IT SOUNDS like a good deal. As millions of students struggle to pay for higher education, hundreds of universities offer full scholarships to the lucky few applicants who are talented enough to compete in intercollegiate sports. Yet a growing number of critics decry this arrangement as exploitative. And on August 8th a federal court agreed, ruling that the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), a club of schools that sets the rules governing college sports, has violated antitrust law.
The case involves Ed O’Bannon, a former college basketball star who now works at a car dealership. In 2009 he filed a class-action lawsuit against the NCAA and EA Sports, a video-game company that used a thinly disguised version of him in a video game (the avatar and Mr O’Bannon are pictured). EA Sports paid a fat fee to the NCAA but nothing to Mr O’Bannon, because college players are supposed to be unpaid amateurs.
Not cricket
Claudia Wilken, a federal judge in California, found that the NCAA was colluding to restrain trade. She ruled that its ban on players being paid for the use of their name or likeness was illegal, and suggested that colleges establish trust funds that student-athletes could tap after graduation. The effect of this decision may at first be modest: it allows the NCAA to cap payments to players at a modest $5,000 a year. However, it sets a precedent that could shake up one of America’s most popular and lucrative forms of entertainment.
Foreigners are often startled when they discover how seriously Americans take college sports. The captain of a university soccer team in Europe is no more likely to be famous than the student who came top in a chemistry exam. In America, however, the top student athletes are stars, watched and cheered by millions.
Colleges set up the NCAA in 1906, at President Theodore Roosevelt’s behest, following a spate of on-field deaths and corruption scandals. American football and basketball now operate on a two-tier system. Colleges offer students a free education, plus room and board, to play for them. The best athletes eventually turn professional and make real money. But they cannot join the National Football League (NFL) until they have spent three years playing for a college team. For the National Basketball Association (NBA), they must be at least 19 years old.
The NFL and NCAA avoid competing with each other by divvying up autumn weekends, with college football games on Saturdays and the pros on Sundays. The “March Madness” college basketball tournament sends workplaces across America into a frenzy of small-time betting. The television contracts are juicy. Across all sports, college athletic revenues are $10.5 billion a year, more than the NFL generates. Less than 30% of that goes towards scholarships and financial aid for players. In contrast, professional athletes usually receive about half of their leagues’ turnover in salary and benefits (see chart).
The NCAA insists that, as amateurs, players cannot claim workmen’s compensation for injuries on the job, which are common and dangerous among head-clashing American footballers. It also bans universities from offering high-school athletes anything of value to enroll and demands that student-athletes perform reasonably well academically.
But such policies tend to be honoured in the breach. Many athletes spend far too long training to have much time for classes. Some are functionally illiterate but somehow manage to turn in well-written essays, the contents of which they do not appear to remember. Academic fraud is rife. For example, an investigation into the University of North Carolina found that athletes were often packed into “no-show classes”. At the average member school in the NCAA’s five highest-grossing “conferences” (subdivisions), just 44% of men’s basketball players graduate within six years.
Newspapers are regularly filled with other college sporting scandals, such as an agent who booked prostitutes for players at the University of Miami. Yet although NCAA member schools and their affiliates are the ones breaking the rules, it is usually players who suffer the consequences. Most student-athletes technically live in poverty, because their scholarships do not cover the cost of living beyond room and board and the NCAA bars them from signing independent endorsement or licensing deals. When the NCAA’s enforcement division gets wind of players trying to make ends meet by selling autographs or merchandise, or by accepting prohibited gifts like plane tickets home, discounted tattoos or free groceries, it hands down lengthy suspensions, which often cost athletes their scholarships the following year.
For decades, college sports fans cheered for their alma maters without worrying that the best coaches earn millions of dollars while the best players live hand to mouth. But in recent years the NCAA has come under pressure from the media and the courts. In 2011 Taylor Branch, a civil-rights historian, wrote an article entitled “The Shame of College Sports”, arguing that for colleges to make millions from the unpaid labour of mostly black athletes carried “the whiff of the plantation”. Joe Nocera of the New York Times has dedicated dozens of columns to the NCAA’s abuses.
Full-court press
At the same time, several legal challenges are grinding through the courts. In one, a group of former athletes is suing the NCAA to receive compensation for concussions they suffered while playing. In another case, a labour judge recently approved a request by Northwestern University’s American football team to vote on forming a union. In March Jeffrey Kessler, a lawyer who has already won an antitrust case against the NFL, filed a new class-action suit against the NCAA seeking to overturn all restrictions on paying players. If the judge in that case applies the core of Ms Wilken’s logic, the entire premise of amateur college sports will be scrapped.
