Athletes? Sure. Students? Well...

ESPN has an interesting story about Florida State University and their approach to assisting students with learning disabilities.

Students who have such struggles may receive admittance with lower GPAs or test scores, and may have accommodations to assist in their learning and academic coursework while enrolled.

Interestingly enough, according to ESPN up to a third of the football team may have been "diagnosed" with these issues. That raises some questions-

1. Are these diagnosis accurate, or a way to admit players who couldn't otherwise get enrolled?
2. Are the accommodations valid, or ways of seeking to ensure that athletes are able to play?
3. Is the university being progressive in helping troubled students, or seeking to keep the team competitive, the alumni happy, and the money rolling in?
   

When I coached, we had a number of students who entered under similar circumstances. But, the ratio was nowhere near FSU's, and the expectation for the students is that they would work to "catch up" and enter the "mainstream" programs/majors within a year or two.

FSU seems to be doing something else entirely, don't you think?

Round Two/Three/Four/Five

Last night, as a part of "Football Night In America", Tony Dungy had the following to say:

Breaking sports news video. MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL highlights and more.

That someone has a better chance to coach in the NFL, where there are less than 40 opportunities, than Division 1 football with 120 opportunities, is a travesty.

Dungy implies that the University Presidents would be the ultimate voice for making this change; that they alone have the ability to make the boosters, alumni, and athletic departments change.

However, Presidents know where their bread is buttered, and ain't doing anything. My opinion: this should be examined by the federal government. Equal Opportunity Hiring practices are enforced in every aspect of University employment- faculty/adjuncts/staff. They should also be used for coaches and other athletic personnel. Otherwise, the educational institution becomes a business, and businesses are not tax exempt.

However, things are looking good for minority football coaches this season with two more hires, and at least two more high profile opportunities on the horizon. Both Kansas and Louisville are rumored to be actively recruiting African American candidates, although for Kansas it would only be a change of venue and not an additional "number" for our count. UPDATE: Louisville has made their decision.UPDATE: As have Akron and Notre Dame

Here's where we are:

Akron: Hire- Rob Ianello (no)
Cincinnati
Florida State: Hire/Appointment- Jimbo Fisher (no)
Kansas
Louisville: Hire- Charlie Strong (yes!!)
Marshall
Memphis: Hire- Larry Porter (yes!!)
Notre Dame: Hire- Brian Kelly (no)
Virginia: Hire- Mike London (yes!!)
Western Kentucky: Hire- Willie Taggart (no)

But of course...

The NCAA has dropped the hammer... on Southeast Missouri State Basketball.

Sanctions?

• Public reprimand and censure.
• Three years of probation to be added to the institution's current two-year probationary period,
  
• Reduction by one of the number of scholarships in men's basketball for the 2009-10 academic year from the NCAA maximum limit of 13 to 12. (Self-imposed by the university)
• Reducing the number of off-campus contact and evaluation recruiting opportunities in men's basketball during the 2009-10 academic year by 15. (Self-imposed by the university)
• Reducing the number of occasions in which men's basketball student-athletes may be supervised by strength and conditioning staff to no more than two per week. This is a reduction of 28 opportunities that generally are conducted May-August. (Self-imposed by the university.)
• Vacation of wins in which involved men's basketball student-athletes competed during the 2006-07 and 2007-08 seasons; and the vacation of the individual records of the student-athletes and record of the former men's basketball coach.

Violations:

• impermissible presence of men's basketball coaching staff members during summer strength and conditioning activities
• impermissible observation of out-of-season pick-up games
• impermissible extra benefits: one in the amount of $239, and the other when the former assistant coach drove a student-athlete 171 miles from campus (allegedly to see his newborn baby)

Meanwhile, in Los Angeles... nothing. Well, not completely nothing: LA Times: Pete Carroll is pushing it

"One of our mottos is, a relentless pursuit of competitive advantage in everything we do," Carroll said Thursday.

Um, Pete, that attitude is exactly what has landed USC in trouble.

"We're not in trouble," Carroll said.

Yes, you are. By college sports definition, any time NCAA investigators are hanging around, you are in trouble.

They showed up for the Reggie Bush stuff, and apparently they are going to stay for the Pete Rodriguez stuff, this special teams consultant who admitted he attended USC practices, which is a direct violation of those stupid rules.

And yet, we've only heard crickets from the NCAA. Anyone surprised?

"Michigan Men"

Quick follow up to Jeff's post over on the BBC: Those Who Stay Will Still Be Losers:

In the comments, I also talked about the following-

What’s especially interesting is that, after Feagin’s transfer/arrest/trainwreck, Slick Rod said he didn’t know about previous issues when the student athlete was in HS.

