<p>Both statements are indeed correct. The article focuses on only element of the problems. The issue of unpaid “actors” in college athletics is a travesty, and one that permeates the sport from its infancy. For some, the vision presented is one of “if you play football, you might get rich. What you need to do is to pass a few classes.” The travesty is that, despite many measures in place, some of those kids have few options than to accept illegal compensation. The entire system reeks of hypocrisy, and none bigger than pretending that this is an education-centric education. The NFL should be allowed to develop a farm system and football might benefit from a new “Thursday” or “Tuesday” league where all the fake students might showcase their talent. I know it is unrealistic! </p>
<p>The rage about how our public system of education is failing so many is, of course, a much larger problem. But, just as it happens in college football, the United States preferred way to address a problem is to pretend it never exists in the first place. The fact that school districts such as Detroit barely graduate their 9th grade and other rely on systemic obfuscation of the data to hide the true problems is better ignored than addressed at the source. If all fails, the system will pretend that it is because the richest nation on earth has too many poors and that there is not enough money available. Yep, our answer is to place an iPad in every poor hand, and let the learn by … themselves. Just about how they do it anyway!</p>
<p>Here’s a quote from a piece on Alabama redshirt senior Kevin Norwood. While I’m sure there are plenty of football players who want only to play football, there are plenty more who want that degree. And football is what allows them to get it.</p>
<p>Of course, there are some REALLY smart football players. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But for each McElroy or Andrew Luck, there are plenty of RGIII, Michael Vick, or Cam Newton. Google their Wonderlic scores for an insight. And those are the uber famous ones that can count on the support and adulation. Next to them, there are plenty of players going through the motions.</p>
<p>Yes, and there is only so much universities can do to help their football players along: study hall, tutors, easy classes, priority registration, flexible exam times, etc, etc. </p>
<p>At some point, the rest is up to the student-athlete to succeed academically, as it should be. </p>
<p>My feeling is that even if the issue is one of mismatch, even without a degree these students are in a better place than they would have been, had they not gone to college at all.</p>
<p>True, but the opportunity to earn a modest “appearance” fee paid by the schools might make their life a bit easier. There is so much waste in college funding, that allowing schools (or boosters) to pay a few hundred dollars a game might reduce the hypocrisy of the current system. </p>
<p>On the other side, perhaps a system that penalizes schools for not graduating their scholarship athletes by reducing the number of scholarships might make the schools think twice in recruiting students who are seeing the NCAA as nothing else than a springboard to the NFL. Again, look at the story of Cam Newton as an Auburn higher gun that was auctioned off in the best southeastern gentlemanly manner.</p>
<p>Take a look at the value of “some college” v. “no college”. If it wasn’t for football, many of these students wouldn’t be going to college at all (among other reasons, because they couldn’t afford it.) (And that’s the REAL tragedy here.)</p>
<p>Compare the Black graduation rate of football players in the same family income quintile with non-football players - in almost every case, they are higher. Now compare them with same, although add a 40-hour a week job onto the non-football players (given the time that football at a high level takes.)</p>
<p>Black men are “failing” for the same reasons low-income students are failing. They generally come from poorer schools with poorer preparation, and they are one family illness or other major family trauma away from leaving school. At least football gives them a minimal income (not enough, but…)</p>
<p>“I do wonder how many of those football players went to college to get an education at all.”</p>
<p>I think I’d say the same of the majority of 18-year-olds.</p>
<p>Doesn’t this really depend on the priorities? When I look at my kids’ friends in HS, they looked at college as the ticket to getting into a profession. Of course some wanted to become doctors or engineers, but changed their minds and finished with economics, or whatever, but the underlying goal for all of them was to acquire skills that would enable them to get usually a white collar job. I don’t know of any of them who wanted to become a pro in football or basketball, and if you assessed their skills in these areas midway through college, they would have been pathetic. If their competence in sports determined their progress through college, many of them would have failed. </p>
