<p>
</p>
<p>The “travesty” part is purely your opinion. Many see this as a positive opportunity for these kids, whether they graduate or not. The “commidity[sic]” part is also your opinion. Many of these students are treated like royalty and will see much more of the world than they ever thought possible because of D1 athletics.</p>
<p>curious14-</p>
<p>I’ll add to your post with this quote:
James Duderstadt, president emeritus of the University of Michigan, put it this way before the Knight Commission in late 2000: Major college sports “do far more damage to the university, to its students and faculty, its leadership, its reputation and credibility than most realize - or at least are willing to admit.” The ugly disciplinary incidents, outrageous academic fraud, dismal graduation rates, and uncontrolled expenditures surrounding college sports reflect what Duderstadt and others have rightly characterized as “an entertainment industry” that is not only the antithesis of academic values but is “corrosive and corruptive to the academic enterprise.”</p>
<p>Bay-</p>
<p>Well, assuming that they graduate (or not) at around age 22, what are they supposed to do to support themselves for the rest of their lives? Are you going to argue that it is better to have a few years of being pampered and then return to your previous life vs. actually getting an education and being able to get hired and earn an income? If this is not a problem, why does the NCAA have so many rules and guidelines and why are they constantly revisiting this issue?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Vango,</p>
<p>First, I would like to hear the athlete’s opinion on this (we never seem to get their perspective on this whole issue -why is that?). I can only speculate that they are likely to be pleased to have had the opportunity to play D1 ball, whether they graduate or not. I don’t think you can assume that they will return to their “previous life,” and I don’t think you can assume that they won’t get any education, or choose to pursue it at 22, or were even eligible for college without their sport in the first place.</p>
<p>There is education to be gained and there are connections to be made from a D1 athletic experience, regardless of whether a diploma is earned. I don’t think you can assume it is time wasted.</p>
<p>"As far as the charge of racism I suggest you reread your own posts.</p>
<p>Well it kinda hard to tell you folks you are being racist because the group targeted D1 scholarship (prmarily football & basketball) are predominately black. That’s who with the broad brush, you are talking about when you generalize “colllege sports and scholarships”. We also had some posts about AA and no need for it anymore on this site. Well, I’ve never been black, but I’ve been poor and what I am reading is about people trying to keep me out of college because I’m not good enough. If you can’t see where some posters are going here…it’s the elephant in the room. </p>
<hr>
<p>Van,</p>
<p>What you’re not getting about a college sports scholarship is it’s an opportunity that alot of kids need to change their environment. You’re talking about taking it away because some prissy girl can get into an ivy school. ivy’s don’t give sports scholarships I’m told, so why are you going after everybody else? Besides if she can afford an ivy, she’s not part of the demographic we’ve been discussing. </p>
<p>That’s a have alot vs. have alot more. Your arguement about scholarships strikes at a majority of families on the lower end of the socio economic scale. You’ve questioned their ethics because a moscow idaho professor designed an ethics test that neither you or I have seen. I question it and you accept it blindly. </p>
<p>Here’s an ethics question: it’s ok to steal bread if your hungry?</p>
<p>Depending on your environment, even if you know it’s wrong you might say yes and that would be ethically correct. </p>
<p>Look at the aftermath of Katrina and how black were shown…Looters. </p>
<p>I doubt you’ve ever gone to bed hungry, not just by choice. I have as a child. Could you see my point that possibly those administering an “ethics”
test are really giving an “are your ethics like mine” test? </p>
<p>Can you understand my point.</p>
<p>Opie-</p>
<p>The racism charges are ridiculous. The Div. 1 schools are big schools that for the most part cater to a range of students. Students of many different academic levels can be successful in that environment given the right support. Someone who only meets the minimum NCAA stat. guidelines is not going to survive at an Ivy and it would be a disservice to place them there. You’re mixing apples and oranges and by playing the race card you are ignoring the evidence.</p>
<p>I suppose you’ll call this a racist website:</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.aaregistry.com/phpQJr/poll.php?pid=64[/url]”>http://www.aaregistry.com/phpQJr/poll.php?pid=64</a>
“What should be done to help Division I College Black basketball players graduate? The 2005 NCAA Division I basketball “Final Four” ended this month with the University of North Carolina winning the title. But the graduation rate of the Black basketball players at UNC was only 67 percent. This comes from a new study by Richard Lapchick, director of the Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport. Here’s the Black player final four graduation statistics: UNC 67%, Michigan State 57%, University of Louisville 11%, and University of Illinois 42%.”</p>
<p>Opie-</p>
<p>And what if schools stopped giving athletic scholarships entirely and then used that money for economically disadvantaged kids instead and let them actually get an education? The argument here all along has not been to get rid of athletics, but to do things in a different way - a way that might benefit society more in the long run. There is so much out there about the “athletics arms race” - colleges spending more and more money on things related to athletics, diverting it from more important things. As a nation we are falling behind even third-world countries educationally. If we diverted some of the focus away from athletics and back on education, do you think our institutions of higher learning would crumble?</p>
<p>"Are you going to argue that it is better to have a few years of being pampered and then return to your previous life vs. actually getting an education and being able to get hired and earn an income? </p>
<p>Aren’t you really stretching an assumption here? You are making alot of statements without any experience to back them up. Every time you address this your automatic default is they will fail. </p>
<p>I keep asking you will they fail more or less than the general student body based on race, gender and economic status? In so many ways you’re bigoted because you really haven’t looked to see how many kids grabbed the brass ring and have done well. No not everyone, but look around you, not everyone “makes” it for alot of reasons. </p>