And now, as a response, the AD will “look into the recruiting process”.

I agree wholeheartedly- you should look into the recruiting process that brought you the coach that actively recruited Chris Henry, Adam Jones, Noel Devine, and friends while at WVa.

Oh wait… that was someone named Bill Martin.

To make things even richer, MACh1gAAn has recently obtained the services of Massillon Ohio's Justin Turner, who was struggling to get past the NCAA clearinghouse.

His issues, in summary- he wasn't able to pass all of the sections of the OGT (Test you have to pass in Ohio to get a diploma- "Thank you", No Child Left Behind).

My issue is not that this student athlete isn't capable of doing college level work, and shouldn't be at UM. It's well known that some people don't test well with certain types of testing- It's not indicative of aptitude at any level. He was, from all I can figure out, a 3.4 student in high school and had a solid SAT/ACT score. We wish him the best as he pursues his education and life's calling.

What I want to point out, though, is that the "Harvard of the West" is willing to allow a student athlete on campus when all they need to do is get past the NCAA's standards. You know, the same ones that SEC schools often use...

Meanwhile, just a bit South, Ohio State "lost" a student athlete because he didn't meet the enrollment requirements of the University.

Doesn't seem like the University of Michigan really cares all that much about academics for their athletes.

FERPA and You

For those of you who don't work in Higher Education, you've probably never even heard of FERPA, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. But, if you're a sports fan, you have been impacted by it's reach, at least according to the Columbus Dispatch.

The law, intended to keep student's personal matters private, limits the circumstances under which an institution can release information about that student. It also places parameters on who this information can be released to.

So where do you come in? There's concern that this is being used by Athletic Departments to thwart investigations into their practices and into the choices/actions of the student athletes at major programs.

The whole article is worth a read- to ensure that I"m not being to homerific, here's the link to two sub-articles about tOSU: Violations and Processes. Seems like they do a better job than most at self reporting the things that do happen, even if they tend to side with the student privacy end of the spectrum.

As a side note- Ohio State has the largest athletic department in the country, offering twice as many sports as most other institutes. With the labyrinthine and ridiculous amount of NCAA guidelines, violations are going to happen. The issues are: 1) repeated mistakes and 2) failure to respond.

Along those lines, there were a great series of articles in the LA Times regarding the U$C/Bu$h situation that we've covered before. Give it a read: USC Stays Silent and The Silence is Deafening

Again, when issues come up do you respond proactively or close ranks and play defense? Seems that the Trojans have chosen the latter...

Well, it's a start

We give both Oregon schools a lot of grief, hereabouts... from their continual inflow of Nike money that still hasn't bought a national championship, to the reminders that the Beavers are the otherOTHER OSU, to the uniforms from hell... You'd never know my wife was from there.

But, I will give credit to the state of Oregon, who are considering a version of the "Rooney Rule" for any future head coaching hires.

It was originally aimed at football coaches, but a House committee expanded it to include all sports as well as athletic directors, Greenlick said.

It would require universities to interview at least one minority in each hiring process. The state's Board of Higher Education would enforce the legislation, but the bill specifies no penalties.

The bill easily passed the House. Should it be approved by the Senate and signed by the governor, Oregon would become the first state with such a requirement.

Good timing, too... we've talked about this before, and have even implied that there may be other ways to levy pressure at the national level. Seems that there's at least some investigation into the foundational purpose of College Sports which may help impact this discussion. A report from the Congressional Budget Office implies,

I-A athletic departments get 60% to 80% of their revenue from activities that can be described as commercial.

CBO director Douglas Elmendorf, left, writes: "The high share of commercial revenue for some sports programs raises the questions of whether those programs have become side businesses for schools and, if they have, whether the same preferential tax preferences should apply to them as to schools in general."

With all the discussion about a playoff and monopolies and such, it may be an interesting summer in the world of higher education and sports.

Signs O' The Times

Nope, not channeling the purple one here, just finishing up the recruiting series.

Since we last talked, the NCAA has decided that it's important to indicate that 7th graders are now officially potential student athletes in basketball. That means that some idiot is pursuing kids who are 12-13 years old to help his program in the future. Wonder who that could be...

Today is National Signing Day- the day that high school athletes sign the letters of intent that will bind them to their colleges of choice (unlike their coaches, who can go where ever they want when ever they want).

This is the day that coaches know for sure who will be joining their team- who was being honest with their verbal commitments, and who has chosen to go elsewhere.

But as Scout, Rivals, and others celebrate this day that legitimizes their existence, let me offer a cold bucket of reality. First, a reminder: These are kids who are choosing to go to college to (allegedly) get their education.

