College Education? Really?
The question of whether or not college athletes should be paid has been hovering over us for decades. Some people feel that the free education athletes receive is more than enough compensation… an argument that makes me insane. This morning on ESPN’s “The Herd”, Colin Cowherd went on a rant about how great college athletes have it. This is what he said:
“I don’t believe college athletes should be paid… I was watching a story this weekend that we had all these big shot coaches and commentators talking about the NCAA and their problems and it still comes down to this to me: 50% of these college athletes don’t even qualify academically for these colleges. They shouldn’t even be on these campuses. So they get these incredible educations for free and they bitch about it. It’s like you gotta be kidding me. You don’t even qualify for the school academically. I mean if somebody gave me a free education and I didn’t even qualify for it? Can’t you be happy with that? … It’s amazing to me how these athletes are whining about what they don’t get. Maybe if you and your friends respected education more… I mean some of these athletes it’s unbelievable like they don’t even look at the educational opportunity they’re getting. Are you kidding me?”
Cowherd’s statements are an example of how out of touch people are with the reality of big time college programs and the athletes they recruit. College football players are recruited based on their athletic abilities with little to no concern for their academic abilities. The athletes are encouraged by the Universities to focus on football and are given academic guidance in order to remain eligible for games. If you want examples of this read my previous articles UNFAIR TREATMENT PART ONE and UNFAIR TREATMENT PART TWO. There is NO standard set by NCAA to make sure that effort is put forth by the Universities to ensure that their athletes graduate with a degree of their choice. Athletes often times are not able to major in certain fields because the athletic department’s academic advisors tell them that those classes don’t fit with the football team’s practice schedule. The NCAA should be ashamed to claim that they are offering these athletes a first class, free education.
Cowherd says that 50% of college athletes don’t even qualify academically for the schools…so why are they there?… because they’re good athletes? Why would you offer someone a college education if they aren’t prepared to accept it? Does that seem like appropriate compensation? That would be like giving a homeless guy a really expensive couch and then saying, “Oh you should be so happy, look what I gave you, it’s worth so much money!” What the hell is he supposed to do with a really expensive couch? He doesn’t have a house.
I don’t believe that athletes should be paid. I believe that the Universities should uphold their promise and give athletes an actual education in a field of their interest.
Some possible ways to do this, NCAA:
- Increase the number of advisors for your athletes so that they can receive one-on-one assistance to ensure their academic success.
- Make classes available to ALL students. If there is only one engineering class and it conflicts with football practice, then schedule another one that doesn’t interfere so that the athletes interested in engineering are still able to take the class.
- Put some of the revenue made by the Universities into communities with unsuccessful public school systems so that the young men recruited by these Universities aren’t so far behind when they arrive there.
Why should you accommodate your athletes in this way, NCAA?
- Because they devote all their time and energy both mentally and physically to your athletic programs and are given no control over their academic careers.
- Because their lives and schedules are determined by the athletic department. Athletes that demand to study certain majors usually get playing time taken away from them or get moved down on the depth chart.
- Because athletes are not allowed to have part time jobs, they’re not allowed to study abroad; they’re not allowed to take an internship in the off-season to gain work experience. And, in a lot of cases they end up in a situation like this Ex-Alabama Star, Now Bank Teller.
If you, or someone you know experienced this side of college athletics, please contact me through the website. We need to bring this to NCAA’s attention.
(Anti NCAA logo courtesy of nationofblue.com)
4 Comments for College Education? Really?
You missed the point of my analogy. It’s not “how much the homeless guys NEEDS the couch” it’s “is he equipped to handle the couch” (with no house, he is not equipped). Therefore, it’s not “does a 19 year old NEED education” (he certainly does) it’s “is he equipped to take in that education.” (with low academic scores coming in and little to no academic advice from universities, he is not)
I agree with you that social structure is needed but you have to remember that only a very small percentage of college athletes go on to face a a world “swamped by media, leaches, and crooked women” (I’m assuming that’s the pro world you speak of only because it sounds like the pro world to me). The majority of college athletes (if they graduate at all) graduate with a degree in something that they were forced into studying by their advisors. What good does that do them? I give specific examples of these people in the articles I linked in the above article.
Thanks for the comment. I love discussing this!
