http://www.wralsportsfan.com/unc/story/10231715/
Some of you have strong opinions about the ncaa too.... thought you might enjoy reading this
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Like. Is there a petition? Where can I sign up? 
“I think that money interest has gotten such a control over the universities and athletics that no one is in charge,” Bill Friday former UNC System president said.
"Bill Friday, who was president of the UNC System for 30 years, said the NCAA cannot be removed without having something to take its place. He admitted that he nor others have the answer just yet"
A couple thoughts
1) If this guy presided over the UNC system for 30 years and HE can't change it that tells me there is a big problem that nobody wants to address while in they are in office.
2) Weren't we just talking about replacing or creating a new association that would do away with the NCAA in a recent HSBBWeb thread? It is about money and power and the NCAA has both. No college has figured a way to get their money, power and academic priorities back in order. Once some of the colleges start banding together will they realize the NCAA can't function without them. Some conference or division has to be the first. Who will it be? Possibly the schools with the least amount to lose, and the least amount of ties to the NCAA.
BOF,
This all sounds vaguely familiar!
“I think that money interest has gotten such a control over the universities and athletics that no one is in charge,” Bill Friday former UNC System president said.
"Bill Friday, who was president of the UNC System for 30 years, said the NCAA cannot be removed without having something to take its place. He admitted that he nor others have the answer just yet"
A couple thoughts
1) If this guy presided over the UNC system for 30 years and HE can't change it that tells me there is a big problem that nobody wants to address while in they are in office.
2) Weren't we just talking about replacing or creating a new association that would do away with the NCAA in a recent HSBBWeb thread? It is about money and power and the NCAA has both. No college has figured a way to get their money, power and academic priorities back in order. Once some of the colleges start banding together will they realize the NCAA can't function without them. Some conference or division has to be the first. Who will it be? Possibly the schools with the least amount to lose, and the least amount of ties to the NCAA.
BOF,
This all sounds vaguely familiar!
I know it's not this simple, but can't universities enforce their own rules that are more stringent that the NCAA's rules? There is too much money at stake and big school athletics is a significant part of the entertainment industry.
I think nearly all the posters on this site would also dismantle the NCAA and opt for a more honest cop, but there are a lot of people out there that want to watch quasi-professional football, basketball, etc and they don't care about the ethics or morality of the system.
The Ivy League and some others that we don't watch on national television have done a pretty good job of keeping athletics honest.
I think nearly all the posters on this site would also dismantle the NCAA and opt for a more honest cop, but there are a lot of people out there that want to watch quasi-professional football, basketball, etc and they don't care about the ethics or morality of the system.
The Ivy League and some others that we don't watch on national television have done a pretty good job of keeping athletics honest.
quote:but there are a lot of people out there that want to watch quasi-professional football, basketball, etc
In the big picture, that is how college athletics are paid for. Female sports, track and field, and baseball don't make money in a lot of places and the football and men's basketball programs keep the athletic department afloat.
Unless you start cutting out scholarship money and reducing expenses big time, how else do you expect these programs to survive?
Fenwaysouth and I have been talking about this on the side and the fact is that the only “STUDENT/athletes” are DIII, Ivy and possibly Patriot schools students. The only other D1 school that I found that allowed their students to miss or adjust practice based on their academic schedule was Stanford. Granted there are probably others, but I suspect very few. I know a number of players who have been told straight out by their D1 coaches that you can’t take that major here and play baseball. What a travesty!
What goes on in football, particularly in the SEC schools makes me want to puke!
It is a joke and the whole student/athlete concept is broken!
What goes on in football, particularly in the SEC schools makes me want to puke!
It is a joke and the whole student/athlete concept is broken!
quote:Originally posted by Bulldog 19:
Unless you start cutting out scholarship money and reducing expenses big time, how else do you expect these programs to survive?
How did they survive and give out scholoships before the big TV contracts and the surging popularity of those two sports?
BOF--
You're painting two populations with broad brushes.
Having coached D3 football at a selective school, I can assure you not all D3 athletes embody the scholarly virtues you espouse. And there are lots of serious students at major conference schools, even the SEC, who attend those schools precisely because they offer the opportunity to excel at both school and sports.
Just about anywhere you go, regardless of division or conference, you can find knuckleheads blowing off school and you can find great kids doing their best. There may be more or less of one variety or the other in certain sports, certain schools, and certain conferences, but there's enough variation everywhere to make generalizations unreliable.
BTW, that Atlantic magaxine article linked on a related thread last week says the NCAA coined the phrase "student athlete" to protect schools from workman's comp claims for injured athletes. If true, the concept was broken from the beginning.
You're painting two populations with broad brushes.
Having coached D3 football at a selective school, I can assure you not all D3 athletes embody the scholarly virtues you espouse. And there are lots of serious students at major conference schools, even the SEC, who attend those schools precisely because they offer the opportunity to excel at both school and sports.
Just about anywhere you go, regardless of division or conference, you can find knuckleheads blowing off school and you can find great kids doing their best. There may be more or less of one variety or the other in certain sports, certain schools, and certain conferences, but there's enough variation everywhere to make generalizations unreliable.
BTW, that Atlantic magaxine article linked on a related thread last week says the NCAA coined the phrase "student athlete" to protect schools from workman's comp claims for injured athletes. If true, the concept was broken from the beginning.
Swampboy-good points. Very well said and very true.
It's only a matter of time before the BCS boys decide to take things totally in their own hands and leave the NCAA altogether. Think about it-they'd carry the football money, and they'd carry all the major basketball schools, so "March Madness" would cease to be a NCAA deal, and eventually become a BCS deal as non-BCS schools jump ship.
It's only a matter of time before the BCS boys decide to take things totally in their own hands and leave the NCAA altogether. Think about it-they'd carry the football money, and they'd carry all the major basketball schools, so "March Madness" would cease to be a NCAA deal, and eventually become a BCS deal as non-BCS schools jump ship.
quote:How did they survive and give out scholoships before the big TV contracts and the surging popularity of those two sports?
Those scholarships didn't cost as much. You may want to check tuition costs today compared to 20 years ago, 30 years ago.
hokieone, I had this conversation recently as well about the football and basketball leaving the NCAA altogether. What if the NCAA would tell those schools they are out in all sports? And if you're this new athletic association, who do you let in? Duke is a powerhouse in basketball, but awful in football (comparitively). Boise State is becoming a major name in football, but we questioned if they even had basketball? They do, but it's not like their football..