Although, the standards by which they are admitted are different than everyone else. While more and more schools brag about their "selectivity" (how high the scores/GPAs of their incoming classes are), NCAA Football powers continually bring people to the academic community whose scores are much lower than the rest of their cohort. Often, there are even attempts to get around the NCAA minimum standard for admittance- yup, there are 3.9 GPA students who don't receive the fat envelope while kids with 820 SATs are given full rides.

Well, once there they still have to make the grades, right? Sure, sort of. Often times, athletes are funneled to specific majors in order to help them maintain eligibility. Sure, there are some exceptions, but it seems that a student's development outside of the field/court is not as important as it could be.

And, to top it all off, the graduation rates (while improving) are still no where near the level that they should be, especially for programs that pride themselves on academic excellence. Sure would make the BCS more interesting if the classroom would factor into the equation...

There will be a lot of celebration today, and rightfully so. For some of these young men, this is the chance of a lifetime.

My hope is that they will find ways to make the most of it, in spite of of some overwhelming odds- potentially being unprepared for academic life, having people invest in them only due to sports, living in a culture who won't celebrate just as much when/if they get their degree.

But those are the times we live in.

Fiesta Follow-up

To good not to post:

The Road To Perdition

Continuing our conversation about recruiting, especially after Saturday's Army All American Bowl.

We've already talked about how strange all of the attention that these young adults receive can seem, but that's just the beginning. There's the recruiting process, facilitated by the Universities themselves (or their representatives).

If you've watched any cheesy movies from the 80's or 90's, some of this might sound familiar to you. For me, this issues is one of ways I got introduced/interested in big-time college sports: before beginning my Master's program in Lexington, I read Raw Recruits (re: the Kentucky scandal). Granted, that was about basketball, but it changed the way I look at athletics.

And, unfortunately, it's still a part of the process many places. Let's look at a few examples:

• Willie Williams was a highly touted athlete from Miami, who in 2004 kept a diary of his recruiting visits. Some of the things included: Lobster, steak, private jets, nightclub visits, cheerleaders.
• Oregon's 2004 treatment of their recruits was so extravagant that it made the NCAA change it's protocol. Again, private jets and lobster make an appearance.
• This past week, news regarding Jamarkus McFarland's process (which included U$C, LSU, and primarily Texas and OU) emerged. Female hostesses, Hummer limos, daily contact, wild parties and allegations of underaged drinking and drug usage seemed to be a part of his experience.

Seems pretty obvious what the values being exemplified here are. Remember, these are 17 and 18 year old young men, being courted by institutions of higher education. Places where young adults are supposed to be developed in ways that will make them better people, not just use them to further the interests of fans and coaches. Places where "learning" is supposed to be preeminent- What do you think each of these young men learned from these experiences?

While it may be that these are all isolated situations, it's seems that turning young adults into a commodity may be an issue even at those places where nothing of this sort has appeared. For instance, two well known institutions have recently taken more commitments from recruits than they appeared to have openings for- are the opportunities valid, or will they come at the expense of another young adult who no longer serves the program?

We'll wrap this up next with an overview of what College is supposed to be about, and if these young adults are benefiting in this way.

The Games Before the Games

I work at an institution of Higher Education, and I love college sports. Even so, sometimes I have to remind myself that these two things interact quite frequently.

It's easy to forget that the huge, fast, amazing athletes we see on the picture box are also 20 year old young men who are still maturing and learning what it means to be an adult. And while they are recipeints of a great opportunity, they also are challenged by the pressure of balancing a college experience with a full time job preparing to perform on the field. Add this to the idol worship and the pressure that comes with being a BMOC, and it amazing that there aren't more instances where an athlete snaps.

I also find myself troubled by the attention that we in American culture pay to young adults; and not just those who run a sub 4.6 40 yard dash. We spend inordinate amounts of time watching Brittany Spears, Lindsay Lohan, Jonas Brothers, or Miley Cyrus rocket to fame and then burn out, and that's a bit odd. Again, these are not even college students when they show up on our radar- they're kids. With our infatuation with youth culture, it's no wonder that shows like "To Catch A Predator" are necessary.

I bring this up because this weekend sees the big High School All Star football games: the Army All American Bowl (on NBC) and the Under Armour Game (on ESPN). While I will watch, and am interested in some of the in-game annoucements that recruits will make, there's something about the whole process.

There are whole institutions and organizations dedicated to watching and grading 15, 16, and 17 year olds as they perform athletically, and some of the verbiage used ("fluid hips", "great hands", "solid lower body") would interest Chris Hansen. Another aspect of this industry is having the "experts" call, email, text message, and interview these young men about their college choices.

