I'm probably wrong here (as usual), but I thought the original impetus for NIL compensation was to take athletes whose name, image, or likeness was already being exploited by the NCAA and member schools through theur use in advertising, tv promotions, merchandise, clothing, video games, etc. and give them a cut of the proceeds. Wasn't that what the original lawsuit(s) was about?
I never knew that it was intended to open the doors to professionalism by allowing the athletes to market their own names, images, and likenesses for all products imaginable whether basketball-related or not.
The previous case did deal with education-related benefits, but two things happened with the Supreme Court's ruling in that case -
(1) The court signaled its absolute hostility to both the NCAA and the concept of amateurism with that 9-0 ruling.
(2) Specific Justices made very clear and encouraging remarks to future plaintiffs. Kavanaugh in particular took a blowtorch to everything about the NCAA, and more or less said he was looking forward to the eventual case that would let them blow the doors off the entire model of college athletics.
Because of those conditions, and because there's another case moving through the courts specifically about the NIL situations we're seeing right now, the NCAA has more or less capitulated in advance. They know these next lawsuits are going to rip a lot of the system apart. So they're basically throwing their hands up and saying "fine, if you don't want us regulating this, then you're on your own." And rightly so, I think. They've spent decades building a model that promoted a semi-competitive framework for college athletics, and the court ruling, the state laws, and the ongoing lawsuits have knocked that all down. Fine. You want it to be pay for play, big money, no rules? Then you get pay for play, big money, no rules.
At least, that's the impression I get. The NCAA Isn't trying to fight anymore, they're trying to survive and protect what they can of their work and their operations.