Too much money involved. Replace NCAA and the same problems exist just under a different name.
quote:Swampboy said....Having coached D3 football at a selective school, I can assure you not all D3 athletes embody the scholarly virtues you espouse. And there are lots of serious students at major conference schools, even the SEC, who attend those schools precisely because they offer the opportunity to excel at both school and sports.
Just about anywhere you go, regardless of division or conference, you can find knuckleheads blowing off school and you can find great kids doing their best. There may be more or less of one variety or the other in certain sports, certain schools, and certain conferences, but there's enough variation everywhere to make generalizations unreliable.
True, there are almost always exceptions. But what about the vast majority? How many of your D3 football players were required or advised to change their majors during the recruiting process? How did your D3 football team adjust to their academic demands? THis happens far more in D1 than D3. In our experience, the Ivy, Patriot and D3 schools were fine with an engineering major and baseball player. That says alot about their priorities. The D1 schools that recruited or offered my son told him in so many words he would have to find a better academic fit which really means: "Son, your a smart kid. Read between the lines, and pick a major that will allow you to train, practice and play more baseball".
My issue with this is that most D1 athletes are not given the opportunity to pursue "tougher" majors if they want to. Most can't because there are not enough hours in the week to do both. While the NCAA caps the number of team practice hours, athletes are expected to work on their own (undocumented) outside of formal practice to keep up with teamates and competition. Congrats to those that can play D1 athletics at a high level and pursue a difficult major. There are very few that can, and it is a lot tougher than it needs to be. What about other D1 athletes that have to change their majors to stay on the athletic scholarship ($) and on the team? That is the dirtiest little D1 secret of this whole process, bar none. It is a lot harder for D1 because of the demands the coaches, adminstration, boosters, travel schedule and students put on them....it is clearly about winning games, getting more alumni $$, and getting faculty research $$. If you win at college sports you have brand recognition. Admission requests went sky high at Boston College after Doug Flutie won the Heisman. The research $$ goes to the D1 graduate schools, and the undergraduates are then taught by TAs or graduate assistants while the full professors do their research. Undergraduate education suffers at these schools. The NCAA, D1 University Presidents and D1 ADs are all at fault. But educational erosion continues until tbe power and money is taken away from the NCAA or other changes made. College athletics has become sports entertainment, and the public craves it. As a country I think we've lost sight of what is most important. Our higher education system is a little screwed up if sports is dominating the agenda and budget. JMO, I will remove myself from the soapbox.
Fenway, sometimes I think the reason we get no more than 4 score and twenty years is that we're just incapable of adapting to that much change in one lifetime, so the good Lord lets out out of here and into the better life, where I doubt there is a NCAA or a BCS...although I sure hope there is baseball. An awful lot of modern life looks like somebody took ethics, morals, and caring most about making other lives better, and tossed it all out the window. Thankfully it seems that daily we witness many small acts of kindness to remind us that the big picture isn't necessarily a totally accurate picture.
Reading the thread about the folks working with challenging children reminded me of a Courtroom experience I had a few years ago. I had petitioned to have a lady appointed guardian of her brother. He was almost 50, could not feed, bathe, or clothe himself, couldn't talk or walk, and had been totally dependent upon others his entire life. His sister has fulfilled that role, all the time, ever since their mother died 25 years ago. In signing the Order, the Judge remarked "Mam, this reminds me again that there are indeed angels among us."
The glass is half full...as long as the NCAA ain't pouring...
Reading the thread about the folks working with challenging children reminded me of a Courtroom experience I had a few years ago. I had petitioned to have a lady appointed guardian of her brother. He was almost 50, could not feed, bathe, or clothe himself, couldn't talk or walk, and had been totally dependent upon others his entire life. His sister has fulfilled that role, all the time, ever since their mother died 25 years ago. In signing the Order, the Judge remarked "Mam, this reminds me again that there are indeed angels among us."
The glass is half full...as long as the NCAA ain't pouring...
quote:In the big picture, that is how college athletics are paid for. Female sports, track and field, and baseball don't make money in a lot of places and the football and men's basketball programs keep the athletic department afloat.
If I'm not mistaken; D2 Institutions differentiate themselves from D1 by Marketing their "balanced Academic and Athletic approach." They play fewer games, they require a balance among academic and athletic time spent. They don't, in most instances, field Football programs that earn the big bucks that lead to corruption issues and out of balance athletic vs. academic salaries.
Whatever the answer, currently the NCAA isn't the answer.
quote:They don't, in most instances, field Football programs that earn the big bucks that lead to corruption issues and out of balance athletic vs. academic salaries.
They also don't offer the same athletic scholarship monies that DI schools do.
I'm not saying I like the way things are. I'm just telling everyone the way it is from my perspective having been involved in Division One athletics.
I think we also have to realize that college student-athletes aren't the only ones who have busy lives like some on here would like to think. Musicians are extremely busy with their music and their class schedules. Many students have jobs and some of them even work full-time jobs while pursuing their degree. And they aren't always in cake-walk degrees!
Friday served from 56 to 86 - before the huge national tv contracts etc. I see these ncaa issues as having evolved slowly into the mess it is today. Friday (and others I'm positive) have spoken out over the years about the disparity in coach salary and professor salary. Nobody was listening then. Hopefully people are now.
I didn't know that the ncaa bought the nit tourney in 2005 for 10 years! Very interesting, it's all about the money. (surprise!) It begins with the money the ncaa rakes in when kids pay $60 to register with the clearing house...
(btw, our oldest completed a technical theater degree that required hours of extra work, missed class, and some travel. I never thought he and our youngest would have any common ground in their college experience.... They do: Hunger, exhaustion, soreness, and no time to call their own. Hopefully, they can add a job well done this spring.)
I didn't know that the ncaa bought the nit tourney in 2005 for 10 years! Very interesting, it's all about the money. (surprise!) It begins with the money the ncaa rakes in when kids pay $60 to register with the clearing house...
(btw, our oldest completed a technical theater degree that required hours of extra work, missed class, and some travel. I never thought he and our youngest would have any common ground in their college experience.... They do: Hunger, exhaustion, soreness, and no time to call their own. Hopefully, they can add a job well done this spring.)
Fenway,
I see eye-to-eye with you on many of the debates here and have a great deal of regard for you, but I have to call you out on this one.
To review the bidding:
BOF asserted that the only "STUDENT/athletes" are playing either with or against his son or yours at high academic schools; everyone else, according to him, is perpetrating a travesty of education (except Stanford).
I objected, saying lots of kids at selective schools aren't serious about their studies and lots of players at major conference schools are also serious about their schoolwork.
Thereupon, you entered the pulpit and gave forth a sermon on the difficulty of studying engineering at major D1 programs.