Please hear me correctly- I do not think that anyone involved in the recruiting tracking process is doing it for the wrong reasons. I just wonder about the bigger picture: these folks are providing a service, and there are people who are willing to pay for this information. And that's what is a bit odd- that there is a market for this information, that there are people around the counntry who are that interested in 15-17 year olds that they probably haven't met or ever will meet. For the record- I can name the 5-6 recruits that Ohio State is still strongly pursuing, so I'm in this boat as well.

I'll be following up on this with some perspective about the means that colleges will take to be sure they win these "recruiting wars", as well as a look at some of the "results" that we see from this process.

Coaching Carousel 2008-09

And now, the promised examination of hiring practices in Division 1 (FBS) college football head coaching positions. Here's the list from last year.

As you remember, we're at 2.5% at the end of the season (3 African American head coaches out of 120 openings). And here's what's happened since:

Toledo: Hire- Tim Boeckman (no)
Kansas State: Hire- Bill Snyder (no)
Tennessee: Hire- Lane Kitfin (no)
Washington: Hire- Steve Sarkisian (no)
Wyoming: Hire- Dave Christensen (no)
Clemson: Hire- Dabo Swinney (no)
New Mexico: Hire- Mike Locksley (YES!!)
Mississippi State- Hire: Dan Mullen (no)
Bowling Green: Hire- Dave Clawson (no)
Syracuse: Hire- Doug Marrone (no)
Auburn
Eastern Michigan
Utah State
New Mexico State
San Diego State
Miami of Ohio
Army

It's also very promising that Buffalo's Turner Gill is being considered for the Syracuse and Auburn positions, but even with Locksley's hire that would leave the number at four (since Gill already has a head coaching position).

Some point to nepotism as being the main culprit behind these issues, and to a point I agree. A friend once said that the easiest way to get a head coaching position was to be an offensive or defensive coordinator, and the easiest way to get those jobs was to be an assistant, and the easiest way to be an assistant is to be a Graduate Assistant, and the best way to do that is to play D1 football.

But that's where the analogy breaks down, as a large portion of rosters are made up of minority students.

In my opinion, even nepotism smells of racism (intentional, subtle, or institutionalized), as people who have been given opportunity are want to give that same chance to others; if the system worked for them, then it must work. At some point, people must make the conscious decision to think outside of the good ole' boys network and hire new faces and new names. And given that coaching selection is all about money, it's hard to be the person who takes that risk.

Again, I read a lot about a future "up and coming" coaches (Strong from Florida; Phillips from Kentucky, etc.) , and am excited about what may happen. But we've been waiting for "may" for a while across the Higher Education landscape, and the numbers aren't great. A recent survey revealed that

“The leadership which is the power structure in college sport remains overwhelming white. In FBS institutions, this includes 92.5 percent of the presidents, 87.5 percent of the athletics directors, 92.6 percent of the faculty athletics reps, 83.3 percent of the faculty and 100 percent of the conference commissioners. Only 3.5 percent of the faculty are African-American and 3.4 are percent Latino.”

There's a long way to go.

Make that four

Update: Ron Prince is out at Kansas State. Next season there will be four head football coaches of African American heritage at Division 1 institutions unless hiring changes occur this off season. They are:

Turner Gill, Buffalo
Sylvester Croom, Mississippi
Randy Shannon, Miami
Kevin Sumlin, Houston

Again, over 120 colleges and only 4 African American head coaches. For those of you playing at home, that's a little more than 3%.

Again, given where we are in history, this is an absolute embarrassment to the sport of college football and to Higher Education as a whole.

At least someone in the national media gets it

Show me the money...

Ok, it's taken a while for me to get back to this (get off me, I've got other things happening), but here goes.

Welcome to part two of the "National Championship/Bowl System" review. In part one, we talked about where the bowls came from (not the stork), and how the idea of a National Championship has changed in the past one hundred years.

We've said for awhile that the key to the Bowls and the BCS is the amount of money that the system creates for advertisers and Bowl committees, and for the schools and athletic departments involved. In looking deeper, though, it turns out that I was wrong.

Well, kinda. Let's take a look at each part of that statement- First, the bowl committees.

The Orange County Register did an amazing job researching the money trail, and points to several aspects that reinforce the current systems:

• Bowl committees rake in all of their money tax free. Because they are "affiliated" with "educational endeavors", they experience the same benefit as the NCAA (again, in spite of the fact that the NCAA doesn't have any oversight for these games). This is thanks to a 1991 ruling by the federal government holding that the Cotton Bowl could have a corporate sponsor without jeopardizing their exempt status.
  
• The BCS has donated over $500,ooo to Washington connections, and seven bowl organizations have received at least 21 million dollars from the government since 2001.
• Bowl committee chairs' salaries often exceed $100,000 a year; with some chair's salaries equaling 10% of total revenues.

