The name, image and likeness saga has dominated the college sports landscape during the off-season ever since the practice was approved nearly two years ago.

Pair NIL with relaxed transfer portal rules and college sports has become even more of a Wild West show with athletes jumping schools at a prodigious rate.

Is there any way to make sense of it all?

Matt Brown, who provides in-depth college sports coverage in his popular online newsletter, Extra Points, was a guest on Ben Criddle’s ESPN 960 BYU Sports radio show this week and discussed what might be done about the mess created by NIL.

“There are two paths,” Brown said. “You can get the federal government to pass a law that will preempt all of the state level NIL laws and make a uniform standard that says the federal government or the NCAA has the authority to impose X, Y or Z regulation. It would also says athletes are not employees. That’s what the NCAA wants, that’s what most athletic directors want and that’s what university presidents want. Is it what lawmakers want? Maybe not so much. You never know with Congress.

“The other thing you can do is say, all right, we’re going to stop pretending these guys are amateurs and collective bargain with them. That gives you an anti-trust exemption and you can haggle on a set of rules like you have for the professionals. That’s something that coaches would like to do. University presidents absolutely do not want that to happen.”

Brown added, “There are only two pathways. Everything else is now legally off the table. If one of those two things don’t happen, there’s nothing anybody in Indianapolis (the NCAA) can do about NIL, because the state laws won’t let them.”

Both paths are fraught with complications. Right now, 32 states already have laws in place for NIL. Brown pointed out that Arkansas and Oklahoma have made adjustments to their laws that basically gives schools what amounts to diplomatic immunity from the NCAA if that organization wanted to regulate NIL.

State lawmakers would undoubtedly chafe at any attempt from the federal government to regulate NIL, which would probably lead to a long, drawn out process while more and more collectives entice athletes with obscene amounts of money from questionable resources.

Several federal bills — the “Student-Athlete Level Playing Field Act” and the “Student-Athlete Equity Act” for example — have been introduced but have not gained much traction. However, some of these bills that were introduced three years ago have been re-introduced as interest level grows in figuring out a way to govern NIL.

The NCAA has shown over the years to be pretty much inept at enforcing rules, so perhaps another group would have to take on the assignment of regulating the NIL landscape should a federal law pass.

The second option, which would essentially make college sports just like the professional game, has its drawbacks as well.

NCAA President Charlie Baker warned athletic directors this week that college athletes don’t want to become employees. The implication was that employees can get fired. Discussions about the transfer portal usually center around an athlete choosing to leave a school for greener pastures, but there are also plenty of instances where a coach, fresh off of pulling an experienced offensive tackle or wide receiver from the transfer portal, has told a player he’d be better off somewhere else. Protection for these athletes is a consideration.

Coaches have to be careful about what they say when it comes to NIL. Last year, BYU coach Kalani Sitake made a tongue-in-cheek comment on a national radio show wondering if a college athlete should have a ton of money in their bank account. He was blasted over social media for daring to attempt to limit what an athlete can make.

Just last week, Utah’s Kyle Whittingham made careful comments about how NIL and the transfer portal have changed college football. The pressure to keep up with the Joneses has never been greater.

“It’s either adapt or get left behind,” Whittingham said.

Newsletter