So apparently, you define "STUDENT/athlete" in such a way that includes only those students who major in engineering or another subject whose rigor meets your exquisite standards and excludes students in all other majors regardless of how diligently they study.
Let's examine the consequences of your standard (and of BOF's peculiar standard that academic legitimacy derives from an inability to schedule classes that don't conflict with practice).
Imagine the tables had been turned. What if I had proclaimed, a la BOF, that the only real student/ATHLETES are the ones playing major college ball and what if I had singled out Ivy League baseball players in particular as not being serious ballplayers?
The uproar from you and BOF and all the high academic profile parents would have been deafening. I would have been run off the site for daring to insinuate that everyone playing college ball anywhere isn't equally entitled to identical respect.
I know this is true because I have seen the alacrity with which the elite academic lobby here pounces on any perceived slight against smart-kid baseball, especially smart-kid, cold-weather baseball. (In fact, the only special interest group with comparable intensity is the catchers-parent lobby, which will snuff out even the slightest hint that the catcher might not always be the toughest, most athletic, most valuable player on the field.)
So, I have a question for you. Why is it ok for you and BOF to disparage my son's legitimacy as a student but it's not ok for me to disparage your son's legitimacy as a ballplayer?
I see eye-to-eye with you on many of the debates here and have a great deal of regard for you, but I have to call you out on this one.
To review the bidding:
BOF asserted that the only "STUDENT/athletes" are playing either with or against his son or yours at high academic schools; everyone else, according to him, is perpetrating a travesty of education (except Stanford).
I objected, saying lots of kids at selective schools aren't serious about their studies and lots of players at major conference schools are also serious about their schoolwork.
Thereupon, you entered the pulpit and gave forth a sermon on the difficulty of studying engineering at major D1 programs.
So apparently, you define "STUDENT/athlete" in such a way that includes only those students who major in engineering or another subject whose rigor meets your exquisite standards and excludes students in all other majors regardless of how diligently they study.
Let's examine the consequences of your standard (and of BOF's peculiar standard that academic legitimacy derives from an inability to schedule classes that don't conflict with practice).
Imagine the tables had been turned. What if I had proclaimed, a la BOF, that the only real student/ATHLETES are the ones playing major college ball and what if I had singled out Ivy League baseball players in particular as not being serious ballplayers?
The uproar from you and BOF and all the high academic profile parents would have been deafening. I would have been run off the site for daring to insinuate that everyone playing college ball anywhere isn't equally entitled to identical respect.
I know this is true because I have seen the alacrity with which the elite academic lobby here pounces on any perceived slight against smart-kid baseball, especially smart-kid, cold-weather baseball. (In fact, the only special interest group with comparable intensity is the catchers-parent lobby, which will snuff out even the slightest hint that the catcher might not always be the toughest, most athletic, most valuable player on the field.)
So, I have a question for you. Why is it ok for you and BOF to disparage my son's legitimacy as a student but it's not ok for me to disparage your son's legitimacy as a ballplayer?
Ahhh seems like we struck a nerve here. First I have never disparaged any student/athlete, only the collegiate system as it now stands. I pointed out that I thought that the Ivy/Patriott/DIII model are the only ones working right now. (not perfect of couse) I still believe this. The Stanford reference was just one simple example of many problems associated with college sports, and one that I personally was aware of since my son was primarily recruited by D1 programs and he was interested in taking a more difficult major. (and time consuming because of labs etc) Frankly most of the abuse is on the football and basketball side, which we all know generate all of the revenue.
But the facts are that D1 coaches are paid to win, and don’t give a dam n about educating future Dr’s, Scientists, Biologists, Engineers, etc. I am not sure what the answer is - but the system of EDUCATING our youth who want to play sports is broken. There are some fine student/athletes playing D1 sports but the system that they are doing it in is a travisty.
But the facts are that D1 coaches are paid to win, and don’t give a dam n about educating future Dr’s, Scientists, Biologists, Engineers, etc. I am not sure what the answer is - but the system of EDUCATING our youth who want to play sports is broken. There are some fine student/athletes playing D1 sports but the system that they are doing it in is a travisty.
I think that the generalization that it is almost impossible to be an engineering major and play baseball at a D1 school is correct. There are exceptions, but they are few and far between. Trevor Bauer is a brilliant kid and he couldn't do it at that level. He made the correct, in his case, choice to focus more on the baseball.
I think that the generalization that most D1 baseball coaches will discourage or prohibit players from being engineering majors is correct. There are more exceptions to this than my first statement as the coaches are simply explaining reality to the players in many cases.
More of the coaches that we listened to at college camps gave the impression or directly stated that they would select classes/majors for the players than not. Davis was an exception. They said they'd work with the players in the off season but that in season the players would be expected to work the rest of their schedule around baseball. That seems to be a reasonable accomodation to me.
JMO, but players have to expect to take a bit longer and make sacrifices in any major and even more so in some of the harder majors and also play baseball. Even so, I certainly would like to see more opportunities for players with the sports and academic talent to take difficult majors and also play major sports at the D1 level than currently exist. Of course I'd also like to see politicians who put their constituents ahead of getting votes so good luck there.
Swampboy,
Ivy league students have generally made the choice to not be as serious about baseball. While it is still very difficult they don't have as demanding a game or practice schedule as the top tier D1 baseball schools and the competition on average just isn't as tough. That doesn't mean that a few of them don't go on to professional baseball careers.
The same goes for BOF's son. He's made the choice to attend an excellent academic school with an excellent D3 baseball program but his son isn't going to see the same level of competition he would have seen if he had chosen one of the D1 schools that made offers to him. He's made a choice to be less serious about baseball to use your words, although I doubt very much he thinks he's anything but totally dedicated to the game. Personally, I think he'll hone his game more at this school than he would've at one of the D1 schools he was considering that wouldn't have really given him an opportunity to study engineering.
His son has the ability to play D1 baseball and he has the ability to pursue a difficult major at a top academic school. The two just don't happen to be compatible in most cases.
It is difficult to play D1 baseball and do a good job in any major. Any player who manages it, and many don't, deserves kudos. It just happens to be that much more difficult in some majors, especially those that have a lot of laboratory courses. Been there, done that and I definitely settled for less in sports (strangely enough by attending a stronger sports school as I was a D2 or D3 talent even though I barely made a good D1 team - the weather and the beaches were great though) to attend my preferred academic school.
I think that the generalization that most D1 baseball coaches will discourage or prohibit players from being engineering majors is correct. There are more exceptions to this than my first statement as the coaches are simply explaining reality to the players in many cases.