Add this to the fact that these things were designed to increase revenue for the cities and areas that host them and it's easy to realize that the financial motivation to continue the current system is quite significant.

People often point to the NCAA basketball tournament as a counter example to this argument- "March Madness" brings in a lot of money (particularly in advertising); wouldn't a football tournament do the same? Yes, and no.

First, the revenue for the tournament starts at the NCAA, not in the hands of the special interests listed above. And, as CBS showed, in the hands of the networks that have the chance to air the programming. After all, why would CBS spend 6 billion to keep the tourney, or why would ESPN work to own five of the games (seriously)? However, the revenue might not come pouring in- ratings continue to decline for the current holiday games.

The second reality, though is that March Madness offers a very different product than would an NCAA football tournament, and that there are too many variables that would keep the same amounts of money in play. Remember, MM only takes three weekends for a team to play six games, and that there are numerous teams at one location (thus boosting the local revenue). A ticket to the early regionals allows fans to watch several great games; something that I can't see bowl sponsors being excited about.

The other factor here is what I call the "Travel budget" factor. Remember, many bowls are vacation opportunities for teams from snowier climes- there's a reason why Buckeye fans and Husker Nation travel so well. The idea of a tournament presupposes that these fans will go to the first and second and third rounds at the same rate that the currently flock to Pasadena or Miami. However, realistically this is pretty unlikely. Where money will be lost is when a group of fans waits to go to the second or third round, and their team is upset in the first game- Those vacations won't be happening, and that revenue won't be realized. It's much more profitable for 64 teams and fanbases to go to 32 games than to hope that these same ones travel to multiple games.

On this latter point, I would also point to the fact that bowls continue to struggle to be profitable for the institutions involved. Schools continue to foot the bill for unsold tickets, which eats into their ability to justify this process. One of the ESPN Bowls even gave free tickets to area residents, and then required everyone to sit on the side opposite of the camera for the illusion of a full house.

And this is where, as earlier stated, I was wrong. Bowl games are not a cash cow for teams involved; instead they end up costing these institutions incredible amounts of money. Over half of the teams involved in "Bowl Season" actually lost money for their participation. Again, the OC Register report highlights this best, and points to the fact that their national championship actually cost the Florida Gators $3.7 million dollars- and they only received $2.24 million for expenses. The SEC got a total of $17 million to be split among the teams in the conference; so in effect it would have been more profitable to have been Vanderbilt and not have been bowl eligible. And you wonder why Notre Dame fans can actually point to last year as a success.

For a playoff, multiply these expenses for every round and the magnitude of the problem shines brightly. Especially in an era where opportunities for student athletes are cut to comply with Title IX and budgetary concerns, the excess of the current system and the impact on athletic departments becomes all the more damaging.

While it appears that there are more than enough cause for reform, the money involved is way too significant for any significant change to be attempted. Bowls are about profit, and not for the schools. College football (well, and basketball too) should be recognized for what it is- an apprenticeship for young adults who may make a career out of professional sports. An apprenticeship that has an immediate benefit for the institutions who are "hosting" the student athletes (although, some have used words like "sweatshop" and "plantation" and "exploit" instead of "apprentice" and "host").

We'll address this more in the final post of this four part series (at this rate, look for it in August) when we think through ways to correct some of the issues that we've brought up. Next time, though, we'll ask the question- "Do we need a national champion?"

Who controls the past now controls the future...

With today's Rage Against The Machine lyric we start the four part exploration of the "National Championship" process, including a look at the money trail on the current system, a discussion about the relevancy for the whole thing, and a suggestion for those who really REALLY want some sort of closure.

Because, it's not enough to point fingers- I want us to really know the facts. First, we figure out how we get to where we are today.

It should also be noticed that as the game was in its formative stages, it was more prestigious than "professional" football. There were major concerns that almost had the game banned, and it was only "Papa Bear" Halas' ability to sign Illinois legend Red Grange to the Bears that gave the NFL any credibility. College football is big now, but it used to have no competition- no NFL, no NBA, no PBA.

And, college football existed before the NCAA (it was f0unded to address football's issues)- which is may also be why the NCAA has never had a 'champion' for football. It's also important to note that the NCAA basketball tournament has always existed (although, at one time it was less significant than the NIT, but that's another post), so there's always been sanctioned "championship".

In this context, the first thing to realize is that (once upon a time) everyone was OK with the media or others deciding this and letting folks know.

You know an obnoxious Notre Dame fan who's obsessed with all of their national championships? Or a Michigan fan with the same obsessions? Or even an Army fan who remembers when they were good (it's true)? Back then, it was up to sports writers (like the Heisman, the MVP for the season) to make that determination.

