Players not impacted by NCAA changes

just brings me to a signup board.

Yes, TPM are we to read about football or something? Is the article baseball based?

Quoted from article:

"Not every school needs to be as strict as Stanford. Some kids deserve a second chance at taking education seriously. But graduating only half of the athletes on a major-college football team is a scam.

"The reality of college football is that it is big business," says Richard Lapchick, director of the Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport at the University of Central Florida. He has made a career out of studying this stuff. Too often, he says, kids are brought in "more for their ability to score touchdowns than to get engineering degrees. Do these schools need to do a better job? Absolutely."

While I am thrilled for the success of Stanford's student-athletes and I admire their dedication to academics, I realize that many high school athletes either lack the brains or the commitment to academics that the Stanford athletes possess. Does this mean that none of them should play college ball? Not in my book. I still think it's a good thing for these gifted athletes to attend college, even if they don't graduate. At the very least, they are a lot further along academically after 4 years than they were coming out of high school. Many kids don't get serious about the important things until later in life, despite the urgings and pleas of their parents. College athletics can actually help some of these kids become more disciplined and dedicated to academics through mandatory study halls, minimum GPA requirements, etc. Perhaps only half of athletes at certain colleges graduate, but if they didn't have football to lure them to college, many probably would never have attended college at all.

quote:

Originally posted by iheartbb:
Yes, TPM are we to read about football or something? Is the article baseball based?

Sorry to have college academics and student athletes interfere with baseball. Mutually exlusive, I guess??

infield08-
Yes in order to compete in the Stanford world you must prepare - academically - you cannot make up for it later, not as a hs student. However, as a (college) junior or senor transfer student depening on your situation, you may still have a chance to transfer.
There a lot of ways to get a degree from Stanford, a friend believes that you should beilieve, plan, do.

infielddad - yours was a fine question and thanks for posting the article. Obviously, there is a nexus between college athletics, student athletes, and the hsbbweb.

It is kind of a tough question for me. My son is not going to Stanford but he is doing well academically. It will also take him approximately five years to graduate. I do value education above all else but see it different than many here. I believe in a long term approach to it and do not believe it is a one time shot. For some it is however and I realize that. I see baseball as a one time shot and that has been a higher priority thus far in our case. Some day, when the baseball ends, I'll see to it that he has every opportunity to complete his degree and/or follow it up with more academic horsepower if necessary.

Regarding this particular article, if my son were a high-end football player and had the opportunity to attend Stanford or USC with approximately the same odds to get on to the field of play, I would probably support him going to USC over Stanford although Stanford would be my personal dream school. Thus, although this writer has a point about academics, there is still value in the athletics imho.

quote:

There a lot of ways to get a degree from Stanford

I had not heard this before.
I would be very interested in learning more.

CD, I posted the article because I thought it conveyed something relevent.

I fully appreciate that very few will ever be admitted to Stanford. In a sense, that is good because it is reflective of life. For me, the article was a life lesson. When you combine effort, intensity, and preparation, you can beat the best, i.e. USC even if you aren't the best athletes. If you have the best athletes, you may win on the field but not in the classroom, i.e. graduation.
Whether you are at Stanford or USC or or Coastal or Trinity, you should be there to achieve. I think it is a good thing that Stanford sets a bar that is pretty uncompromising. That does not mean the bar needs to be the same for every school or student. It just means there needs to be a bar and IMO, everyone loses when it gets compromised.

My point was, as hard as it is to be admitted to Stanford as a freshman, If you are willing to transfer as a Junior/Senior depening on your individual sitation, you could certainly graduate from Stanford if you can afford it and/or are qualified for academic scholarship/or other scholarship other than athletic which may not be available. There are also other educational grant/aides available.

quote:

Originally posted by ClevelandDad:
Thus, although this writer has a point about academics, there is still value in the athletics imho.

The answer to this question is wholly individual. I am on the other side of this fence CD, where I belive in leveraging your athletic talent for the best degree possible. Makes neither of us right, just different.

When Matt Leinert was a 5th year senior, he elected to take a modern dance class. It was his only class, and what made him eligible at USC. I had to ask why a guy who was about to make millions wouldn't take a financial or business class. Different priority.

Mine went to college to play baseball.

While he played baseball in college, he got three years of college behind him that he wouldn't have today if he hadn't played baseball.

No apologies to the academicians.

