Attitude on Paying Collegiate Athletes and Draft Eligibility

Today's blog was written by Robert Dean. Robert is a senior Biology major at the University of Notre Dame and a student in the Social Foundations of Coaching course taught by Play Like a Champion Today Founding Director Professor Clark Power and Program Director Kristin Sheehan. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author, and not of the Play Like a Champion Today Program.

As an incoming freshman I remember supporting the idea of paying collegiate athletes. Having researched the revenue that major sports programs generate, I was adamant about the idea of sharing this income with the athletes that provide the “entertainment” that people pay to watch. I believed that schools were essentially robbing their athletes of a significant amount of money that they deserved, and were exploiting them in what I deemed to be an archaic system.

photo courtesy of forbes.com

Yet, four years later I could not disagree with my younger-self more. I firmly believe that collegiate athletes receive benefits that far exceed the necessary obligation of their respective universities. By attending some of the most prestigious universities in the country, collegiate athletes are given myriad opportunities. Not only do they obtain an education that will provide them with knowledge and experiences to last a lifetime, but they will also have the opportunity to develop friendships and other relationships. Finally, and most importantly, attending college provides eighteen year old adolescents the opportunity to mature both athletically and personally. Through the guidance of coaches and teachers around them, college provides athletes an invaluable growth opportunity. The combination of these experiences far exceeds any monetary reward that the universities could ever provide, and also helps to make each athlete into a better member of society.

photo courtesy of  nytimes.com

However, I must also note that I believe that the debate surrounding paying college athletes directly coincides with the argument involving when to allow student-athletes to become professional athletes. While I believe that collegiate athletes do not need to receive additional monetary benefits, I also believe that athletes should be allowed the opportunity to turn professional in any sport prior to college. If a high-schooler is talented enough to play a professional sport, and also has no interest in furthering themselves through the college experience, the laws of sports should not prevent them from living out their dreams. I believe that athletes should be allowed to become a professional prior to college, but once they are committed to competing collegiately they should be forced to finish their degree before they are allowed to become professional. In this system, athletes would be forced to either completely engage themselves in the collegiate experience and earn a degree, or chose to not play a collegiate sport. 

Put the Student Back in Student-Athlete

Today's blog was written by Noah. Noah is a sophomore computer science major and a student in the Social Foundations of Coaching, a course taught by Play Like a Champion founding director Professor Clark Power and Program Director Kristin Sheehan. 

As stories pour in from Columbia, Missouri, it is difficult to draw something positive from what is seen. Students receiving death threats, reporters being attacked—an entire college campus on edge. With all of the issues stirring, I want to focus not on the overwhelming problems in play on all sides, but on what we can draw from this experience.

As a disclaimer, I do not know whether Mr. Wolfe’s decisions deserved the sort of outrage that has ensued at the University of Missouri. I do not wish to make this story about defending Mr. Wolfe. I am not promoting what the Mizzou students have done. This is in no way a promotion of Concerned Students 1950. This is not an article about racism. I wish to make it about a decision made by one man who, in a time of adversity, stood up for those who look up to him so much: University of Missouri head football coach Gary Pinkel.

When we see college athletes, on our own campus or on TV, we do not look at them as students. Do you really look at, for example, Cardale Jones and wonder how he is doing in his math class? Probably not. I never have. The things about modern college athletics is the giant rift between the average football student-athlete and the average student is growing at an alarming rate. At some universities, students are given special housing, special classes, special dining privileges—I am not arguing that any of this is wrong, I am just saying that it exists and further pushes the football player from the student body. You see them play on Saturday and rarely think of them as students. They are often better-known representatives of a university than the president or board of trustees; they have an immeasurable impact. That being said, their influence is dampened and they are often told to not make rash decisions, to not say something that may be deemed extreme or contrary, to not embarrass the university, to always present themselves in a clean image. With this, I would ask if then they are really even treated as students. College is a time when young people have the opportunity to try new things and, as would be expected, mess up. A time to be right and a time to be wrong. A time to make something of yourself. A time to define yourself beyond just a degree and a number. A time to become yourself.

In my opinion, Gary Pinkel, the man “in charge” of the players did exactly what he should have when the players said they wanted to boycott the game. He did nothing. He treated them as students. He treated them as people who can make their own decisions and portray themselves as they deem appropriate. Although disagreements arise over whether what they did was justified or exceeded acceptable limits, they have just as much a right to a voice on that campus as any other student.

This is a step forward. I hope football players and other student-athletes are encouraged to get more involved in the daily life of their universities, although not in such a dramatic manner. Whatever happens in Missouri over the next few months, one thing is for certain: Coach Pinkel sent a message. A message that will reverberate throughout the entire college football landscape. It seems ridiculously simple.

Student-athletes are students.

