College athletics out of control?

[OldPony]

Who made an "academic" argument?

[No Cal Pony]

I believe the reference was to Charleston Pony's reply to mine that D1 kids do mostly care about the education. I still disagree. Been areound way to many kids in big programs to see. They are there to try to build a pro career. Of course, there are those who realize that they will probably never make it to the big time, but their egos have been so inflated by coaches and friends at high school and college levels, that they begin to truly believe the hype. As EastStang put it, if a kid cared, why pick a clemson or n.c. state over a duke or wake forest. Look at unc's qb, who was ready to walk away from the program, and a unc degree. If he really cared about the degree, he wound NEVER think of leaving one of the most highly rated colleges in the USA. Why would a kid pick a$m or tick over rice or SMU? Few kids see the real opportunities. One high school classmate of mine did, and instead of going to any number of mid-major schools, went to Harvard.

I might be wrong about this, but don't feel so.

Go Ponies!

[OldPony]

Thanks. Unfortunately, you are right. Most athletes have had a lot of smoke blown up their dresses and are told continually that they can be pro material so they believe it.
The NCAA and, most especially, the College Presidents are the only ones who can control the admissions. They are not going to unless they see a major loss of money when they have athletes committing crimes and recruiting violations occur. They think that they can avoid meltdowns like Baylor so it will take more murders, rapes and assaults to make them think that athletes should be more than just animals who can play. They have to be able to do college work and comport themselves as decent human beings. Lord knows how many more crimes the Presidents have to see.
This is not meant to be an indictment of athletes. Most, I still believe, are good young men but they are starting to get painted by the bad apples. I have heard good high school athletes (when they can afford to go otherwise)say many times that they won't play football in college after going on recruiting trips and finding out who their "friends" will be for the next 4-5 years. It is a shame but true.
BTW-I always want to ask grads of various jock schools how proud they are of the athletes when they speak. Now we are even dumbing down the announcers. When the play by play guys say "should have ran" you know we're in trouble.
I am generally pleased with the caliber young man that SMU has taken and I believe SMU is doing things right. I just wish there were rules to make others do the same things. Sermon over today!

[OldPony]

If you have any doubts about what OP is referring to, look at DMN on line edition today under college sports and under AP stories. Of 5 stories, 4 are athletes in trouble.

[EastStang]

The "thug" athlete has always been around in almost all programs Division 1 down to Division III. I've heard of Harvard hockey players/grads involved in "rape" charges. All it takes is a guy who thinks he is above all discipline. That is one thing I like about Bennett is that he enforces the rules. Look how he sat Bartels out last year from starting the Hawaii game because he broke a team rule. If a coach enforces the rules and sets an example by trying to follow them himself, the athletes generally behave well. If the coach looks the other way when his star breaks a rule, then he loses control of his players. The bigger the program, the harder it is for the coach to control the players, especially when boosters are putting out money. When a kid is getting a check from boosters that kid is going to listen to the booster and not to the coach. Ask Bobby Collins. When the coach is breaking the rules, the player figures he can do what he wants to rat out his coach. Reverse blackmail. Ask Dave Bliss.

[Charleston Pony]

I will stand by my statement that a "majority" of I-A football players DO value the educations they are getting and fully realize they are not likely to ever play professionally. Don't tell me a majority of guys playing at Duke, Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Stanford, etc... are there to enhance their shot at playing professionally. They chose those schools for the value of the education AND the chance to compete against the very best, but vast majority of football players at those schools are legitimate STUDENT-athletes.

I'm not saying there aren't a TON of guys playing college ball who shouldn't even be in college...that's the original point in all of this; but I don't think that group constitutes the majority. Perhaps as much as half the roster at many programs would be full of guys that shouldn't be competing in a college classroom, but places like Tulane & Rice (and I shouldn't exclude SMU) demonstrate through high graduation rates that most players are as serious about their educations as they are developing their football skills.

My original comment was in response to NoCal's comment that "the vast majority of Division I players don't value a degree". I still don't believe that's true. At any given institution, that may be true...but to make that broad a statement for all of Division I is not accurate. Otherwise, you wouldn't see the graduation rates we see today.

[No Cal Pony]

CP, I will also still disagree. Also, to point to the graduation rates doens't justify the staement that most kids care. While SMU and other like minded institutions make the effort to get quality kids, sometime the numbers get inflated. This is too a game. Just think how these numbers would be affected if there were no pe majors, or any other like that are set up at so many schools to ensure that the kids have a home that doesn't require them to be truly challenged in academics. Remember too that the kids coming out of a Rice, duke, stanford, or even SMU are far outnumbered by the kids cruising through a tenn., ok., fla., etc.

My wife went to fla., and I hear about the gators constantly. But, I'll take my kids and my school any day.

Go Ponies!

[No Cal Pony]

By the way CP, maybe someday we'll meet. Trying to find more SMU folk around the area as I now live in Chapel Hill, NC.

