Why did you ignore the fact from the article that people do pay to watch (it's one of the most watched events in the world) it's just that that money doesn't reach the athletes? Not sure which pokemon represents that
A quick Google search suggests that the Olympics feature about 10k athletes in summer games and 3k in winter games - 2-3 orders of magnitude more than the typical 20-30 players on staff at a soccer club. I wouldn't be surprised if the wage gap was even more crass than those numbers suggest, but it shows that major spectator sports are an entirely different game.
1) it entirely depends on the prize and the financing infrastructure around it
2) athletes can participate in other competitions besides the Olympics
They can, but almost none of them are even remotely as popular as the Olympics. The only exceptions are in massive sports (football, in the US american football, hockey, basketball; in countries like India cricket; tennis, F1). For every other sport, the Olympics are the pinnacle and nothing is even remotely comparable.
2) yeah, but who watches those? and if there's nobody watching then there's not much money in it
Sure, an actual clown will get paid a tad better than zero by their circus, but they don't have the upside of a potential lucrative clown shoe sponsorship deal if they win.
TL;DR: these athletes knew the deal before they went in, and shouldn't act victim when they have to show their butts on only fans because their gamble didn't land.
Where is anybody "acting" victim? Isn't choosing to open an OnlyFans and posting on it to make rent and travel money the opposite of playing victim since they're taking agency over their situation?