For now, the NCAA is digging in its heels. It plans to appeal the O’Bannon ruling. It insists that paying student athletes more than the cost of their education would ruin college sports and expose players to “commercial exploitation”, which is an odd way of saying “being paid for your labour”. It would take a determined goal-line stand for the colleges to resist the forces now ranged against them. By refusing to concede a few more yards, the NCAA risks surrendering a game-ending score.
Post by ChillyMcFreeze on Aug 19, 2014 7:49:29 GMT -5
I still have the wide-eyed, idealistic view that a fully paid education *is* your pay as a college athlete. And at a lot of schools, that amounts to a pretty hefty check. A hell of a lot more than their classmates make delivering pizzas. And if student athletes are practicing too much to study, the onus is on the athletic program to make sure players get ample study time.
But the horse is out of the barn on this. There is no way any athletic program at a major university will do anything that might hurt revenues, even if it will benefit the students. So I'm coming around to the idea that we should compensate these kids for the injuries they're likely to incur, the lack of job prospects they'll face when they graduate because they haven't sat through a collective 20 hours of class, and the fact that the amount money they bring into their universities is kind of obscene not to give them some share.
This article is interesting. It occurs to me that there isn't a lot of transparency with these scholarships/programs. There is no telling whether education means solely tuition or includes fees, books, etc. I also wonder about the kids that aren't absolutely spectacular and so they offer partial scholarships to, but the same work load is expected out of them as the fully-funded kids. Again, this information doesn't seem readily available. Just with my own local university, I can see scholarships and recipients but there's no telling what those scholarships entail, what the requirements are, etc.
I also know some academic or need-based scholarships offer an extra amount, and even the RAs got a stipend on top of their room and board being paid for. From a purely business stand-point I imagine that would have been easier so I wonder if the NCAA wouldn't allow that.
I am a believer that a free education (tuition, books, housing) IS the pay. Student athletes are STUDENTS. Some schools may need to bolster their emphasis an student academics. Leaving school with no student loans, a degree and often name recognition and connections due to their athletic participation are bonuses many of the student athletes enjoy (well earned).
I know our local university has team study time, tutors available if needed- and our women's track team are all top students with straight A grade (and not easy programs-pre med etc) - they are motivated hard working women.
I know at my SEC school a lot of the football players got a free ride: tuition, room and board (we had a dorm especially for the athletes, and they got unlimited meals in the cafeterias), and a book allowance. Not sure about a stipend. Some of the other athletes (gymnasts, soccer, softball) got similar deals if they were good enough.
They do have to put in a ton of work, and I definitely knew some athletes who skated by in their classes just because of their status, but I'll admit I was totally jealous of the deal they got. Even if it doesn't come close to what some of them were making for the school.
Obvs I don't know how the scholarship stuff works at other schools. I went to a flagship state university.
I'm never going to say that all colleges treat all athletes fairly, but the median value of the tuition, room, and board these athletes receive is in the $30-$40k range.* It's not like they're receiving nothing at all, and this article is therefore quite misleadingly written.
If the NCAA and colleges weren't making money off of these kids names for video games and the like, I would be more on the side of the tuition is their pay. But this lawsuit in particular centered around them using his name and likeness in a video game that they sold. It's crossing a line for me especially as graphics and video games get better every year.
And to add - my understanding is that the players don't have to even sign off on their name and likeness being used. I could be wrong but I don't think they even get the choice to opt out and their names and likeness are used without their consent, which is some major bullshit.
If the NCAA and colleges weren't making money off of these kids names for video games and the like, I would be more on the side of the tuition is their pay. But this lawsuit in particular centered around them using his name and likeness in a video game that they sold. It's crossing a line for me especially as graphics and video games get better every year.
This is true. I don't know how royalties for these games work. Do colleges get money, or is it just the NCAA and Electronic Arts? I do think it would make sense for players to get some sort of royalties for their names and likenesses being used. These games are big money.
Does anyone know how it works for the pro versions of these games? Do NFL players get royalties for the Madden games? Or pro golfers for the Tiger Woods games, for that matter?
