<p>Where do we draw the line? What if a mid gets an offer from a big company where they can make six figures right out of school. Should we let him out because its a “better” opportunity than being an officer? How do we know that this player will not stay in the minor leagues? What kind of recruiting tool would that be. What about the officer who has big plans after his/her commitment but gets wounded and can not persue them? Are we saying that because they didnt have a shot at a professional sport that their future dreams are not as important? </p>
<p>“If it’s all about producing combatant officers, then why does the Academy allow some graduates to pursue medical degrees at civilian institutions upon graduation”</p>
<p>Because they are directly supporting the fleet. By saying X baseball player used to be in the navy but didnt finish his commitment, is that really a recruiting tool? A doctor will directly support the war on terror, will be deployed, will be away from their family. Do not try saying a Navy doc or lawyer are not combat leaders because they are. </p>
<p>That is a great message to send to future members of the Navy. Come and sacrifice for your country but I didnt because I was special and wanted to play baseball.</p>