An organization that makes billions of dollars pays it's employees in classes. That's the reality that can't be avoided.
I get the notions of maintaining competitive balance, and minor sports, , and the general impracticality of it all. But that's an easy call for us to make, because we're not the people who are doing a job worth millions of dollars for 2 years of unwanted courses at a state university.
It's just selfishness on our own part. We like watching college sports. We like balance. Paying people a fair wage might ruin that.
And maybe in principle this is similar to High-school in some way. But the difference in scale makes them completely different practically speaking. It's billions of dollars, and not only do they make billions, they created a litany of rules making sure the players can't get anything from it.
Is there anything else like this in the world?
The only thing completely true about your statement is that there is indeed nothing in the world that compares to the U.S.'s collegiate athletics system (or it's University systems for that matter) There's nothing in the world that compares to it's high school athletics programs either. The available offerings for students to participate and develop their athletic skills in leagues tied to schools extends down to middle and even primary. Collegiate athletics is an extension of this, and quite the opposite of how you're trying to portray it, it's a benefit to all concerned. Are the rules regarding maintaining amateur status, recruitment, etc nit-picky? Sure they are. If they weren't the system wouldn't have developed to the degree and scope it has. Anyone not agreeing with the system is entirely free to not participate in it and choose another avenue of participation, development, or training.
You keep stating that college sports "makes billions". That's a disingenuous way to put it. They do generate billions in revenue, but only a very small percentage of university sports teams actually turn any kind of profit at all, and only a handful do so for any length of time. The vast majority operate in the red. When a particular sport does turn a profit the money is usually first spread within the athletic department to fund other sports and University at large. The money spent on athletes for travel, coaches and assistant coaches salaries, facilities, maintenance, recruiting, etc etc is astronomical and eats up most revenue for even the most successful programs.
This money spent (for development, training, travel, and stage where they can showcase their skills) dwarfs that which is spent on other students, the majority of which are funding their own educations on the notion that it too will benefit them when they also "go pro" and in their particular fields. The fact that nobody is going to pay to see an engineering student study as a from of entertainment but they will pay to see a player or team play is beside the point when you consider the money spent on that player-student. The student-athlete, even those not an any scholarship at all, enjoy free benefits well up-and above those that aren't just for the opportunity to play their chosen sport, and almost every one of those benefits cost a great deal of money. Why should't revenue generated by the sport they play help fund it?
The money-level running through college sports may seem like big "business money" to you, and of course they must budget, account-for, and operate in a business-llke manner, but it's not a business. If it were most collegiate-level programs wouldn't get out of the planning stage to exist in the first place and most of those that did would have folded long ago.
You could argue that there's no place for athletics in college, that it's only a place for academics. Well, those schools exist as well. There are also other avenues for player development in the hopes of achieving pro-level skills and attention AND be paid something, especially if that sport is hockey (which is the case here).