(Disclaimer - as I realize that many of you may already understand this)
The appropriate, approved way to run NIL necessitates NO involvement from the university.
An IU perspective FWIW: I heard Woody interviewed about NIL this week. In summary, he said he's fine with athletes getting paid as long as getting an education and the team are the first priorities. Then he said that he tells recruits and their families that he and his staff will never have any involvement in NIL - that it's not their arena and it won't be under the rules.
This is not a revelation.
So, what is the reason that IU is doing pretty well with NIL/player retention? Not because there's a U Miami-like booster out there, it's because a few media/marketing-savvy alums have designed an NIL collective; a charitable organization that collects NIL money from all corners and distributes it to athletes as per the collective's board decision. So Grace Berger and Race Thompson got nice NIL deals, for example.
And because the NIL pays players for charity work, the collective contributors get to take it as a charitable contribution, and the players get to do something or promote something worthwhile in exchange for the NIL deal. Doing this takes an individual like Ruiz out of the equation, and reduces the chance that a less-savvy kid like Wong will need to 'negotiate' with an individual like Ruiz.
That is not to say that IU's approach is novel or superior; that's just how it seems to be set up when it works and is run within the rules, while still having real impact. IU is not using NIL to 'recruit' but is using the collective for player retention.