It is a tough subject. In effect, college serves as a minor league (or midway step) for the NFL, NBA, and most sports to some degree. Many of the "star" athletes that have a professional future are NOT attending for academics, which is not to deny that there are those that do want an education (and return after or during their pro careers to complete their degrees).
Of course this is dicey since lots more athletes think they are pro prospects than actually are, and not all that make it to the fringes of professional sports are making huge or lifetime changing earnings. And the vast majority of athletes are never going pro, as the NCAA reminds us.
That said, what makes this tough is also that college sports in large part exists outside "education" - it is a money making and or goodwill generating world of its own, who's mission is difficult to mesh with an "educational" model. Is it fair (I don't know the answer 100%) to generate income by employing someone to earn you money in exchange for an educational opportunity, the chance to grow your "game" and some minimal and or necessary benefits (insurance, food and such)?
College athletics will collapse if schools are ever allowed to pay players whatever they can afford to, as the divergence between the haves and have-nots would widen. Similarly, benefits such as the "moving the parents" and cash incentives would have the same effect. OTH, I find it harder to object to an athlete receiving funds from his jersey or from endorsing the local car dealership, although this too will be more beneficial to the haves than have nots (but the haves already are advantaged by having proven that by their success they have a greater benefit on you future than other schools).
I am interested in seeing how it plays out. I am neither for or against this (or paying athletes) "on principle". Rather, as it plays out, I am interesting in studying the ramifications across the greater playing field.