<p>When you look at black football players, what percentage of them are actually trying to get into professional sports versus working towards a traditional career? This may well reflect on their competency on the field rather than in the classroom. If you want them to do well, create an alternative track where their ability and accomplishment in their area of interest determines their graduation. </p>
<p>I’m probably not the only FOB who scratches his head and wonders about the priority of sports in educational institutions in this country during and before college.</p>
<p>Many low-income students simply look at college as a way out of poverty, and out of their communities, as well they should. When I taught at the community college, I don’t think I knew a single student, not one, who was hoping to become a doctor, engineer, lawyer, or corporate executive. About half hoped to be able to transfer to a four-year college (about a quarter - of the graduates - actually did), with hopes of becoming nurses or in some allied health profession, accountants, bookkeepers, schoolteachers. I imagine about another half of them were lost along the way. So, maybe, one of of eight made it. (We did have two or three students who transferred to an Ivy each year, usually UPenn.)</p>
<p>Compared with them, Black football players are doing GREAT! Actually, astonishingly!</p>
<p>Mini, I also have some first hand experience with inner city kids and I agree with a great deal of what you said. But I don’t think the problem is as simple as poverty. Put simply, these kids come from what are essentially failed states, with dysfunctional societies that are reproducing themselves. Many of them desperately want to succeed and escape, but they have no idea how our world works. I wish I had a solution that might work on a large scale, but I don’t.</p>
<p>One anecdote. I was at a scholarly conference with a panel on the problem of inner city schools. The white liberals thought they could solve the problem with funding and a requirement that white students stay in the public schools (!) The two African-Americans on the panel–both veterans of the struggle–had come to the that the only solution was to establish boarding schools for inner city kids (in Africa, because it would be cheaper).</p>
<p>" Many of them desperately want to succeed and escape, but they have no idea how our world works. I wish I had a solution that might work on a large scale, but I don’t."</p>
<p>It’s not large scale, but the data show, clearly, that football WORKS! The players who don’t graduate do far better than if they hadn’t gone to college at all, and a remarkably large number of them DO graduate, despite low entering SATS, GPAs, etc., and a crushing workload on top of their studies. </p>
<p>I think they understand the world very, very well, far better than most higher income 18 year olds. Football is a way out…and it works! The 44% graduation rate at UCal Berkeley is far, far higher than what it would be for these same students had they entered a two-year college, and then, having gotten through, tried to transfer to a four-year college, and then graduate. And those that didn’t graduate end up far, far ahead of fellow high school grads from the same neighborhoods and income class who never went to college at all. Isn’t it amazing that almost half of the students with entering 2.8 GPAs and 1100 SAT scores, who are then required to put 40 hours a week on top of their studies, graduate at all? I think it is positively extraordinary. (and yes, it could be better. But take some non-football-playing low-income minorities with the same scores and GPAs, send them to Berkeley while they have to work 40 hours a week, and see how they do…)</p>
<p>(Frankly, I wish it didn’t - so many end up with injuries that will cripple them in 20 years, and brain damage that will debilitate too many of them far too early. But given the alternatives, it works!)</p>
<p>Once again, i agree with much of what you say. There is no question that inner city kids understand that sports are one way out and I don’t doubt that those who are exposed to the mores of white affluent society because they get athletic scholarships are far more likely to succeed than those who never escape–particularly if they have the kind of drive necessary to become a D1 athlete.</p>
<p>My comment was addressed to the suggestion that the difficulties faced by the vast majority of inner city students–those who are recruited athletes–are due primarily to the fact that they have to attend poor, underfunded schools. While I believe that justice requires at least equal funding for those schools, the fact that the schools are poor is do primarily to the dysfunctional culture of the inner city, not the other way around. NOTE: I am not blaming the children or for that matter their parents for the culture. It is simply something they were born into. The problem is that while it is easy to destroy the social fabric of a society, it is much harder to rebuild it.</p>
