Yeah, the author literally opened it by noting his office and adviser role to Alabama and then presented him as a neutral party the whole rest of the article. That closing quote from DeBoer was laughable. It read like a Babylon Bee or Onion article.
Saban spends the whole article criticizing collectives and the author busts out this line
"And while Saban wants to see players get their share of the financial pie, he said the only way any of this works is if there's also a commitment on the players' side."
Fair share would be a % of the revenue like the pro sports CBAs. The collectives are peanuts compared to that and he's fighting that piece of it. Whatever else he's considering replacing it with it's clear the way he's talking he wants it linked directly to personal NIL (no collectives) which will be drastically lower numbers.
I can't stand Saban, but I'm particularly bothered by a coach getting filthy rich in a sport and then fighting tooth and nail to keep the players from getting a share. The aristocracy does not like to be threatened...