More of the coaches that we listened to at college camps gave the impression or directly stated that they would select classes/majors for the players than not. Davis was an exception. They said they'd work with the players in the off season but that in season the players would be expected to work the rest of their schedule around baseball. That seems to be a reasonable accomodation to me.
JMO, but players have to expect to take a bit longer and make sacrifices in any major and even more so in some of the harder majors and also play baseball. Even so, I certainly would like to see more opportunities for players with the sports and academic talent to take difficult majors and also play major sports at the D1 level than currently exist. Of course I'd also like to see politicians who put their constituents ahead of getting votes so good luck there.
Swampboy,
Ivy league students have generally made the choice to not be as serious about baseball. While it is still very difficult they don't have as demanding a game or practice schedule as the top tier D1 baseball schools and the competition on average just isn't as tough. That doesn't mean that a few of them don't go on to professional baseball careers.
The same goes for BOF's son. He's made the choice to attend an excellent academic school with an excellent D3 baseball program but his son isn't going to see the same level of competition he would have seen if he had chosen one of the D1 schools that made offers to him. He's made a choice to be less serious about baseball to use your words, although I doubt very much he thinks he's anything but totally dedicated to the game. Personally, I think he'll hone his game more at this school than he would've at one of the D1 schools he was considering that wouldn't have really given him an opportunity to study engineering.
His son has the ability to play D1 baseball and he has the ability to pursue a difficult major at a top academic school. The two just don't happen to be compatible in most cases.
It is difficult to play D1 baseball and do a good job in any major. Any player who manages it, and many don't, deserves kudos. It just happens to be that much more difficult in some majors, especially those that have a lot of laboratory courses. Been there, done that and I definitely settled for less in sports (strangely enough by attending a stronger sports school as I was a D2 or D3 talent even though I barely made a good D1 team - the weather and the beaches were great though) to attend my preferred academic school.
BOF,
Worry less about whether you touched a nerve and more about keeping your story straight. You contradict yourself:
Yes, you did disparage the academic legitimacy of every ball player who goes to a school not on your list.
It reflects poorly on you to pretend you didn't say what you clearly did say. Better just to back away from it as a careless exaggeration.
Worry less about whether you touched a nerve and more about keeping your story straight. You contradict yourself:
quote:Originally posted by BOF:
First I have never disparaged any student/athlete, only the collegiate system as it now stands.
quote:Originally posted by BOF:
[T]he fact is that the only “STUDENT/athletes” are DIII, Ivy and possibly Patriot schools students.
Yes, you did disparage the academic legitimacy of every ball player who goes to a school not on your list.
It reflects poorly on you to pretend you didn't say what you clearly did say. Better just to back away from it as a careless exaggeration.
Swampboy - I think you would be correct in your assessment that the IVY league has lesser quality baseball players man-for-man than scholarship D1s.
The draft proves that professional baseball feels that way - very few IVY players drafted when compared to SEC, PAC 12, ACCESS, and many more. With 28 men rosters, no schollys, shorter seasons, fewer coaches then permitted by NCAA rules, fewer practices then permitted by NCAA rules, no Friday games (all league weekends consist of 2 double headers) and few players who realistically aspire to a pro career, I can't imagine anyone claiming that the IVYs (and the patriot league) present baseball powerhouses.
What they do present are teams whose average SAT scores are well over 2100. For the most part they are better students man-for-man then schools from power baseball conferences.
However, regardless of where a student-athlete goes, combining a rigorous course load, graduating in 4 years, all the while playing baseball (fall, winter, spring and summer) is an incredible accomplishment. All the time made more difficult by the money which drives college sports.
The draft proves that professional baseball feels that way - very few IVY players drafted when compared to SEC, PAC 12, ACCESS, and many more. With 28 men rosters, no schollys, shorter seasons, fewer coaches then permitted by NCAA rules, fewer practices then permitted by NCAA rules, no Friday games (all league weekends consist of 2 double headers) and few players who realistically aspire to a pro career, I can't imagine anyone claiming that the IVYs (and the patriot league) present baseball powerhouses.
What they do present are teams whose average SAT scores are well over 2100. For the most part they are better students man-for-man then schools from power baseball conferences.
However, regardless of where a student-athlete goes, combining a rigorous course load, graduating in 4 years, all the while playing baseball (fall, winter, spring and summer) is an incredible accomplishment. All the time made more difficult by the money which drives college sports.
quote:Originally posted by BOF:
- but the system of EDUCATING our youth who want to play sports is broken. There are some fine student/athletes playing D1 sports but the system that they are doing it in is a travisty.
Well, I think you can take it a step forward and say our entire nation's system of educating our youth – particularly K-12, regardless of sports, is breaking down. Clearly, our government, both state and federal, driven by influence from power bases in the private sector, are progressively de-valuing the education of our youth versus other areas of policy, so why should the business and power structure that is big-time D1 athletics be any different?
Swampboy.
Just one more comment on this. I happen to agree with you that D1 players are student/ATHLETES, and therein lies the problem. They are simply not allowed to reach their full academic potential, and this is a shame.
Late add.
I stand by my statement, the capitalization of the words are a simple way to say that the student/athletes in those conferences are students first, athletes second. (I know a generalization) and that in the major D1 programs the emphasis is the other way around. This does not mean that the athletes in those conferences are not serious about their athletics, nor that the students in the major D1 programs are not serious about their academics. It is where the emphasis is. This is a fact, and you are misguided if you think otherwise.
Just one more comment on this. I happen to agree with you that D1 players are student/ATHLETES, and therein lies the problem. They are simply not allowed to reach their full academic potential, and this is a shame.
Late add.
I stand by my statement, the capitalization of the words are a simple way to say that the student/athletes in those conferences are students first, athletes second. (I know a generalization) and that in the major D1 programs the emphasis is the other way around. This does not mean that the athletes in those conferences are not serious about their athletics, nor that the students in the major D1 programs are not serious about their academics. It is where the emphasis is. This is a fact, and you are misguided if you think otherwise.
CADad is right on.
I have stated that DK was discouraged in taking engineering. I recently got a pm from a parent that their son was going to major in engineering in the same program my son played for and encouraged. But there was no way, at the time that there was any other career son wanted to pursue more than proball (but he was going to college) so that is why he went to where he did.
I suppose coaches have their reasons why they encourage some and not others. Looking back, NO WAY could he have taken a difficult major (like premed or engineering) and survived playing where he did, but that is my player. Someone else may be different.