But they weren't the only ones- there were multiple "champions", designated by differing groups. For instance, Ohio State has five "official" championships and seven other ones. So the idea of a "true" champion is mostly a modern one- our ancestors were either OK with the complexity, enjoyed the debate, or simply had better things to do. My vote is the latter- there just wasn't 24 hour coverage online and on cable of sports (not that I'm complaining).

At one point, though, things got complex when the good folks in Pasadena decided to host a little game in 1902 in order to raise awareness for tourism and for their parade. That first game was Michigan and Stanford (I know, but it's true), and saw Michigan win 49-0. But the Rose Bowl wasn't always a Big T1e1n and Pac-10 event; one of the most famous moments in college football occurred in a game against Georgia Tech and Cal (I know, because my grandfather listened to it on the radio).

With the success of trips to California, other cities soon got into the act- Florida and Texas soon hosted bowl games of their own. To ensure a crowd, these games began to approach conferences in order to set up the best match ups and provide a vacation spot for fans from the east coast, the Midwest, and the plains states.

In all of this, though, the idea of "championship" never came into consideration. Even through the 80's, there were split "championships", as the Associated Press and Coaches Poll would select different teams. But any attempt to change the bowl alignments to facilitate a better process went out the window with the 1984 anti-trust decision that allowed for colleges (and conferences) to negotiate their own television deals (which is why Notre Dame has their own deal with NBC). Because conferences were creating their own contracts, they were working to create the television rights for their bowl agreements. All the NCAA could do was "recognize" these bowl games (meaning "allow student athletes to play, and member institutions to participate"). "Recognizing" is not "sanctioning".

This leads us a bit into the next post about the financial realities of the current system, but let's finish with a quick summary: NCAA never had a national champion for college football, Bowls have never about championships or playoffs (only money), NCAA can't do a playoff now due to legal precedent.

Next: Follow the money... The major barrier to making any changes. And why it's not as lucrative for your alma mater as you might imagine.

Leaders of Men...

Over the past few weeks, we've seen some interesting developments in the world of higher education. And yes, I do count the athletic department as a part of the higher education initiative. Perhaps that's where my difficulty lies.

Be more concerned with your character than your reputation,
because your character is what you really are,
while your reputation is merely what others think you are.
John Wooden, UCLA

As a former Division 3 player (note that I didn't say "athlete"), I respect and value the co-curricular experience, and see sports as a part of that. Intramurals, pick up games, games that you invent to kill time and make friends (Dunn "Hall Ball" anyone?), university sponsored opportunities (club or "varsity)- all of these should be driven by the mission of the institution and aimed at helping graduate well rounded and mature adults.

Believe deep down in your heart that you're destined to do great things.
Joe Paterno, Penn State

Heck, I value this so much that I've invested my life and livelihood (as well as the lives of my family) to pursue opportunities to encourage, support, and teach college students. I had the blessing, many years ago, to work with the academic support system at a Division 1 school and to coach football as an assistant at my alma mater, and found my passion and calling to work with young adults in these arenas. So, I'm a bit biased.

I can't believe that God put us on this earth to be ordinary.
Lou Holtz, Notre Dame

I also believe that coaches have the ability to make the greatest impact on the lives of students- that there are things learned on the practice field, training room, and on the court/field that many students will not have the opportunity to learn otherwise: Teamwork, sacrifice, persistence, winning and losing with dignity, etc. As you can (hopefully) see, I hold the role of "coach" in high regard.

Sacrifice. Work. Self-discipline.
I teach these things, and my boys don't forget them when they leave.
Paul "Bear" Bryant, Alabama

Like many lessons on college campuses, learning takes place as much from observing as it does from hearing lectures: in the realm of athletics, talking about sacrifice and character has little value if the players do not experience it consistently in all aspects of their coach's life.

Coaching is a profession of love.
You can't coach people unless you love them.
Eddie Robinson, Grambling

Young people need models, not critics
John Wooden

Which is why this past several weeks have been so difficult for me, as I watch coach after coach send very clear messages about their values to the students and others who are being shaped by them. Even more difficult for me has been to see how this disconnect falls not only on the individuals involved, but on the institutions as well. (This is why I care so deeply about hiring processes for minority candidates- these 'teach' values as well.) Clearly, there are messages being communicated in and by these places of learning; and I'm not comfortable with what they are.

