There really aren't any in reality, as the NCAA has not done anything, nor shown any inclination to enforce any rules around NIL.
What the current set up does stipulate is that the NIL cannot act on behalf of, or as a representative of, the university officially. That means a coach cannot tell a recruit "we guarantee that if you come here you will get XXX amount of money." What they can say is other players on our team have done well in NIL, you can talk to them. Through back-channels, the collective can then work with the player or their representatives to talk about what might be possible. Also according to the current rules, collectives can't just pay players for showing up on campus. The player must provide a good or service. But that service can be something like showing up to some photo session. The SWARM collective actually takes this part seriously and involves the players in opportunities to meet with fans and do charity activities.
In reality, players are being guaranteed $ for going to a school. Iowa appears to be trying to comply with the rules set forth. The sticking point and kerfuffle during the holiday was the leader of the SWARM collective was asking for similar support of the collective as OSU and Michigan administrations have been doing. OSU and Michigan AD's have been emailing their donors, encouraging them to support their own collectives. Also providing those collectives access to their donor lists. Iowa has been far less willing to share that information because of supposed Title IX concerns. I don't quite understand the Title IX fears by Iowa, I guess it could be construed that since the SWARM is going to spend a lot more money on football players and men's basketball players (because that is where fans want their money to go), that they can't be seen as officially supporting this.
My opinion is that this is a cover for the core issue, which is that in this new model the power of the fundraising and the donor relationship shifts from Iowa and the foundation to the collective. For Iowa to be successful in football (and if football isn't good, the entire department suffers), donors are going to need to spend less directly giving to Iowa and more to the collective to actually get players. There are many people employed in the athletic department and foundation making very good salaries based on owning that relationship with the donors. People are organizations don't just willingly give that up without direction from leadership. OSU and Michigan have decided that they are going to change and embrace this model of players getting compensated and make it easier for their collectives to access their donors. Iowa is not there yet, which is not surprising given Barta's history.