I will also admit that while a very good student, baseball was going to determine where he would go not academics, I am not sure he would have been a Tiger (out of state) any other way. He played a difficult schedule, difficult conference, in a demanding program, in a good academic university, maintained his GPA for president's honor roll and never cut class, helped his team with an ACC championship and helped get his team to Omaha, what more is expected from a D1 student athlete?
Does it matter what he majored in? That may have been a choice guided by his coaches, but he could have gone to play at an easier bb program and taken a more difficult career path.
BTW, I don't think in anyway that son's HC thought of son as an athlete first over a student, that'snot his style, school was VERY IMPORTANT, and I think that most HC at most big programs follow the same.
I am not all that familiar with D3 athletics and the demands, so it's hard for me to understand, I really am not sure that anyone not having been through a top D1 athletic program (with their sons) would understand as well.
I have stated that DK was discouraged in taking engineering. I recently got a pm from a parent that their son was going to major in engineering in the same program my son played for and encouraged. But there was no way, at the time that there was any other career son wanted to pursue more than proball (but he was going to college) so that is why he went to where he did.
I suppose coaches have their reasons why they encourage some and not others. Looking back, NO WAY could he have taken a difficult major (like premed or engineering) and survived playing where he did, but that is my player. Someone else may be different.
I will also admit that while a very good student, baseball was going to determine where he would go not academics, I am not sure he would have been a Tiger (out of state) any other way. He played a difficult schedule, difficult conference, in a demanding program, in a good academic university, maintained his GPA for president's honor roll and never cut class, helped his team with an ACC championship and helped get his team to Omaha, what more is expected from a D1 student athlete?
Does it matter what he majored in? That may have been a choice guided by his coaches, but he could have gone to play at an easier bb program and taken a more difficult career path.
BTW, I don't think in anyway that son's HC thought of son as an athlete first over a student, that'snot his style, school was VERY IMPORTANT, and I think that most HC at most big programs follow the same.
I am not all that familiar with D3 athletics and the demands, so it's hard for me to understand, I really am not sure that anyone not having been through a top D1 athletic program (with their sons) would understand as well.
One more point, I changed my last paragraph, I think that the system is better in some ways, the NCAA came down hard on D1 schools for not pushing their athletes to graduate and stricter on admissions.
Isn't it the BCS that has made the system corrupt?
Isn't it the BCS that has made the system corrupt?
I appreciate the conciliatory comments offered by CADad and Goosegg and others who have tried to mediate/explain here, but you're missing my point.
I understand and am well aware of the issues and tradeoffs and compromises you mention.
My objection is to the sanctimonious attitude that certain schools are somehow magically exempt from the competitive and economic forces that affect everyone else and that only their students are really, truly students living up to the ideal. Check out all the Sociology and Psychology majors on the Harvard football roster and see how long that delusion lasts.
Here's my point. Many parents on this site have kids who worked very hard and achieved enough on the field and in the classroom to have a lot of college options. They can go for the brass ring in baseball, or they can go for the brass ring in academics. Almost none can grab both. Most who try to grab the baseball ring will fall short.
Once they're in that position, these young men have to decide, maybe for the first time in their lives, what really matters most to them. Several doors stand open before them, each leading to a different kind of college experience, a different life, and a different character.
When a player who has earned to right to choose between a) becoming an awesome scholar and a pretty good ballplayer or b) becoming an awesome ballplayer and a pretty good scholar, his choice should be respected.
And when someone like BOF comes along and says the young men who choose option b) aren't really students, I will object.
I respect and applaud the choices made by BOF's son and by FenwaySouth's son. If they can't respect the choice my son made, I'll thank them to either speak to me about it privately or not at all.
I understand and am well aware of the issues and tradeoffs and compromises you mention.
My objection is to the sanctimonious attitude that certain schools are somehow magically exempt from the competitive and economic forces that affect everyone else and that only their students are really, truly students living up to the ideal. Check out all the Sociology and Psychology majors on the Harvard football roster and see how long that delusion lasts.
Here's my point. Many parents on this site have kids who worked very hard and achieved enough on the field and in the classroom to have a lot of college options. They can go for the brass ring in baseball, or they can go for the brass ring in academics. Almost none can grab both. Most who try to grab the baseball ring will fall short.
Once they're in that position, these young men have to decide, maybe for the first time in their lives, what really matters most to them. Several doors stand open before them, each leading to a different kind of college experience, a different life, and a different character.
When a player who has earned to right to choose between a) becoming an awesome scholar and a pretty good ballplayer or b) becoming an awesome ballplayer and a pretty good scholar, his choice should be respected.
And when someone like BOF comes along and says the young men who choose option b) aren't really students, I will object.
I respect and applaud the choices made by BOF's son and by FenwaySouth's son. If they can't respect the choice my son made, I'll thank them to either speak to me about it privately or not at all.
Painting with way too broad of a brush. First, the major academic shortcomings will be found in football and basketball, no surprise there. Secondly there are hundreds if not more of dedicated Student/ athletes playing baseball at top D1 conferences. My sons good friend is a two way player majoring in pre-med at Northwestern. The best player on my sons team is a business major at Wake Forest (aka work forest due to academic workloads) which is a top ranked under graduate business school. I just spoke with my son who like hundreds of other players, is completely worn out from week long practices and academic grind while working to get accepted into business school and be a two way player in the ACC.
Not uncommon focus and dedication.
Not uncommon focus and dedication.
Swaamp
I think you succinctly and accurately summed up the options and how - for the most part - choosing one impacts the other.
I felt frustrated during the process leading up to choosing a college understanding that impact and knowing that an 18yr old needs to make that choice.
But, alas, they need to make life impacting decisions as they mature and so long as they enter eyes open (ala TPMs son) it's their (with adult input) decision.
As a parent, I don't like my semi-adult son to foreclose life changing options without deep thought and introspection. On the other hand, I've already lived my life - this life is his!
I think you succinctly and accurately summed up the options and how - for the most part - choosing one impacts the other.
I felt frustrated during the process leading up to choosing a college understanding that impact and knowing that an 18yr old needs to make that choice.
But, alas, they need to make life impacting decisions as they mature and so long as they enter eyes open (ala TPMs son) it's their (with adult input) decision.
As a parent, I don't like my semi-adult son to foreclose life changing options without deep thought and introspection. On the other hand, I've already lived my life - this life is his!