<p>“If this is not a problem, why does the NCAA have so many rules and guidelines and why are they constantly revisiting this issue?”</p>
<p>Why do we have traffic laws and civil laws? Because in order to have a society we have to have some basic agreements in how we operate. The NCAA didn’t create itself. It was created by the schools as a common ground so all could be in agreement. The schools create the standards amongst themselves and the NCAA oversees. Do people break the rules? yup, but most don’t.</p>
<p>Dear Vango,</p>
<p>Out of curiousity, to which colleges in third-world countries are you applying?</p>
<p>Also, I am not questioning the ethics of an individual person. I am questioning a system that causes the ethical reasoning of a person to degrade. There are more than enough stories out there of athletes behaving badly. Part of it comes from being treated as a star (probably the same reason Hollywood celebs behave badly), part of it comes from the pressures of the sport (steroids, anyone?). This is not anecdotal on my part - google various sports related associations and this is the topic du jour. I’m guessing that means people think its a problem.</p>
<p>Motherdear-</p>
<p>I would assume that you are trying to convey that you disagree with my statement that even third-world countries are outranking the U.S. in international education rankings. However, it is sad, but true. The info is out there, if you really want to know, you’ll find it.</p>
<p>Opie-</p>
<p>You don’t think an 11% graduation rate for black basketball players at University of Louisville is a problem?? How does that translate into grabbing the brass ring? Where do you think these kids came from in the first place?? Are you telling me they all make a smooth transition to viable careers?</p>
<p>“And what if schools stopped giving athletic scholarships entirely and then used that money for economically disadvantaged kids instead and let them actually get an education?”</p>
<p>It’s called divison 3. No sports scholarships. </p>
<p>Again your assuming an econ disadvantaged athelete won’t get an education.
STOP IT:) Please. It is possible. Do you want to see the family photos?:)</p>
<p>“The argument here all along has not been to get rid of athletics, but to do things in a different way - a way that might benefit society more in the long run.”</p>
<p>and you “feel” that sport does not benefit society? Sport replaces war in society. Would you rather have the US national beat Mexico 2-0 (yea) or a real conflict? Are the olympics a bad idea? Do they not benefit society through the spirit of competition? Can you think of many other things were you can Lose and still get another chance? </p>
<p>" There is so much out there about the “athletics arms race” - colleges spending more and more money on things related to athletics, diverting it from more important things."</p>
<p>I haven’t really heard of ANY college diverting funds for sports, can you name some? </p>
<p>You know if Phil Knight gives the U or O 75 million dollars for the atheletic department, does it not benefit the school itself. Except of course for those uniforms…</p>
<p>" As a nation we are falling behind even third-world countries educationally."</p>
<p>And you’re blaming sport for this? </p>
<p>" If we diverted some of the focus away from athletics and back on education, do you think our institutions of higher learning would crumble? "</p>
<p>Not crumble, but become boring automaton factories turning out drones. </p>
<p>Do you think if we eliminated the arts from colleges we’d turn out better students? or music or history or social sciences or physcology or philosphy and so on? You could effective argue that an activity has to make x amount of revenue or it is a waste of resources. One man’s vital activity is another man’s crap waste of money and time.</p>
<p>I</p>
<p>Curious, I am more in agreement with you than you seem to indicate. The examples I gave in a situation I know pretty well, reflect Bok’s sentiments exactly. I doubt very much that the administrators that I referred to feel any different about the situation than they did. They just know that it would not be a wise move to change the status quo because the marketplace does not support it. There are just not enough people who feel the same way as Vango. I think sports is overemphasized in our society and in our colleges too. I am entitled to my opinion as is Vango. But so are those who do not agree and they are the majority that is driving the status quo. If I were a college administrator in the position to make far reaching changes to a small college having admissions woes, I would certainly be looking at putting in a football program if the school did not have one. Or a basketball one. From all I have been seeing, it would be a wise move. But I can also say that I would be axed from those colleges that are admitting totally unqualified athletes and then dumping them in huge because one thing I would push would be investing money and services to end that practice. I think that is unconscienable. With the way our colleges are these days, much more than academic centers, communities with all sorts of resources and missions and with holistic admissions, I don’t think taking athletic prowress into account when evaluating admissions candidates is a terrible thing. Of course academic prowress comes first, and I think the academic stats of the top schools and of admissions shows this. Other skills and talent are important too, and are evaluated in terms of what the school needs and wants in terms of its resources that year. Unfortunately if the student pool is flush with violinists and pianists and dancers and actors, that is not going to hold as much weight as things that are on the wish list and are scarcer.</p>
<p>“You don’t think an 11% graduation rate for black basketball players at University of Louisville is a problem?? How does that translate into grabbing the brass ring? Where do you think these kids came from in the first place?? Are you telling me they all make a smooth transition to viable careers”</p>
<p>That’s up 11% from what you want to do with them…
</p>
<p>Does everyone realize the opportunity presented to them? sadly no.</p>
<p>Opie-</p>
<p>So you would take an economically underprivileged kid, have him play ball for a few years while not meeting the requirements to graduate, and I would take the same money and have the kid go to classes and graduate? I like my option better. Why does the kid have to entertain the masses for his scholarship?</p>
<p>Just curious, Vango: Have you talked to any inner city kids about this.</p>
<p>Vango,</p>
<p>The bottom line (IMHO) is that America loves sports, and is that really so bad? I agree that we should improve the current system as much as possible, but citing some anecdotal statistics is not going to change our entire culture.</p>
<p>“have him play ball for a few years while not meeting the requirements to graduate, and I would take the same money and have the kid go to classes and graduate?”</p>
<p>GEE, I get only that option? :)</p>