A quick search of “UCLA” on Cameo – a website where fans can pay for customized video messages from celebrities – and you’re greeted with the winning smile of UCLA men’s basketball coach Mick Cronin.

Scroll a little further, and you’re suddenly in the company of UCLA gymnastics’ Emma Malabuyo, football’s Dorian Thompson-Robinson and men’s basketball’s Jaime Jaquez Jr.

Ever since the new name, image and likeness laws were implemented 14 months ago, college coaches and staff are no longer the only ones profiting off the on-field action. Student-athletes are now forging agreements with businesses ranging from well-known athletics brands to HVAC companies. Cameo is just one of the countless money-making opportunities that has become so prolific.

Players that haven’t even started their collegiate careers are finding chances to profit off their personal brands. Freshman guard Amari Bailey has yet to play a minute for UCLA men’s basketball, but his Instagram profile features ads for clothing companies and energy drinks.

And Bailey isn’t the only one. Visit the social media of any player, and odds are, you’ll find some kind of product endorsement or advertisement.

But what does all this mean?

It demonstrates that the goal of getting college athletes compensation for their work has been a success. According to Opendorse – a company that helps athletes facilitate NIL deals – approximately $917 million was made by athletes from various deals in the first year that NIL laws went into effect.

As controversy swirled around Reggie Bush’s Heisman Trophy and high-profile court cases brought conversations about pay-for-play to the national forefront, NIL seems to have found a comfortable middle ground. A uniform wage across all sports is a challenge for universities when the majority of their athletics revenue comes from football and basketball, but the fight for some level of payment was reaching a breaking point.

Now, athletes of revenue and nonrevenue sports alike are getting their chance. Nike’s initial foray into the NIL world was not with a football or basketball player but with UCLA women’s soccer’s Reilyn Turner.

However, that doesn’t mean the NIL environment going forward will be without obstacles, nor does it mean the system will stagnate.

This year, the formation of NIL collectives – independent groups typically created by alumni of specific universities to facilitate NIL deals for their athletes – has created a triangle of conflict. The relationships between these collectives, schools and the NCAA led to a decision by the NCAA in May to formally clarify that these collectives are considered boosters and thus cannot be involved in any level of recruitment, be it of high school athletes or those in the transfer portal.

That policy was implemented to curb the issue of collectives using NIL deals to entice players to join their respective schools in what was effectively a pseudo pay-for-play scheme, something expressly forbidden by the NCAA.

USC, for example, recently had a collective formed called “Student Body Right,” which aims to provide some level of salary to all academically eligible USC football players, so long as they meet a benchmark level of community service and charity work. While this collective would have to abide by NCAA rules and stay out of recruitment, its mere existence would likely be enticing for players that want to be paid.

Clearly, the allowance of NIL into the collegiate athletics sphere hasn’t been a cut-and-dry affair.

That doesn’t mean collectives can’t still assist players in finding deals and profiting off their talents, but it does clarify what collectives are and what the focus of NIL should be. Considering that we’re only 14 months into the age of NIL, it’s almost a guarantee that the NCAA will need to make more revisions to prevent enthusiastic schools, businesses or third parties from taking advantage of a regulatory gray area.

Independent of potential pay-for-play violations, there’s still room to grow in the NIL sphere. The announcement of EA Sports College Football ’24 – a revival of a football video game that was discontinued in 2013 – could spell more opportunity for college football players that opt to allow their likenesses in the game and on the cover.

With over 460,000 athletes across the NCAA, there’s sure to be new ideas to capitalize on the opportunities NIL affords. In August, UCLA football players created the Westwood NIL Club, a GoFundMe-esque website that allows Bruin fans to directly connect with and support the team. As of Aug. 31, the club had 30 members pledging $1,000 for 10% of the monthly goal.

With so much room to maneuver, both creativity and controversy are sure to flourish as student-athletes look to profit off their work.

Despite the uncertainty of the future, one thing remains certain: This new era of collegiate athletics is the best it’s ever been for the student-athletes themselves.