Go Ponies!


[This message has been edited by No Cal Pony (edited 08-26-2003).]

[OldPony]

Yes East Stang- There have always been thug athletes just as there have been thug students. The difference is in the numbers and the degree of thuggery (like that word?). In four years at SMU, I remeber 2 athletes getting in trouble for fighting. We were at big time program then. Today, look at almost any of the top programs. K State has 5 awaiting trials I believe. When you pick up the newspaper, it is obvious that this is a growing problem. Nebraska had always been a model program until they took the last steps to win a championship. Tom's last few years were marked by punks who got in trouble for drugs, rape and assaults. CU has had problems the past 5-6 years, the list just goes on and on.
I too am impressed with Bennett and the quality of the young men he, Cavan and Rossley brought to our campus. I believe the majority of athletes value an education. I also believe that many, many of these young men think they can advance to the next level. These goals don't have to conflict. Many of the schools need to get a grip on who the offer. If they don't, the NCAA should. Rather than put schools on probation, I am for punishing coaches and the athletes who take money, do crimes etc. If schools don't try hard to police the action, I think they should forfeit bowl and other TV money and be banned for long periods from TV. I also believe that there should be minimum graduation rates to be bowl eligible. It's a shame OP isn't in charge.

[Stallion]

what a lot of people are forgetting is that we aren't dealing with just "thug" athletes-we are dealing with athletes from an entirely different world than some you might see at SMU, TCU, Baylor or even UT and A&M for the most part. I got a stark reminder of that the other day watching the Darrell Royal story on KERA. The story focused on the recruitment of Earl Campbell. I knew Campbell came from modest means but they had a picture of his home at the time of his recruitment. This placed looked like something you'd see from the 1930's in the movie Sounder or Roots. It looked like one of those shacks you see on the side of the road where you shake your head and wonder when was the last time someone lived in that dump. Tier 1 and Tier 2 universities are asking this kid who probably came from an inferior high school to fit in the pristine campus of a place like SMU when no one in his family made it past 10th grade. The reason I point out Campbell is because he has never been thought of as a "thug"- although questions have arisen about his academic performance at UT- he is reputed to be a guy with integrity. Athletics have reached out to a whole segment of kids who otherwise never would have gone to college. Good or Bad? Fair or Unfair? The answer is not always so clear. Finally, I think its funny how some many people have criticized coaches who fail to exercise discipline in a program and yet how many times have we seen SMU fans torch Mike Cavan when he suspended Donte Womack for breaking team rules before the TCU game. You can't have it both ways-if you want to establish a disciplined program it means making those tough choices like Lou Holtz in the Orange Bowl rather than like Texas Tech which allowed Hanspard to play in a Bowl Game with a .00 GPA.

[This message has been edited by Stallion (edited 08-26-2003).]

[OlePony]

Stallion makes a good point as does OldPony. Giving poor guys a chance because of their environments is noble. Bringing in thugs isn't. If I remember, Campbell was a deeply religious young man and had a mother who made him toe the line. There are many other cases though that kids given a chance made themselves into productive members of the schools and society. It isn't easy to tell sometimes but many times there are large warning signs. Cavan was right to discipline when he did but sometimes the discipline may not have fit the action. Sometimes coaches don't give the press the real story behind the action to protect an otherwise good kid. He sure couldn't coach QB's though.
I think Bennett is much more inspirational while keeping a steady hand on discipline. Only time will tell for sure but he seems to be doing a lot of things right. It seems the kids are buying into what he is selling and this years team may be surprisingly good. 6-7 wins would be outstanding, 5 likely, 4 very disappointing.

[Charleston Pony]

NoCal: If you've never lived in the Triangle area before, I think you will enjoy it. Brace yourself to be overwhelmed by ACC hoops! We lived in Durham from '87-'91 (during Duke's 4 yr final four run). Thoroughly enjoyed the area. If the Ponies ever get out this way again, we will have to consider a road trip.

[EastStang]

I agree with Stallion's sentiments to a degree. Allen Iverson was involved in a gang related event in Virginia Beach, tried, convicted, and won on appeal. He was then admitted to Georgetown, and according the John Thompson was a adequate student and kept his nose clean there. In another environment as he's shown in the pros, Iverson tends to get into scrapes and drove even Larry Brown nuts. A lot depends on the coach. However, some of these kids have long rap sheets already and yet are admitted. My contention is that there are always going to be kids who take advantage of any privilege extended them.

[Waz]

Great post Stallion, and accurate. East Stang, I know Allen Iverson's past dorm RA. From what she says, Iverson was always in trouble. Fights, taunts, loud music and general disrespect for everything in the dorm. He had major attitude.The Housing folks were told to lay low and Thompson and staff always came to the rescue. He was obviously prepping to become the fine role model that he is today.