Yes, the schools are giving them free (though nothing is truly free) tuition, tutors, etc. But I don't see how that matters here; the schools aren't paying the players (at least not directly).
But because the school is giving a scholarship (and all that goes with it), why does that mean a car dealership can't put a point guard in a commercial? Or a grocery store can't pay a wide receiver to tweet about the store? Or a couple volleyball players can't have a podcast with sponsors and a patreon? Or a walk-on TE can't do a spot for the local Applebee's? Or for a softball player (who probably isn't on full scholarship anyway) who wants to go into fashion to start a clothing line?
There are rules in place specifically for basketball and football players (more strict rules for football, of course) that won't allow them to get a job playing their sport until a certain time. Why is allowing these players to get paid in college because of their "celebrity" (for lack of a better word) any worse than allowing the aforementioned Michael Phelps to get paid for swimming even before being in college? Or for tennis players to hit the pro circuit in their teen years? Or for baseball players to go pro after high school?
I struggle to see how letting some kids get money based off of their NIL (when they are clearly public figures) is a bad thing. Or certainly any worse than it is for kids their age (and sometimes younger) to get paid for playing their sport.