College athletes are not allowed to just take the easiest courses without any regard towards a degree. Yes, they can take easier majors and easy elective courses. But they have to be working towards a degree. Teams have academic advisors to make sure this is happening.
OK - they cannot completely ignore degree progress over the course of a few years but as you say a) they can take (or be told to take) the easier majors and b) take (or again be told to take) easy elective courses. If you don't think some of the major programs have severe doubts about certain individuals academic success, they you are simply wrong. High schools sometimes graduate these type kids when they really are not performing at a high school level. Major colleges have very special programs which work to get these kids eligible (I forget what the big priate school is that is basically an NCAA eligibility mill) and keep them eligible. The UNC scandal sheds some light on this. I'm not saying the majority of student-athletes are not students first - I'm saying there are kids truly getting taken advantage of - at the individual level - as there "four year ride" sometimes ends up with a bruised body and no degree. It happens - am not trying to provide figures, but no one should think such an outcome never occurs.
As for aligning with the board bigot, I assume most of my blame lies at the feet of white administrators. No idea what could be done or what should be done when a athletically gifted kid gets shuffled through high school, but, similar to the idea of paying these kids, I think eligibility rules need to have room for kids with academic weaknesses as long as the college program demonstrates that they are actually addressing these weaknesses - instead of glossing over best they can by crafting a modern day major in underwater basket weaving.