"maybe, but I don't think it is a reasonable expectation to think it doesn't happen at many many schools or close to everywhere.
Did we all forget the North Carolina phantom class for athletes? Remember the one where it was only available to atheletes of various sports?"
Quite a leap from citing the UNC example of phantom classes and stretching that to include the vast majority of schools are giving away impermissible scholarships. Do you have any evidence, apart from having "no doubt in your mind" that the vast majority of schools are giving away impermissible scholarships? I understand your feelings (well placed in that it seems that cheating has no dire consequences), but where is actual evidence?
As for the thought that 35 players at Vandy and Duke are paying their own way, no, I don't think you can stretch my observation to fit that. Those players (collectively) get 11.7 full COA scholarships, plus whatever all other students are offered as inducements which essentially cut the sticker price. At the 65k local D1 power, I know many kids (recruited walk-ons) who (over the last decade) received minor awards (because the school gives out lots of 1 - 5k scholarships) whose parents were hoping (wishing) that some athletic scholarship would be earned in subsequent years. Most transferred as wishes crashed into the reality of college baseball economics.
If a family has means, has poured money into building skills for 10 years, has a player who a coach has convinced is wanted (but for zero money), who has hopes that the player will succeed, then, yes, they will pay the price (the same as a non-athlete's family will sacrifice to pay the tuition for that "dream" school). Still more families will initially look at the reduction in sticker price and feel elated; reality sets in when even with the reduction, the family still owes 30k per year (again, the same as a non-athlete's family).
Some (southern) schools have state programs (open to all state residents) (e.g., HOPE) which essentially bring down the sticker price - but the awards are without regard to athletic skills. These types of programs put those schools at an economic advantage when compared to schools in states without such generous programs.
Coaches are masters at manipulating economics; each has his magic dust - some offer small up front minimum scholarships with talk of larger grants In future years (left unsaid is what benchmarks must be met to earn the increase); others will cut seniors to zero (can't transfer, wasn't drafted as a junior, no downside); others use the revolving door (don't produce, leave). Whatever method each coach uses, most of the time the field tilts towards the coach and away from the player and family.
Each type of FA has its own risks: athletic scholarships (perform on the field or it's gone), academic scholarships (perform in the classroom while having a full time job or it's gone), or need-based (family has a good financial year and it's gone).