The universities certainly do not use those individuals to generate the labs and research that I am using. The research money I am using comes from the NSF (National Science Foundation). Unless the lab will specifically benefit the knowledge of any event that occurs during an athletic event (for example, CB3 at the University of Nebraska Lincoln, where I'll have the privilege to be a part of), the athletic department does NOT fund the research.
The problem you're detailing doesn't really deal with the issue of whether athletes should be paid. Rather, it deals with another systemic issue within the universities and the NCAA--an issue that I completely agree with--the demands put on athletes by their universities do everything but ensure that the player is a student first, athlete second. What that problem is, I can't really say. Maybe it's the will to win that drives such high demands. Maybe it's something else entirely. More than likely it's a combination of the will to win and numerous other factors. I agree with you on that.
Like I said, that I'm all for giving athletes a choice for payment. They can either have a scholarship, or they can not have a scholarship but instead receive a stipend. That way, each individual athlete can decide what is going to be more important to him or her after he or she finishes their collegiate career.