Let me rephrase myself. What you call "the end result" is what I'm calling into question.
I believe that for most players, compensation is a direct challenge to "the end result," that is, the team-oriented goal. Successful teams are predicated on individuals sacrificing individual short-term goals for collective long-term goals. Compensation undermines the sacrificial prerequisite to greatness. If you don't delay gratification, the "end result" loses its luster and appeal, and thus less worthy of hard work and dedication.
So NIL and any form of automatic compensation not tied to performance (ie bowls, titles, etc.) in effect will diminish greatness because it will ease the "suffering" required for excellent performance. At least the NFL ties compensation to performance. To my knowledge NIL compensation is much less discriminating. Am I wrong on this?