As a competitive measure, that's not a bad solution, but the issue always boils down to what does college football demand from a player in return for their scholarship, etc. It's effectively a job, and if the amateurism horse hasn't bolted, then the door is hanging on by like one rusty bolt, so the NCAA can't (and really... shouldn't) try to reel it back in towards the old days.

I think there are smart enough people involved that you can save the non-revenue sports that the schools would like to save, and most full-ride athletes will have a market value that's very well served by living expenses and a tuition waiver. Just rip off the bandaid with football and basketball.

Player allegiance is to their team most of the time, not a school, not a geographical region, not a fan base. If a leader who was a substantial part of what made the team "the team", then players should be able to go search out a new team.

Coaches contracts have managed to work this out. They stick out their contract or they pay (or get their next school to pay). Schools keep coaches to end of contract or they pay.

I don't want to see players limited in ways coaches aren't. They only get a few years to play college ball, while coaches get decades. Let the players take their best shots. It's crazy now because it's new, things will settle down after a couple seasons. Maybe NIL contracts start looking different to encourage players to stick around 3+ years.