BYU compete for legitimate titles. Now they are once again. And frankly this is just the beginning. The more NIL is around, the less of a grip the SEC blue bloods will have on CFB (even though they'll fight to the death to keep it). I think it's pretty fun.