To be honest, I don't think anybody outside the program really knows much. A lot of the details are not publicly reported.
But, somebody the other day here put the situation into some fair context in my opinion (I can't remember who it was, but if anyone else does, we can tag them for credit) - we have a fair amount of anecdotal evidence that suggests Nebraska is in a strong and competitive position with NIL, and we have virtually no evidence to suggest they're not. "Strong and competitive" can of course be interpreted, but the general narrative has been that there's very little concern of Nebraska being able to compete at a high level from an NIL standpoint.
And then
@Mavric shared this the other day which I thought was interesting. Sean Callahan said the following a couple of days ago when someone asked him a snarky NIL question, and Sean probably has more knowledge of the situation than most anyone else who is willing to talk about it.
So, anecdotal evidence of it being good, virtually no evidence of it being bad. If one were to take a stand either way there is at least some substance to the former. Most of the criticisms or questions I've seen about NIL have been rooted in discontent regarding the production on the field, but I don't think that's necessarily a direct indictment on NIL. Could be bad talent identification, bad coaching, or perhaps even Nebraska's recruitment ceiling is just a bit lower than preferred right now because the program has been in a rut for so long. Money is just part of the equation.