Swampboy,
I have tremendous respect for your opinions. I know you know what you are talking about. In no way am I attempting to insult your son or any one's son. I'm not suggesting my son or any one else son who picked a similiar path is superior in baseball or academics. Quite the contrary. I think it is harder for D1 athletes to have difficult majors purely because of time demands than it is for most Ivy, Patriot of D3 schools. Simply stated, Ivy, Patriot and D3 is more athletically accomodating in general. Therefore I have tremendous respect for any D1 athlete that can pull it off. My point isn't really about specific athletes as it is about this D1 money making system the country is caught up in right now. The system the NCAA, D1 College Presidents and D1 ADs have in place is holding athletes back to the point where they don't have as many academic options as their Ivy, Patriot, and D3 brethren. What I am trying to get across is....(again)
"My issue with this is that most D1 athletes are not given the opportunity to pursue "tougher" majors if they want to. Most can't because there are not enough hours in the week to do both."
Did I go too far in my explanation? Probably, I get a little passionate about this topic as I'm seeing what this system has done to undergraduate education in the last 20-30 years. I have been reading ALOT about this topic. I have two sons getting ready for college in the next few years, and frankly it scares me. However, I wanted to point out how broke the entire system is, because it really is FUBAR.
I'm not disparging your son, and I don't think BOF did either. I don't see it that way. I'm disparging the academic opportunities that most D1 athletes have been limited to by the NCAA, D1 College Presidents, D1 ADs because of the money grab that has been going on for the last 30 years. This money grab has effected many athletes and their academic opportunities in one way or another. I really hope you understand what I'm saying here, because I intend no disrepect to anyone other than those profiting from this system. As for my son, we both know where the Ivy League (and the Patriot League) fit in the D1 baseball hierarchy. Our discussion here really isn't about baseball. In the next 5-10 years I hope there is some type of reform that will fix this amateur athletics situation and the money, power and control will go back the Colleges. And, hopefully, the colleges will not sell their soul to the devil(s) again for a few bucks to find themselves in the same predicament.
I have tremendous respect for your opinions. I know you know what you are talking about. In no way am I attempting to insult your son or any one's son. I'm not suggesting my son or any one else son who picked a similiar path is superior in baseball or academics. Quite the contrary. I think it is harder for D1 athletes to have difficult majors purely because of time demands than it is for most Ivy, Patriot of D3 schools. Simply stated, Ivy, Patriot and D3 is more athletically accomodating in general. Therefore I have tremendous respect for any D1 athlete that can pull it off. My point isn't really about specific athletes as it is about this D1 money making system the country is caught up in right now. The system the NCAA, D1 College Presidents and D1 ADs have in place is holding athletes back to the point where they don't have as many academic options as their Ivy, Patriot, and D3 brethren. What I am trying to get across is....(again)
"My issue with this is that most D1 athletes are not given the opportunity to pursue "tougher" majors if they want to. Most can't because there are not enough hours in the week to do both."
Did I go too far in my explanation? Probably, I get a little passionate about this topic as I'm seeing what this system has done to undergraduate education in the last 20-30 years. I have been reading ALOT about this topic. I have two sons getting ready for college in the next few years, and frankly it scares me. However, I wanted to point out how broke the entire system is, because it really is FUBAR.
quote:Swampboy said....So, I have a question for you. Why is it ok for you and BOF to disparage my son's legitimacy as a student but it's not ok for me to disparage your son's legitimacy as a ballplayer?
I'm not disparging your son, and I don't think BOF did either. I don't see it that way. I'm disparging the academic opportunities that most D1 athletes have been limited to by the NCAA, D1 College Presidents, D1 ADs because of the money grab that has been going on for the last 30 years. This money grab has effected many athletes and their academic opportunities in one way or another. I really hope you understand what I'm saying here, because I intend no disrepect to anyone other than those profiting from this system. As for my son, we both know where the Ivy League (and the Patriot League) fit in the D1 baseball hierarchy. Our discussion here really isn't about baseball. In the next 5-10 years I hope there is some type of reform that will fix this amateur athletics situation and the money, power and control will go back the Colleges. And, hopefully, the colleges will not sell their soul to the devil(s) again for a few bucks to find themselves in the same predicament.
quote:Originally posted by Swampboy:
And when someone like BOF comes along and says the young men who choose option b) aren't really students, I will object.
Swampboy,
I am going to say this one more time that no one, including myself, has derided any student/athlete, including your son. You have extrapolated a capitalization into an insult. I am sorry you have done this, and many others have explained the truth, and I will just leave it at that.
I posted a short comment in a thread about getting rid of the NCAA. This is not really a possibility, but something needs to change and I pointed out my opinion based on recent real experience. The reality is that many parents and players don’t know the realities of college sports and how broken the system is. (frankly IMO football and basketball are so far gone it is not even funny) In baseball there are only a handful of competitive D1 college baseball programs that allow a student to take most majors and play ball.
How many people know this?
Very few, and that is the beauty of this site, the exchange of real information. I did not REALY understand it until last year when my son was going through the recruiting process last year. I remember how one program wanted my son and invited us to a game and in the dugout afterwards I started asking some detailed questions about how they work around lab times, etc, how many players were in XYZ major, and this guy was literally squirming around in his seat trying to explain something that he originally said he would make work, but the reality he had very little experience in it. This is another generalization, and I have posted it a number of times, but my wife thinks baseball coaches are a bunch of used car sales men. They will tell you almost anything to get you on their “lot.” Buyer beware!
So the moral to this story is that kids wanting to take more difficult and time consuming majors you better do your homework.
BOF and FenwaySouth,
Both of you gentlemen have earned a lot of credibility here, so I take you at your word that you did not mean your comments they way they appeared.
I'm ready to move on and get back to trashing the NCAA in earnest if you are (but I'm going to go out and enjoy this gorgeous fall afternoon first).
Both of you gentlemen have earned a lot of credibility here, so I take you at your word that you did not mean your comments they way they appeared.
I'm ready to move on and get back to trashing the NCAA in earnest if you are (but I'm going to go out and enjoy this gorgeous fall afternoon first).
I was talking to some NESCAC (northeast top academic D3) team parents when my son was a high school junior. They told me if it's a choice between an exam and a game, your son will not be on the bus. I remember a friend of mine being benched for the first game of the CWS because he couldn't reschedule a final and missed the last practice before departing for Omaha.quote:Originally posted by BOF:
Fenwaysouth and I have been talking about this on the side and the fact is that the only “STUDENT/athletes” are DIII, Ivy and possibly Patriot schools students. The only other D1 school that I found that allowed their students to miss or adjust practice based on their academic schedule was Stanford. Granted there are probably others, but I suspect very few. I know a number of players who have been told straight out by their D1 coaches that you can’t take that major here and play baseball. What a travesty!
What goes on in football, particularly in the SEC schools makes me want to puke!
It is a joke and the whole student/athlete concept is broken!