I guess I have a real problem with companies or the university making money off of the name of an individual student. I don't think jerseys should be sold with players names or numbers on them (they didn't use to be - unsure if that has changed) and they definitely shouldn't be used in video games without the player's consent and without them being compensated in some way. I feel like there should be a way to separate that from compensating a player for playing the game.
As far as players being compensated, that drastically changes the model and has repercussions for all sports. Basically we are talking about football, basketball and maybe hockey floating all of the other sports. If players get compensated, it would seem to me that there would be no money for track, swimming, gymnastics, etc. In addition, when we talk about how much universities bring in with sports revenue, we are not talking all universities or even most. We are talking Division I only and then only the high profile sports. In my opinion, paying players would be the demise of college sports overall. Most universities would not be able to pay the players, and the staff members that are currently volunteer. Only the top division I schools would be able to pull this off. And finally, it would take the opportunity to go to college away from many who need that scholarship money.
I do think coaches make way too much money. WAY too much. But that is another issue.
If the NCAA and colleges weren't making money off of these kids names for video games and the like, I would be more on the side of the tuition is their pay. But this lawsuit in particular centered around them using his name and likeness in a video game that they sold. It's crossing a line for me especially as graphics and video games get better every year.
This is true. I don't know how royalties for these games work. Do colleges get money, or is it just the NCAA and Electronic Arts? I do think it would make sense for players to get some sort of royalties for their names and likenesses being used. These games are big money.
Does anyone know how it works for the pro versions of these games? Do NFL players get royalties for the Madden games? Or pro golfers for the Tiger Woods games, for that matter?
I'm not sure how it works with the pros and the pro teams. It might be somewhere in their collective bargaining agreements and/or in the teams agreements with the NFL.
Even if they don't get paid my guess is they were able to bargain for it in some way.
And to add - my understanding is that the players don't have to even sign off on their name and likeness being used. I could be wrong but I don't think they even get the choice to opt out and their names and likeness are used without their consent, which is some major bullshit.
Wouldn't surprise me. A lot of colleges are allowed to use your likeness for marketing materials. So hell why not profit from the gaming industry too right?
Post by autumnfire on Aug 19, 2014 15:07:27 GMT -5
Holy crap that was a read.
I'm a former NCAA athlete and while I wasn't a baseball, football or basketball player I find some of this to be mainly geared towards male athletes and not touch on female athletes. Mainly how they depict athletes as just getting by in school (well I guess they did stress 'some'). Which is slightly bothersome, because that's not always the case. Many female athletes and some male that I know who played hockey and other sports did so as a means to have their education paid for while playing a sport they loved.
I have to admit I did notice many of our male hockey players take advantage of fellow classmates to do their homework. They felt they were gods gift to our school not all but some. For many of them college was a stepping stone to the pro's and an education secondary to their goal of getting drafted. And to those whose primary goal was sport over education it did show.
I was always of the mindset that I worked hard both academically and physically to get to where I was. I viewed my scholarship like a job. I was training 4 hours a day 6 days a week and all through summer and most of my childhood. Thank goodness for my parents. They paid well and above what I received for my scholarships in my hockey playing years alone, hotels, meals, registration fees, equipment etc.. I was more than working hard for the money I received to go to school. There was no time for a second job, your job was playing hockey (insert other sports). We were given Sunday's off and that was about it. Life is different or at least it was for me as a student athlete in comparison to my roommates who weren't. I did view my scholarship as my payment for the work I put in every day for the sport I was playing. The games, the summers of training, holidays we had to stay at school to train, going back to school weeks early to start per-season training and the Christmases we visited with family then went back to school the following day. Not all athletes on scholarships are given full rides though but are expected to give the same amount of their time and effort. NCAA only offers x amount for each sport each year depending on the senior graduate class. A few of my teammates actually had %50 to %75 the rest was got on loans but couldn't be paid until school was done. Those people I noticed big time were very restricted as they had no way to get extra money due to the commitment required to play.
Athletics are a different game all together. There are some schools that are a bit corrupt in my mind in how they make up classes so that athletes reach the gpa allowed to play D1 (2.0) which is the bar for many schools before academic probation anyways.
I can tell you my scholarship was full. We were not allowed to accept anything as gifts. I had someone from a major hockey equipment brand want to 'give' me equipment to advertise while I was still in high school. I was not allowed to do so as it would have caused me to be classified as a professional athlete. My scholarship although paid in full by the NCAA, did not cover books but I mean that's a drop in the hat in comparison to the other fees I didn't have to pay. Everything else was covered, when I was no longer on the meal plan living in on campus townhouses, my school actually had to pay out to me so I had spending money to get the meals that my scholarship paid for. It came heavily taxed for me because I was a Canadian. My fellow American teammates got $2500 while I received $1500 for the semester (not complaining just offering a perspective in terms of what's paid for a full scholarship).