Athletics vs. Academics

Today's blog post is written by Play Like a Champion founder and co-director Professor Clark Power.  The article was originally featured in the Huffington Post.  

Mary Willingham's stunning charges that 60 percent of the University of North Carolina's (UNC) football and basketball players read below the 8th grade level, and eight percent to 10 percent read at or below a third grade level, have reignited questions and controversies, not only around North Carolina's beleaguered efforts to restore its academic reputation, but about college athletics more generally. Although some members of the UNC community have questioned Willingham's data, there is no denying the fraught relationship between big-time college athletics and colleges' academic mission.

From the very beginning of intercollegiate athletics, the pursuit of athletic success has forced compromises with academic integrity. In spite of the best of intentions, over a hundred years of attempts to check encroachments of intercollegiate athletic programs on colleges' academic standards have floundered. We are in the midst of the latest, and what many believe is the most promising, of these reforms, the NCAA's institution of the Academic Progress Rate (APR) legislation in 2004. The late Myles Brand, who introduced the APR in 2004 as President of the NCAA, called it "the most far-reaching effort of its kind." This legislation requires that institutions ensure that their athletes meet yearly benchmarks for progress toward graduation, or face team sanctions.

The evidence suggests that the APR legislation is achieving its intended goal of improving graduation rates, particularly among athletes playing the high revenue sports of basketball and football. On the other hand, research by the University of South Carolina's Collegiate Sports Research Institute (CSRI) indicates that the picture is not as rosy as it first may appear. The CSRI reports that Football Bowl Series (FBS) colleges graduate 18 percent fewer football players than non-athletes, and 24 percent fewer African American football players. The CSRI report also notes that conferences vary to the extent in which they graduate their football players, with the major conferences faring the worst.

Even if the APR legislation succeeds in eliminating the gap between the graduations rates of football and basketball players and those of the non-athlete population, concerns raised by Willingham about the quality of athletes' education linger. The documentary, Schooled: The Price of College Sports, raises disturbing questions about the tactics used to keep up APRs. In the documentary, Dominque Foxworth, a graduate of Maryland, and the President of the NFL Players' Association notes, "Your [college's] challenge is to get them eligible; it's not about educating them."

To be fair, thanks to the dedicated services of academic support personnel, many athletes do receive an education that was not available to them in high school or grade school. Yet, many athletes lack the background and motivation to be successful, even with extensive tutoring. While support staff and dedicated faculty can provide high quality remedial programs, they cannot do athletes classwork for them. Pressures to cheat and engage in academic fraud mount as unprepared student athletes are held to the same standards as other students.

We are not doing student athletes a favor by admitting them into academic programs that they are not qualified for. Many of those who struggle to maintain eligibility come from poor families. Growing inequality in the U.S. has led to a worsening achievement gap that makes it increasingly difficult for poor students to receive the education that they need to realize the American dream of working their way out of poverty.

If college administrators and boards of trustees insist upon admitting student-athletes who are not yet ready to do college work, then in all fairness, non-degree programs ought to be established for helping these student-athletes to get the education they missed. Furthermore, if college presidents are fully committed to upholding academic standards and providing their weakest students with real education, they need to involve their faculty and academic support specialists, like Willingham, to far a far greater extent than most do at present. The APR reform, which was undertaken without their input, is creating a whole new set of problems. Faculty ought to be given responsibility for setting and overseeing admissions criteria and maintaining quality remedial, as well as conventional educational programs.

Playing Until The Whistle

Today's blog entry was written by Paul Jones. Paul is a psychology student at Purdue North Central which is a regional campus of Purdue University. Paul is interning with Play Like A Champion this fall. Paul has a passion for sports and an eagerness to learn which makes him the perfect fit for our team. Paul was a key player in our Sports Leadership conference this June and during this semester, he is assisting with Play Like A Champion’s research, helping with our social media, leading several ongoing special projects and learning our curriculum of coach education. Paul is a “champion” to our program.

As an athlete you are told to play your hardest and play until you hear the whistle.  There is a difference between playing hard and playing dirty and intentionally injuring another player.  A prime example from this weekends collegiate football games is from October 3rd, when The University of Texas took on Iowa State University in a tight game where both teams played hard until the bitter end, and where both coaches objected to the officiating.

In the third quarter, Texas scored on a run from a couple of yards out, but after the play Texas was penalized 15 yards when wide receiver Mike Davis threw a low block on ISU defensive back, Deon Broomfield.  The play called for the wide receivers to block the defensive backs.  The replays clearly show the Texas back clearly crossing the goal line as other players from Texas signal and celebrate a touchdown.  As the celebration started, Broomfield slowed down, but that did not stop Davis from diving low into the knees of Broomfield. 