<p>In order to fairly compare the success of a non-football admit with similar stats, one would need to provide this admit with…free and unlimited tutoring, a class schedule guaranteed to fit AROUND the work schedule (and not the reverse)…free-passes in a number of classes (yes, it is known in the underground where a FB player can get a guaranteed pass…guess our hypothetical admit would need a secret handshake so that the prof would know they are in that ‘grade not tied to performance’ group). Then that admit would need workplace coaches…(heavy lifting at the loading dock …well…come on in for a specifically geared training session so that you will perform better) oh…and massage therapist, physical therapists, and in some places…free healthcare (MRI’s etc) … and let’s not forget the free and personalized laundry services…they would need guaranteed FREE transportation to and from work. They would need a guaranteed extension for all academic deadlines as dictated by their work schedule. They would need exemptions from those pesky ‘you can only miss X number of classes before your grade drops by Y%’ rules. Oh, an no pressure to graduate in 4 years. If the admit proves to be rather good, they can be academically red shirted, given free tuition, keep ‘training’ with their team and stretch out graduation for 5 -6 years. After all, maturity comes at different times to different peopld ;)</p>
<p>To my knowledge no such systematic, engrained and well defined structure exists anywhere to ‘support’ a lower stats student. Guess the university athletic setup still implements the ‘separate but equal’ approach. And it does so with the loud cheers of those who would be first in line to call the ACLU if such a setup were to be found in the …say …business world.</p>
<p>But why not have (UCB in this instance) bring in a group of exactly this type of low stats kid and have this group be ‘adjuct’ players…with access to each and every perk, support and blind eye given to the FB team…THEN let’s check in and see where we are in 4 (or 5 or 6 ) years.</p>
<p>There is a reason that many employers prefer to hire college athletes and I personally know of two that will only hire athletes. The reality is that recruited athletes must have a lot of drive just to achieve that status. Admittedly, other students at highly selective schools might have similar drive. But the average student at typical State U–forget it.</p>
<p>Whether athletes are able to transfer that drive to academics is a separate question. But in general, it makes them more likely to succeed at whatever they do.</p>
<p>Not sure what “black” has to do with it. If you look inside the most successful college football programs, you’ll find that most players of all races and ethnicities aspire to professional football careers. Most won’t make it, of course, but that’s their ambition, and that’s why they sign on to the top, high-profile programs. A few have the good sense to hedge their bets by using their college years to study toward a more conventional career. Another sizable cohort won’t make it as professional athletes but will eventually find gainful employment in the ranks of college or high school coaching, staying close to the game they love. And many of those who do graduate without any particular career direction in mind will eventually find gainful employment somewhere–just like a lot of non-athletes who drift through their undergraduate years without particular career goals in mind.</p>
<p>‘There is a reason that many employers prefer to hire college athletes and I personally know of two that will only hire athletes. The reality is that recruited athletes must have a lot of drive just to achieve that status.’</p>
<p>My former office was filled with former college athletes - especially football players - as well. They simply had learned to work harder than virtually everyone else, and because of their backgrounds prior to college, seemed to understand many of our clients better. As a non-athlete myself, it took me quite some time to get my head around this idea, but once I took off my blinders, it was really noticeable. Many of them told us stories of their injuries, and how they feared losing their scholarships (because of what awaited them back home), and the demands of rehab coupled with a full schedule (for which many were poorly prepared academically to begin with). They had amazing stories to tell (and almost none of them were about gridiron glory).</p>
<p>I have no doubt that an elevated level of discipline and drive is needed to become a recruited athlete. This would argue for a HIGHER than normal graduation rate…unless of course the energy and drive is not applied in that area…which then begs the question…why go to college…which puts us back on the mobius strip.</p>
<p>And I did not say athletes had is easy or soft…I did say that as a group they receive more support services and are given more concessions than a kid with similar low stats and struggling academically and financially would receive. I would say the lower stats kid has a tougher road to hoe.</p>
<p>Regular poor students do not have to worry about blowing a coverage or missing a tackle on national TV. The pressure is HIGH. Coaches test their knowledge of plays and game plan every week in meetings. Much like Prof Kingsfield in Paper Chase there is no hiding.</p>