RJM,
Thanks for sharing the Frontline video. I just finished a few books on this topic and I look forward to reading the "Blind Side" by Michael Lewis (menitioned in video) next.
Vaccarro provides an interesting history about where/when the money grab started and I applaud his efforts (and Ed O'Bannon)to make this right in court. This topic has me absolutely in a frenzy. It all starts here. If our courts can make this right (thereby changing NCAA policy) then hopefully our colleges will get back to the business of educating.
If anyone knows of any other books on the topic, I'd love to read them. Please let me know. Thanks.
Thanks for sharing the Frontline video. I just finished a few books on this topic and I look forward to reading the "Blind Side" by Michael Lewis (menitioned in video) next.
Vaccarro provides an interesting history about where/when the money grab started and I applaud his efforts (and Ed O'Bannon)to make this right in court. This topic has me absolutely in a frenzy. It all starts here. If our courts can make this right (thereby changing NCAA policy) then hopefully our colleges will get back to the business of educating.
If anyone knows of any other books on the topic, I'd love to read them. Please let me know. Thanks.
Sonny Vacarro has been part of the problem. Many see him as a sleeze ball. Somewhere along the line he got a conscious or he's covering up. From powerbasketball.com
While not about college sports you might find this book interesting. We Own This Game: A Season In The Adult World Of Youth Football I used to be big on reading books analyzing youth sports. This is one of the best. It's the NCAA BS, Friday Night Lights and the insanity of youth sports rolled into one.
While not about college sports you might find this book interesting. We Own This Game: A Season In The Adult World Of Youth Football I used to be big on reading books analyzing youth sports. This is one of the best. It's the NCAA BS, Friday Night Lights and the insanity of youth sports rolled into one.
This has been a very interesting and enjoyable discussion. I appreciate all of the time and thought you guys (M/F) put into your posts. Thanks also for the link to the Frontline article.
To me, the idea that the NCAA truly puts academics ahead of athletics is laughable. The hypocrisy makes me want to shake my head every time I hear the term student/athlete. That's not fair to all of the kids, but I can't help but have the knee-jerk reaction.
I just have a couple of questions. What would college baseball be like if the NCAA truly put academics first? What changes would YOU make. And what impact would those changes have on the game.
To me, the idea that the NCAA truly puts academics ahead of athletics is laughable. The hypocrisy makes me want to shake my head every time I hear the term student/athlete. That's not fair to all of the kids, but I can't help but have the knee-jerk reaction.
I just have a couple of questions. What would college baseball be like if the NCAA truly put academics first? What changes would YOU make. And what impact would those changes have on the game.
NCAA stands for National Collegiate ATHLETIC Asscoiation. Read the history on its own web site. It's purpose to exist has never been about anything scholastic but as a mechanism to keep the Government from running collegiate sports. It does a nice spin job on how the kids have always been it's primary objective.
It was founded because Teddy Roosevelt wanted change in college football becasue of injuries and deaths on the playing field and college Presidents created the NCAA to prevent football from being controlled by the government or banned altogether. BTW the forward pass was a result.
Abuse has always been there and from this charter the NCAA became the enforcement organization. It has cloaked it's mission over the years as the counterweight to financial and coach abuse by using the Student-Athlete theme as a way to gain the high ground in all debate. In doing so sports like Football and Basketball have forced it to contort itself to breaking credibility becasue of the money involved.
The solution IMO is to allow Football and Basketball to simply become what they already are Minor League Professional sports. Let the boosters run amock. Who cares what they do with their money or if kids get rich? Give athletes the option of taking compensation in cash or scholorship and be up front about what the options and expectations are. No more laughable assertions about kids trying to make the NFL or NBA are college students. Let them declare what they are and be treated as such. Everyone makes informed decisions. For some it may be the best paying job they will ever have and they will have earned every penny.
It was founded because Teddy Roosevelt wanted change in college football becasue of injuries and deaths on the playing field and college Presidents created the NCAA to prevent football from being controlled by the government or banned altogether. BTW the forward pass was a result.
Abuse has always been there and from this charter the NCAA became the enforcement organization. It has cloaked it's mission over the years as the counterweight to financial and coach abuse by using the Student-Athlete theme as a way to gain the high ground in all debate. In doing so sports like Football and Basketball have forced it to contort itself to breaking credibility becasue of the money involved.
The solution IMO is to allow Football and Basketball to simply become what they already are Minor League Professional sports. Let the boosters run amock. Who cares what they do with their money or if kids get rich? Give athletes the option of taking compensation in cash or scholorship and be up front about what the options and expectations are. No more laughable assertions about kids trying to make the NFL or NBA are college students. Let them declare what they are and be treated as such. Everyone makes informed decisions. For some it may be the best paying job they will ever have and they will have earned every penny.
MTH has an interesting point. Frankly, I do not think I am qualified to suggest a solution. I took a look at the NCAA site just to see what the various rules were for Div I, II, III baseball and they are not available online you have to purchase them. The amount of research just to understand the baseball rules would be significant, and I really don’t have the time nor desire frankly.
I watched the video that RJM posted and I was not aware that 90% of the money NCAA brings in was from the men’s basketball tournament alone. According to this video it is a $700M a year revenue stream, not including games leading up to the tournament. With all of the television money for football I have a hard time believing that there is not at least an equal revenue stream but maybe this money flows in differently. I do know that the PAC10 now 12 television rights are around $25M per year per institution.
There is something seriously wrong when you have graduation rates of less then 50% for many of the basketball teams, (29% for African Americans!) with 1 % of these athletes actually playing in the NBA. These kids are generating all of the interest, $$$ and getting nothing in return, not even an education it seems. The head of the supposedly non-profit NCAA making $2Mish…..it just smells bad.
Certainly the DIII model works, but this is only part of a total solution, and I recognize not all kids are gifted academically. I do like the fact that my son’s money is dependent on what he does in the classroom not the baseball field. The coach will determine who plays based on field performance, so if he wants to play he needs to perform there as well. To me at least it has a nice natural balance.
It is an extremely complex problem, including how to share revenue between the sports, institutions, players, coaches, boosters. With the billions of dollars flowing now there certainly needs some oversight. The one thing I do know is that the kids are getting screw ed if they are not getting an education, there is too much control placed in the institutions over them. The transfer rule is horrible for example. So I can pick out certain things that I think are wrong but this is one big rotten smelly mess.