Sports do not build character. They reveal it.
John Wooden

While a couple recent examples come easily to mind (I'll discuss 4), I want to talk about my first struggles with this inconsistency. Former Colorado Coach Bill McCartney made two decisions that seemed to be out of sync to me in his final season with the Buffs. First, Colorado won the National Championship in 1990 by finishing the season undefeated. Then, in 1994, Coach McCartney retired to found a well known Christian Men's movement, which focused on helping men live lives of integrity. The disconnect for me came at two levels; first Coach McCartney's championship came at the hands of an officiating mistake, and Coach McCartney never acknowledged this by forfeiting the game (even though there was precedent to do so). He did, eight years later, say that he was "remorseful", but at no time did he discuss giving his school's national title to another school. Second, when he left to start his ministry, I remember reading comments from student athletes who were devastated by his decision; one said, in particular, "What about the promises he made to use? Aren't those worth keeping?" I highlight this not to denigrate Coach McCartney, but to give some context for my recent thoughts on the actions and words we've been seeing/hearing on ESPN and elsewhere.

Leadership, like coaching, is fighting for the hearts and souls of men
and getting them to believe in you.
Eddie Robinson

While Nick Saban comes most easily to mind in these conversations, the first such case of actions speaking louder than words I want to point to comes from a much smaller place. After his first year at Rice, Todd Graham signed a contract extension only to take a new position at Tulsa three days later. Rumor has it that he may have even been in negotiation with Tulsa during his talks with Rice. And now, his name is at the top of the list for many searches... after one year at Tulsa.

Any time you give a man something he doesn't earn, you cheapen him.
Woody Hayes, The Ohio State University

This brings us to coach Saban, who left LSU to the more lucritive pastures of the NFL, only to leave the Dolphins in disarray to jump to Alabama. While difficult enough to swallow for someone who's charged with character development (or not- we'll get to that), what makes Saban's decision all the more egregious were the words "I'm not going to be the Alabama coach" that he spoke just prior to signing the contract.

I plan on staying at Alabama for the rest of my career.
I guarantee that I'll be here for you through it all, regardless of what happens.
'Bear' Bryant

Bobby Petrino has been in the news as of late as well; this time for quitting his job as Atlanta Falcons head coach in order to return to the college world at Arkansas. Occurring just one day after his franchise QB was sentenced to prison for 23 months, this move came without conversations with his current employer, who had not granted Petrino permission to talk with anyone else about other opportunities. If only the owner of the Falcons had remembered that Petrino came to his employ six months after signing a contract extension at Louisville- This isn't a man who's word means much. Or, as a friend once said "Never date a girl that will break up with her boyfriend to be with you. If you do, don't be surprised when she leaves you for someone else."

I never criticize a player until they are first convinced
of my unconditional confidence in their abilities.
John Robinson, USC
I'll never give up on a player regardless of his ability
as long as he never gives up on himself.
'Bear' Bryant
You win with people.
Woody Hayes

Finally, we come to the big news from the Big House... West Virginia's coach Rich Rodriguez' decision to leave Morgantown after signing a one year extension last year. It's been pointed out that Coach Rodriguez only chose to stay at WVU after agreeing in principal to a deal at Alabama; after which the Mountaineers counter offered, and he had a chance to look and sound like he had been a WVU man all along. An alumni of the institution, Rodriguez pledged to be at WVU "for a long, long time" at his press conference following the signing of the extension. Yet he left his alma mater and his promises for more money.

When a team outgrows individual performance
and learns team confidence,
excellence becomes a reality.
Joe Paterno

Ability is what you're capable of doing.
Motivation determines what you do.
Attitude determines how well you do it.
Lou Holtz

What may be more troubling is the manner by which he chose to leave. According to reports, he submitted his resignation via a memo delivered by a graduate assistant, rather than meeting face to face with the staff involved. Also, before he told his own team, he called a prized recruit to invite him to come to Ann Arbor with the coach. When he finally met with the young men he had brought and taught at Morgantown, it was a 10 minute meeting immediately prior to leaving for his new position. Clearly, messages are sent about values.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings,
and the feelings of others before your own rights.
John Wooden

As mentioned earlier, part of the concern that I have is not the messages being taught by individuals, but that institutions which are called to a higher purpose have colluded with this mindset and encouraged this behavior. ESPN's Gregg Easterbrook writes,

And this is the coach Michigan wants! Someone whose word is not bond; someone who, if the Free Press account is accurate, actively tried to double-cross his previous school. Wolverines: If Rodriguez is a fiasco at Michigan, don't say you weren't warned.

Loyalty is a two-way street, not a blind alley
Woody Hayes

Others point to this issue, and ask "Why don't universities pursue legal action against coaches for breaking their contract? Mark Story from the Lexington Herald-Leader points to the truth of this matter:

When their own jobs come open, teams want the ability to poach other head coaches. That's why they'll never hold their own coach to a contract.

