I tend to agree and used to think that myself.
But pay-for-play NIL could change how universities view giving student-athletes employee status. The current form of NIL is forcing schools to divert booster donations to NIL Collectives. Sure Big10 & SEC schools can afford to do so, but even among Big10 and SEC schools the Collective playing field isn't level. There's a huge difference between Texas, Texas A&M, Ohio State, Michigan, etc. vs. Iowa, Indiana, Missouri, Mississippi, etc.
If athletes are employees, benefits would likely be collectively bargained at a conference level, so there might be a roster salary cap or set salary schedule based on position, starter status, etc.
Employee status might become the best way to bring Collective monies back into university coffers and could level the talent playing field if a salary structure is created. It might also limit the transfer portal activity if student-athletes sign multi-year contracts.