I watched the video that RJM posted and I was not aware that 90% of the money NCAA brings in was from the men’s basketball tournament alone. According to this video it is a $700M a year revenue stream, not including games leading up to the tournament. With all of the television money for football I have a hard time believing that there is not at least an equal revenue stream but maybe this money flows in differently. I do know that the PAC10 now 12 television rights are around $25M per year per institution.
There is something seriously wrong when you have graduation rates of less then 50% for many of the basketball teams, (29% for African Americans!) with 1 % of these athletes actually playing in the NBA. These kids are generating all of the interest, $$$ and getting nothing in return, not even an education it seems. The head of the supposedly non-profit NCAA making $2Mish…..it just smells bad.
Certainly the DIII model works, but this is only part of a total solution, and I recognize not all kids are gifted academically. I do like the fact that my son’s money is dependent on what he does in the classroom not the baseball field. The coach will determine who plays based on field performance, so if he wants to play he needs to perform there as well. To me at least it has a nice natural balance.
It is an extremely complex problem, including how to share revenue between the sports, institutions, players, coaches, boosters. With the billions of dollars flowing now there certainly needs some oversight. The one thing I do know is that the kids are getting screw ed if they are not getting an education, there is too much control placed in the institutions over them. The transfer rule is horrible for example. So I can pick out certain things that I think are wrong but this is one big rotten smelly mess.
quote:Originally posted by BOF:
MTH has an interesting point. Frankly, I do not think I am qualified to suggest a solution. I took a look at the NCAA site just to see what the various rules were for Div I, II, III baseball and they are not available online you have to purchase them. The amount of research just to understand the baseball rules would be significant, and I really don’t have the time nor desire frankly.
The NCAA site is a little confusing, but you can download the D1, D2, and D3 manuals for free. The listed charge is for the hard copy. The link to the PDF version is buried below the for profit link. You're definitely right about the amount of research involved. You can go nuts trying to decipher some of these rules.
[url=http://ncaapublications.com/p-4224-2011-2012-ncaa-division-i-manual-august-2011.aspx%5B/QUOTE%5D]http://ncaapublications.com/p-...st-2011.aspx
quote:Certainly the DIII model works, but this is only part of a total solution, and I recognize not all kids are gifted academically. I do like the fact that my son’s money is dependent on what he does in the classroom not the baseball field. The coach will determine who plays based on field performance, so if he wants to play he needs to perform there as well. To me at least it has a nice natural balance.
There is a nice element of security in being on academic money. You don't have to worry about whether your scholarship will be pulled/nonrenewed or reduced. All you have to do is make the grades and it's automatically renewed.
“I’M NOT HIDING,” Sonny Vaccaro told a closed hearing at the Willard Hotel in Washington, D.C., in 2001. “We want to put our materials on the bodies of your athletes, and the best way to do that is buy your school. Or buy your coach.”
Vaccaro’s audience, the members of the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, bristled. These were eminent reformers—among them the president of the National Collegiate Athletic Association, two former heads of the U.S. Olympic Committee, and several university presidents and chancellors. The Knight Foundation, a nonprofit that takes an interest in college athletics as part of its concern with civic life, had tasked them with saving college sports from runaway commercialism as embodied by the likes of Vaccaro, who, since signing his pioneering shoe contract with Michael Jordan in 1984, had built sponsorship empires successively at Nike, Adidas, and Reebok. Not all the members could hide their scorn for the “sneaker pimp” of schoolyard hustle, who boasted of writing checks for millions to everybody in higher education.
“Why,” asked Bryce Jordan, the president emeritus of Penn State, “should a university be an advertising medium for your industry?”
Vaccaro did not blink. “They shouldn’t, sir,” he replied. “You sold your souls, and you’re going to continue selling them. You can be very moral and righteous in asking me that question, sir,” Vaccaro added with irrepressible good cheer, “but there’s not one of you in this room that’s going to turn down any of our money. You’re going to take it. I can only offer it.”
William Friday, a former president of North Carolina’s university system, still winces at the memory. “Boy, the silence that fell in that room,” he recalled recently. “I never will forget it.” Friday, who founded and co-chaired two of the three Knight Foundation sports initiatives over the past 20 years, called Vaccaro “the worst of all” the witnesses ever to come before the panel.
But what Vaccaro said in 2001 was true then, and it’s true now: corporations offer money so they can profit from the glory of college athletes, and the universities grab it. In 2010, despite the faltering economy, a single college athletic league, the football-crazed Southeastern Conference (SEC), became the first to crack the billion-dollar barrier in athletic receipts. The Big Ten pursued closely at $905 million. That money comes from a combination of ticket sales, concession sales, merchandise, licensing fees, and other sources—but the great bulk of it comes from television contracts
Read the rest of a great article:
http://www.theatlantic.com/mag...college-sports/8643/
Vaccaro’s audience, the members of the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, bristled. These were eminent reformers—among them the president of the National Collegiate Athletic Association, two former heads of the U.S. Olympic Committee, and several university presidents and chancellors. The Knight Foundation, a nonprofit that takes an interest in college athletics as part of its concern with civic life, had tasked them with saving college sports from runaway commercialism as embodied by the likes of Vaccaro, who, since signing his pioneering shoe contract with Michael Jordan in 1984, had built sponsorship empires successively at Nike, Adidas, and Reebok. Not all the members could hide their scorn for the “sneaker pimp” of schoolyard hustle, who boasted of writing checks for millions to everybody in higher education.
“Why,” asked Bryce Jordan, the president emeritus of Penn State, “should a university be an advertising medium for your industry?”
Vaccaro did not blink. “They shouldn’t, sir,” he replied. “You sold your souls, and you’re going to continue selling them. You can be very moral and righteous in asking me that question, sir,” Vaccaro added with irrepressible good cheer, “but there’s not one of you in this room that’s going to turn down any of our money. You’re going to take it. I can only offer it.”
William Friday, a former president of North Carolina’s university system, still winces at the memory. “Boy, the silence that fell in that room,” he recalled recently. “I never will forget it.” Friday, who founded and co-chaired two of the three Knight Foundation sports initiatives over the past 20 years, called Vaccaro “the worst of all” the witnesses ever to come before the panel.
But what Vaccaro said in 2001 was true then, and it’s true now: corporations offer money so they can profit from the glory of college athletes, and the universities grab it. In 2010, despite the faltering economy, a single college athletic league, the football-crazed Southeastern Conference (SEC), became the first to crack the billion-dollar barrier in athletic receipts. The Big Ten pursued closely at $905 million. That money comes from a combination of ticket sales, concession sales, merchandise, licensing fees, and other sources—but the great bulk of it comes from television contracts
Read the rest of a great article:
http://www.theatlantic.com/mag...college-sports/8643/