Analogies aside – A sub-par high school student needs an education whether he is equipped to accept it or not. Whether or not players should get paid is one debate – another is that the curriculum seriously needs to adapt to the modern world. Did you know that “Social-networking-advisor” is an actual job-title? Also, give the players a chance to study how to become Jerry Maguire, Joe Buck or Billy Beane – throw some core classes their way for good measure – and you have someone ready for the field, press box or clubhouse. I mean, how enticing does a General Studies degree really sound? I think we’re both walking through the same door here, I just can’t fit that ‘expensive couch’ through the frame 
Also, watching Andrew Luck try to get an Architecture degree, at Stanford of all places, is torture. As someone with two architecture degrees, I can confirm that it is continuously raining shit on that kid when he’s not playing football. He might not able to save Cincinnati (2012 first round overall), but at least he can have an intelligible conversation about Post-modernism. However, I can’t blame him – I wouldn’t want to play for Carolina either. I guess I’m picky.
It’s a sham to think of college athletes as amateurs. You cease to be an amateur when the job you perform generates significant revenue — regardless of whether your employer chooses to compensate you fairly for that work or not.
College athletes generate HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars each year for their employers. In exchange, they receive free goods and services — an education — which is carefully structured so as not to interfere with their important work schedules.
In the 1950′s, maybe an education for 4 years of football service was a fair trade.
But in the modern era, with packed stadiums, expanded schedules, universal television coverage, ubiquitous corporate sponsorship, and merchandise revenues to infinity and beyond, college football has become a business on par with the Fortune 500. It has never been more clear that 4 years of education is not nearly fair compensation for the (very risky) work college athletes perform.
It makes me physically ill when schools announce a “bonus game” added to their schedule. For the benefit of the athletes who risk lethal or career-ending injury with each additional blow? Of course not. Each extra game means a few million more in the University’s coffers.
Pro teams have unions and agents to deride this garbage. What do college athletes have?
Free lectures.
Earlier this year, Steve Spurrier came up with a plan to pay his team out of his own pocket (1). $300 a game — hardly enough, but a start. Every head coach in the SEC signed his petition, but the plan made it no further than the paper it was written on.
The reason is dead simple.
The NCAA and Universities enjoy tax free status only so long as they steadfastly refuse to allow their most valuable employees to receive even one penny in compensation. Coaches? Administrators? School presidents? Bureaucrats? Sure, pay them through the nose. But the actual athletes — no, no! Or magical tax free status disappears.
Does it surprise you when athletes are suspended for trading jerseys for tattoos? For hawking their championship rings on eBay? Seriously, stop and think about that. JERSEYS for TATTOOS… RINGS for a few hundred bucks… These kids aren’t robbing banks — they’re trading hard-earned trophies for measly beer and pizza money.
And the NCAA treats them as though they’ve committed armed robbery.
Because if the NCAA fails to DEMONIZE these kids for attempting to compensate themselves even in some modest way where their own employers have failed, they’re on the hook for tax write-offs not in the MILLIONS but BILLIONS of dollars.
The conflict of interest is staggering. And the deck is stacked so unfavorably against college athletes, it would take an act of God (or congress) to level the playing field.
==============
ADDENDUM: Just for fun, South Park boiled down this tirade into a neat 30 minute episode. The result should win the heisman: http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s15e05-crack-baby-athletic-association
** (1) Source: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=6616618
I listen to Colin every morning on my way to work. I find he is either dialed, intentionally contrarian (his word) or just making the simple argument. In this case, he is making the simple argument – he has no idea what it’s like to be a college athlete and the only college athletes he comes in contact with are emerging stars and fuck-ups. He is pretty out of touch, so I agree with you.
However – the couch analogy is hopelessly flawed. You can’t compare a hobo’s need for an expensive couch (no need), with an 19-year-old’s need for an education (huge need). Whether or not Cam Newton was killing his trig mid-term is irrelevant. What is relevant is a need for the social structure college provides to an individual about to become swamped by the media, leaches and crooked women. The University is a four-year internship to fame, not a useless couch.
My analogy – Being awarded with an athletic scholarship is like getting underwear for your birthday. Some people accept and appreciate new underwear – some wear the underwear but are insulted by the shitty gift idea – and others just throw the underwear away and make rich friends who give out Drakkar Noir and Season 2 of Jersey Shore on birthdays. – - I won’t hate if you copy and paste that bad-boy into your article lol.
Good write up.