The writer doesn't make much of argument. Comparing NCAA athletic scholarships to the reserve clause system fails on a lot of different levels both legally and ethically. The reserve question was more about the nature of the contracts themselves. The players were paid, what mattered was how they could market themselves to teams and the reserve system prevented them from doing so. Nothing is stopping any athlete in the NCAA from marketing themselves as athletes. If they want to skip college and go directly to a professional league, they have that freedom.
Also, 2,000 dollars is just money added to the full cost of attendance scholarships. It's not much different than getting a student loan and have the loan amount based upon the student financial need. It's certainly not anything close to a pay-for-play system, which is something based upon ability and participation and it certainly doesn't prevent players from independently marketing themselves at the professional level.
