The report goes on to state that better efforts need to be taken to ensure that Academic Progress Rates (APR) trend more up than down where the athlete is concerned and it admonishes those programs that have taken to overspending in the name of more championships rather than more education.
The bottom-line of the report is this: It’s time to get back to the schooling and lose the emphasis on sports.
One of the first things that the Knight Commission points out is the sub-par graduation rate of many of the nation’s top programs. Their solution for that is to propose a ban on postseason play for any team that fails to meet the 50 percent graduation rate.
That’s all fine and good, in theory, but one of the reasons why the graduation rate is so low is because of attrition to the NFL. If a player sees an opportunity to net a million-dollar paycheck, they are not going to risk injury just to get their degree—many will justify their decision by saying they can always come back later to finish.
To be quite honest, why penalize any school because an athlete decided to leave early for a shot at lucrative employment? After all, if any undergrad student was given an opportunity to make a six-figure salary after only two-years of college, I’m willing to bet that they would forfeit their final two years as well—APR be damned.
In my opinion, if the NCAA really wants to strike up a partnership with an organization, how about giving the NBA, MLB, or NFL a call and asking that they require a minimum age of 21 for all who wish to apply for admission to their league? That would stop the exodus in a heartbeat, don’t you think? I’m betting coaches would love to keep their teams intact for 3-4 seasons—no argument there.
Don’t think that will fly?...Me neither, but therein lies the point.
Collegiate athletics for many of the best athletes is simply a means to an end. After a couple seasons of playing at a high-level, they graduate to the big time. That was always their intention and, APR or no APR, a coach is not likely going to pass on a five-star player just because the NCAA has a need to prove to itself that academics is still important.
Which leads to the next part of the report, the Commission wants to punish teams that fail to build upon the education aspect by banning them from postseason events—even if that event is a national championship game:
A series of recommendations centered on treating athletes as students first and foremost also have financial implications, including:
• Limiting the length of the football postseason so it does not extend into the start of the second academic term,
• Reducing the length of seasons and number of events, and
• Preventing the use of athletes’ identities to promote commercial entities or products.
That’s ridiculous, honestly, it is. You cannot introduce “cost-saving” measures with the the intention of re-prioritizing academics over athletics, yet cut off the main source of the academic money.
Have they forgotten that most of these universities depend on public funding to remain afloat? Where do they think the better portion of that money is coming from? Ask Texas, Georgia, and Ohio State how much money their football programs generate for their university presidents each year.
Like it or not, a successful football program brings the brick and mortar money needed to make these schools just as appealing to the non-athlete as the athlete. University presidents can say what they like about how important academics is to them—they know where their bread is buttered and—it would be foolish to bite the hand that feeds you.
Is it fair that education has taken such a backseat to athletics? No, because in the long run, what is going to be more helpful to our economy are the doctors, educators, nurses, and engineers that these schools will potentially release into the world.
However, where reform is concerned, it is just as important to be realistic as it is to be prudent.
No comments:
Post a Comment