After the game, the defensive back, Broomfield, took to Twitter and said, "Mike Davis really tried to take me out." Davis responded on Twitter saying, "I play to the whistle ….. Sorry I was taught that."  Yes, it can get loud in a packed stadium, but regardless of the volume of the whistle, the play had clearly stopped and there is no need to attack a player when he is so far from the action of the game.  I am all for giving your all during the game and support the players who do so, but on a play like that, there is no need.  He wasn't playing to the whistle, he was putting another athlete at risk of serious injury. It was a good call by the officials, some are even calling for a harsher penalty, but the coach of Texas, Mack Brown, stood by his player and said, "He couldn’t hear (the whistle), There’s 70,000 people screaming their guts out."  He later said that he “thought it was competing.”  This is in a time where players are being penalized and suspended for "targeting" other players and this looked like he was targeting.  The Big 12 reprimanded Davis, but did not issue a suspension. The only punishment that can follow now would come from the Texas team itself. 

Here at Play Like A Champion Today, we teach building character through sports, and we expect the coaches to model good character as well.  It would have shown strength and character for Davis to admit that he was wrong. It would have shown good character to step up and say that he is not that kind of player and would play better next time. (Instead, he stated that in a similar situation, he would do the same thing again.)  It also would have displayed better character if Coach Brown had handled Davis's actions in a different manner.  At Play Like A Champion Today we work on winning the right way. When the final whistle blew last week, Texas won the game, but they did not win the right way.

The Dallas Morning News has more information on the game and the ensuing controversy here.

Where do our Priorities Lie?

Play Like a Champion Director Clark Power offers some insight on the current storm at Rutgers, and how it reflects the current state of college athletics.

Once again President Robert Barachi is on the hot seat. He chose Julie Hermann as Rutgers' new Athletic Director in a move designed to restore integrity to Rutgers' beleaguered athletic department. Hermann replaces Tim Pernetti, who resigned under pressure for not responding more decisively to a videotape showing basketball coach, Mike Rice shoving his players, throwing basketballs at their heads, and berating them with slurs. Maybe Barachi wishes he had Pernetti back. Hermann, it appears, may have been abusive herself, something that Rutgers' search committee was unaware of when they hired her. The search committee, in fact, viewed Hermann as the answer to an athletic department culture more protective of coaches than players. In a press release announcing the search committee's decision, Kate Sweeney, the co-chair, noted that the "committee was particularly impressed with Julie Hermann's student-centered approach to athletics."

Less than two weeks after Herrmann's selection, Hermann's "student-centered approach to athletics" was challenged in a New Jersey Star-Ledger story, which published a copy of 16-year-old letter written by former student athletes, who alleged that they suffered "unbearable mental cruelty" while Hermann was their volleyball coach. Players recalled reading that letter to Hermann and the women's athletic director, Joan Cronan, in an intense and uncomfortable meeting. Hermann denies knowing about that letter. She also denies the allegation in the letter that she called her players "whores, alcoholics and learning disabled." "For sure, I was an intense coach," she explained, "but there is a vast difference between high intensity and abusive behavior."

Cronan couldn't have been too bothered by the student athletes' discontent because Hermann went on to become an assistant coach for USA Volleyball before becoming an Assistant Athletic Director at the University of Louisville. Louisville Athletic Director, Tom Jurich, who hired Hermann admits knowing that "things didn't end well at Tennessee" but that "everything was clear sailing" after speaking with the AD at Tennessee and the coach of the Olympic Team under whom Hermann coached while still at Tennessee. He admitted, "She is intense" but added, "I don't know a coach who isn't."

Kim Tibbits, Hermann' assistant coach at Tennessee upholds Hermann's side of the story, "I was by Julie's side in every meeting and every practice, and she never did what they're saying. What they are saying is not true. She was the most supportive coach. She loved those kids. What I'm hearing and seeing now is just shocking." Cronan said that couldn't recall the letter itself or the high drama of the team meeting that precipitated Hermann's departure. She does remember, however, that the players were somewhat "disgruntled." But she attributed their displeasure as due to "frustration" at their team's lack of athletic success.

Those who defend Hermann, including Hermann herself, see her as the real victim in all of this. Without a videotape like the one that led to Rice's demise there is no way of verifying the players' story. All we have is the testimony of the student athletes themselves, all of whom received counseling following their unanimous expression of "irreconcilable differences with their coach." The only uncontroverted part of this unfolding story is that none of the administrators, who vetted Hermann as she rose up the administrative ladder, ever bothered to ask her players why "things didn't turn out well" at Tennessee.

If we can learn anything from this latest Rutgers controversy, it is that in a "student-centered" athletic environment, the student athletes ought to be consulted and taken seriously, particularly when allegations of abuse arise. Students may well be in the best position to help the athletic community to determine the difference between being intense and being abusive.