I am genuinely confused by all the consternation over Baylor's signing of James Nnaji. There is no substantive difference between his case and the hundreds of other internationals who are playing college bkb and getting paid quite well for it. The only difference is he was drafted by an NBA team, but he never played in the NBA and never signed a contract. And he never played in college, so under long-established NCAA rules he should be eligible. So what's the difference between his case and the many other internationals — who everyone seems to agree have been a huge boon for college hoops?
If the issue is midseason transfers playing right away and displacing current players, what is the difference between Nnaji and all the other midseason transfers who are going to start playing right away — again, under long-established NCAA rules?
What's different here aren't the eligibility rules post-NIL/House but the incentive of international players to play college ball in the States for multiple times what they can get paid overseas. Either bringing in the international players is good for college hoops, or it's not. (Narrator: It is.) Being drafted by an NBA team you never played for or signed a contract with is not a material difference IMO, by the letter or the spirit of the rules that were in place long before NIL and the House settlement.
So what am I missing?