IFD,
That was a good article, regardless of whether it is Standford or puducnk U, I do believe many kids wouldn't get college opportunities unless they played a sport.
Football is a different animal, most of the parents I know of football players know most likely their sons will never play in college, never play beyond college, but with the rising costs of education, they might likely get into a sschool they might not otherwise or just get into school period. I applaud any schools efforts to uphold academic standards, regardless of sport.
This sort of went along with the point I was trying to make in the post I started on college education.
No one can tell me otherwise that the parents of young players today don't do what they do for free education or have some of it paid for. If I was a parent of a youth player today, that would be my goal from early on.
My understanding is that many football players DO graduate, because of redshirt, they are awarded the fifth year. I also am finding out that most AD's discourage 5th year (unless medical hardhsip) for baseball. Most likely why we are seeing fewer and fewer redshirts each year. That's a cheap shot on college baseball, but again, it is not a profit sport. Why pay for a players 5th year of school when our budget doesn't allow it. Or come your fifth year if you want to stay fine, but we aren't paying. Yes, it takes more than 4 years to complete a degree, mine has only two semesters left, he stayed on track, only because word from up above (AD) was no 5 years, unless you want to pick up the tab, we don't care if you have 3 credits to go or 15.

Interesting the NFL has a program where they work with their non degreed players to get their degree.

quote:

No one can tell me otherwise that the parents of young players today don't do what they do for free education or have some of it paid for. If I was a parent of a youth player today, that would be my goal from early on.

TPM, I agree with you. But I also disagree.
I do not think the goal of our sons and daughters playing sports should be a college scholarship. It is a wonderful result and reward if and when it occurs. It should not be the goal, especially for the parent.
For me, it is with regret, though, that I think I am in the vast minority standing in the path of a fast moving train.
The continued growth and proliferation of showcases down to ages 10-11 is evidence you are correct. A local private school offering a Christmas camp to 8th graders where they will be rated on the MLB 5 tool skills and hear presentations from a college recruiter is additional evidence.
I don't understand why it isn't enough for 12-15 year olds to play sports because they love them. There are so many good life lessons competitive youth and high school sports can provide.
Why, do we as parents, feel the need to have a plan, an end, a result, which is a scholarship.
As I said, a scholarship is a wonderful and hard earned result. My sense is that more negative than positive can occur for the player, the parent and coaches when it is the goal.

IFD,
I agree with you 100%.

However, if I was in a situation where my son wanted to EARN a degree at schools such as Stanford, UM, Vanderbilt, Duke, no way could I afford it, so I would do what I had to to make it easier. I wouldn't work my butt off, spend endless dollars for him to attend school just to play baseball where they play good baseball. I'd work my butt off for a degree at those type of schools.

I think that is why we didn't work so hard at it, we had free tuition for state schools, so I knew he could get into a state school and pre paid tuition stopped rising costs.

Hope that I made that clear.

TPM, I can relate. In our area, and in the high school where ours graduated, there is almost an obsession with publicizing acceptances at Stanford, the Ivys, and the others you have mentioned.
But that is why being an "Old Timer" and having a strong belief that baseball teaches life lessons leads me to the conclusion that in most situations, the degree from those schools is a source of great pride, opens many doors early, but eventually those advantages dissipate.
In the minor leagues, two or our sons best friends graduated from Vanderbilt and Stanford. Little doubt playing at those two schools and playing well contributed to one being a 5th rounder, one a 10th, and ours a 25th. Little doubt that led to the other two starting from day one and ours sitting more than he cared or liked. Little doubt that, at the start, there were discernible differences in their games.
As time went on, though, with the playing field equal and the coaching equal, those gaps narrowed and eventually were eliminated. It isn't because the other 2 didn't work hard. They had/have incredible work ethics, but being in competitive situations where other aspects were relatively equal, hard work and talent of the 25th rounder elevated his skills at a more rapid pace.
Personally, I believe the same is true in life.
When you see these 3 now, whether on the baseball field or off it, you really cannot tell where they started, or the school where they received degrees, but you know all 3 succeeded and have talents and skills to succeed going forward, whether on the field or off.

IFDad - Very thought provoking topic and interesting responses. Regarding your discussion of the Vandy & Stanford players compared to your son, I can imagine on the field there's no difference where they graduated from. However, what happens once baseball ends? I think the argument some would make is that's where their connection to Vandy and Stanford will kick in. I'm not suggesting your son in particular won't be successful, merely pointing out the value of a Vandy, Stanford, Duke, UM degree once they enter the work force vesus a kid from Boise State, Ohio U, etc.

CPLZ - If I was Matt Leinart, I'm thinking I'd take the easy class too and hire somebody to manage the money. Besides, we don't know he didn't take those classes already. We only know he took the balroom dancing class because the media jumped all over that.

quote:

However, what happens once baseball ends? I think the argument some would make is that's where their connection to Vandy and Stanford will kick in. I'm not suggesting your son in particular won't be successful, merely pointing out the value of a Vandy, Stanford, Duke, UM degree once they enter the work force vesus a kid from Boise State, Ohio U, etc.

Beezer, I agree completely with you on those points.
That was why I made the analogy to the baseball experiences.
I don't have a lot of doubt that starting out, just like in baseball, the degree from Stanford and Vandy will open doors and help pave a smoother path.
Over time, though, hard work, dedication, drive, passion, talent and some luck tends to equalize the early differences. It is my experience that many end up on the same path at some point and where you went to school looks nice on the resume but doesn't generate business.