I hear ya Terry. It has been that way for along time.
I look at it two ways. I forget the player that it was, at Texas I do believe. He actually got investigated and suspended for two games I believe, just for using somebody's cell phone. Then, theres the Olympic gold medalist in snowboarding, that since he took money from Home Depot to go to the games in Utah (plane ticket), he lost his eligibilty to attend Colorado for football. He was considered a "pro" since he took the money for the airfare. And, the list goes on and on.
You are right, it doesn't make sense. They got these guys on such a short leash, that it is hypocritical, when they investigate a program. The schools actually pay the players, for "work" at the school. But, that is legit, but to go and do advertising, endorsements, or such is construde as a "payoff". So, which is it. No cash, ok to cash in the right circumstances, or ok to all cash? I guess, it depends on the program is basically what it all boils down too.
All schools are dirty, it's how dirty, and "is the NCAA looking?" Like, to pay a guy to play for you, would somehow rob SMU, Baylor, Northwestern, Vanderbuilt of talent. Ya right. If anything, they could actually get some marquee players. Time to ditch the NCAA, and go to a pay for play. All the organizing body would have to do, is set hard limits. Then, if you get caught cheating, you are banned from bowl games. Hard cap limit for the team, and a hard cap limit for the players per year. Set it straight up, legit, and have open account books. Plain, simple, and open.