If coaching contracts were actually enforced, then any time a job opened, your pool of candidates would be limited to those coaches A) whose contracts happened to be expiring at the same time; B) who were retired or otherwise unemployed; C) who were assistants.

Publicity is like poison; it doesn't hurt unless you swallow it.
Joe Paterno

So where does that leave us? Well, interestingly enough, right back where we started. After Coach Rodriguez left for Ann Arbor, Nick Saban is rumored to have contacted WVU about the open position. One year into his contract at Alabama, which he entered after one year as the Dolphins' coach. Remember what I said earlier about dating? Fortunately, there are some who are starting to see through this- the top recruit who Coach Rodriguez spoke with before his own players and staff is also rumored to have said that, while he loves the offensive scheme that the coach teaches, it would be hard to play for him since Coach Rodriguez could leave Michigan just as easily as he left WVU.

Success is a peace of mind which is a direct result of
self-satisfaction in knowing that you did your best
to become the best that you are capable of becoming.
John Wooden

And yes, I recognize that I'm a fan of an institution with the largest athletic budget in the country. Like I've said before- I'm not naive enough to think that college sports have become more about the money than anything else. As such, perhaps my thoughts are unfounded- we wouldn't have this problem with CEOs of Microsoft or Apple or Dell, would we?

The will to win,
the desire to succeed,
the urge to reach your full potential...
these are the keys that will unlock the door to personal excellence.
Eddie Robinson

I guess I just hope daily that we can figure out ways to be good stewards of the thousands of lives that are entrusted to us, and to the millions of others who are watching and learning from outside the classrooms.

You cannot live a perfect day without doing something for someone
who will never be able to repay you.
John Wooden
You can never really pay back. You can only pay forward.
Woody Hayes

That's just cool...

I'm sorry, but it is.

Character Education

Yesterday was National Signing Day for college football prospects, and there's a lot out there on the internets and ebays about this process. Don't look at me... use Google, for heaven's sake.

Quick thoughts:
1) I'm creeped out by the amount of attention that we pay to high school athletes- 17 year olds- in this process. But, given that ESPN is televising HS B-Ball games, I think it will probably get worse.

2) This year, there were a lot of verbal commitments that went out the window; the Detroit News has a good article about the impact that this has and what this implies. But again, we shoudn't be surprised at this.

3) Given that we're talking (allegedly) about Insitutions of Higher Education, what does this mean about the values of these places and what persons involved with them are teaching?

Coaching, the NCAA, and $$$$$

'Cause in reality, it all comes back to money.

We've been talking about the investigation into the NCAA's tax exempt status.

Today's LA Times jumps on the bandwagon (not the first time they've borrowed from yours truly), and examines not only this issue but athletic spending overall.

In a section about coaching salaries, you read this quote:

Colleges continue to ignore that "players are generating the money," said David Berri, an associate professor of applied economics at Cal State Bakersfield and a co-author of "The Wages of Win," a book about modern sports. "The money for coaches is coming from players. When you put it that way, it really is a reverse Robin Hood effect — rob from the poor, give to the rich."

Great article, and good to see that others are thinking about this as well.

More on Tax Exemption...

We've been following the NCAA tax exemption situation for a while... to refresh your memory, check here:

Now they've done it
Tax Exemption, Part Deux
Quickly (see part on "Professionals, Part 2)
Someone Must Be Paying Attention
and, from Gladwell.com: Abolish the NCAA? and NCAA Redux

Today comes an article in the New York Times (!) that echoes these sentiments: Looks Like A Business; Should Be A Business. This article points to the Saban hire as being yet another piece of proof that the NCAA is not about academics, but about money (at least in the "major" sports).

Great quotes:

What kind of a skewed market makes these demands? First, the players are not allowed to be compensated. Instead, the coaches walk off with the value produced by the “student-athletes.”

Second, athletic departments have no shareholders who seek dividends or increases in stock value through higher reported profits. That is, these departments face no market pressure to turn a profit. Money finds a way to be spent in such a circumstance and costs bloat.

Third, athletic departments benefit from privileged tax treatment. Perhaps most notably, boosters can give money to the program and procure the privilege of buying some choice seats on the 50-yard line. Tax laws allow a booster to deduct 80 percent of such a donation, which in practice is little more than a personal seat license.

Fourth, it is in athletic directors’ self-interest to up the ante on coaches’ compensation. Their worth increases along with their coaches’ pay.

But the real point is that college athletics are not supposed to be run according to the rules of the marketplace. They are supposed to be run according to the norms of the university.

Athletic departments should not be able to have it both ways: either they are part of academia and are treated as nonprofit institutions, or they are professional enterprises, whose players are paid a salary and covered by workmen’s compensation, and they pay taxes like other business entities.