Pay to Play?

Suddenly the great "Pay to Play" debate has regained steam in the realm of college sports.  I do not understand fully the whole scheme behind pay to play.  There are a ridiculous amount of obstacles to dodge and decisions to make about this conundrum.  They provide some motivation for avoiding pay to play.  Such thing as "do women athletes get as much as male?", "Do high revenue sport athletes such as football and basketball make the same amount as sports such as tennis or rowing?", "Do high revenue schools have to use pay to play?", and "Do all schools have to pay the same amount?"  The difficult answers to these many questions provide motivation for not even delving into the problem, but there is one other thing which should cause the NCAA to avoid pay to play at all costs.  In an era where college athletes are hounded for accepting illegal benefits, it seems the athletes deserve a little extra pocket change.  They seem to need it...but I mean aren't the athletes receiving a scholarship more times than not?  I mean that's basically being paid to play since a family would be saving an excess of $10,000 or so.  Also, why should athletes deserve monies?  Just because athletes are partaking in an extra-curricular activity they shouldn't get cash.  Shouldn't student council, band members, and art club members earn cash too?  I mean that's extra-curricular, so they need some extra cash.  They don't even get the scholarships as the athletes usually do.  It is foolish, the students do not deserve favoritism simply because of their partaking in sports.  It doesn't make any sense.  The athletes choose to play the sports, so why should they be paid for possibly volunteering?  Stop talking about this nonsense before people start to agree that athletes deserve to earn cash.  When that happens I will be pissed.