Where were they deriving their primary source of income from prior? I thought the anti-athletes big claim was that these guys were already being "paid" in the form of a free education (giggle) and training. So wasn't this already their primary source of income, and now they're just going to potentially be paid more?
It was pretty silly before. No one really cared about the kids' education prior. It was just qualify academically, so you can get on the field and we can cheer you on for your exploits there. There was no grand celebration when a kid got an A for the semester. There was when he scored a TD, however. Most were majoring in advertising/public relations/sports rec/criminology/sociology throwaway majors and guaranteed to graduate as long as they attended class. Big whoop. A pseudo-education just to process them through the football system. Meanwhile, these "men" have been groomed, since they were 17, 16, 15 or even 14, by older men paid millions toward this goal to come to their program and make that program successful.
Sort of like it was for pretty much the entirety of the scholarship era of college football, except, for most of it, the players had to "earn their keep" every year, but they weren't allowed to move on without losing eligibility because ... why exactly?
They always were open to criticism. You guys who have an issue with this, and are taking it out on the players ... you're just friggin' weird.