Given the heavy restrictions the NCAA has on collegiate athletes I actually agree with this man suing. When we play games there is a fee for anyone who isn't a student. Mens games just bring my jaw to the floor with some of the more major sports. The schools and I imagine the NCAA do rep the benefits from these students (especially around end of the year tournaments). I know my school just got a ton of publicity over our women's hockey team winning the NCAA championship. Both the school and NCAA make out well just on athletes performances and sometimes not so much if it's a bad few years. It's a give and take so to speak. If my name and image was ever used in a game without 1. my knowledge and 2. some kind of royalties I'd be doing the same as this guy. Since that's unlikely to EVER happen I don't have to worry about that . But I can understand where he's coming from as I think the only thing an athlete owes the school and the NCAA is to perform and work their asses off for 4 years while maintaining a good GPA. Not all athletes and their school are playing the system. Some go on to do amazing things in the working world outside of their sport. I'm sure while it was an honor to have his image in a game it must have also been a bit of a slap to the face to find out that the NCAA got a huge cut.
Now my opinion changes IF the NCAA was putting that back into scholarships. Then I can see how that is helping to fund future athletes. But at the very least the athletes should get some kind of compensation even if it's in the form of a fund that they can touch after they're done competing on a collegiate level.
Post by autumnfire on Aug 19, 2014 15:08:47 GMT -5
Shit.. If I'm thinking back though I vaguely remember singing an NCAA form as a freshmen with regards to use of 'my' image. I could be wrong but it may have been something we actually signed in agreement to. Wish I could remember.
This is a hot topic in my family, as college football is gospel around here. Has anyone watched the documentary "Schooled: The Price of College Sports"? It was on Netflix last year, not sure if it still is, but it's kind of nauseating to watch about coaches being fired for helping to feed the players who cannot afford to eat because it's a "perk" to the athlete. It needs reformed in a big way.
Shit.. If I'm thinking back though I vaguely remember singing an NCAA form as a freshmen with regards to use of 'my' image. I could be wrong but it may have been something we actually signed in agreement to. Wish I could remember.
I believe they probably do. My concern with that is that they aren't really in a position to refuse. If pro athletes sign something of that nature I think they have more of an opportunity and a better bargaining position, kwim?
Shit.. If I'm thinking back though I vaguely remember singing an NCAA form as a freshmen with regards to use of 'my' image. I could be wrong but it may have been something we actually signed in agreement to. Wish I could remember.
I believe they probably do. My concern with that is that they aren't really in a position to refuse. If pro athletes sign something of that nature I think they have more of an opportunity and a better bargaining position, kwim?
Agreed. We weren't in a position to choose as you said. If we didn't sign that meant we didn't get our scholarships and who really wants to give that up?
For women's hockey I signed it without a thought because the odds of us being used in a game or other advertising was slim. Seemed far fetched for me so I signed without a thought.
It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out. I like the idea of a fund, and having a cap on it making it available after the athlete is done participating in D1 collegiate sports.
The only thing I'm wondering about is what this means for past players who may have had the same thing done to them. If they'd be able to also sue. I'm not up to snuff on the laws or if this only applies to athletes moving forward.
I still have the wide-eyed, idealistic view that a fully paid education *is* your pay as a college athlete. And at a lot of schools, that amounts to a pretty hefty check. A hell of a lot more than their classmates make delivering pizzas. And if student athletes are practicing too much to study, the onus is on the athletic program to make sure players get ample study time.
But the horse is out of the barn on this. There is no way any athletic program at a major university will do anything that might hurt revenues, even if it will benefit the students. So I'm coming around to the idea that we should compensate these kids for the injuries they're likely to incur, the lack of job prospects they'll face when they graduate because they haven't sat through a collective 20 hours of class, and the fact that the amount money they bring into their universities is kind of obscene not to give them some share.
But division 1 athletes miss so much class with traveling for games and practice. Most do not get a degree while in college. My H played division 1 football and had to change his major because his coaches did not want to hear about a lab interferring with practice. Once he realized that he was not going to be a professional FB player, he quit because he wanted a degree. I think that these colleges should have to give these players a full ride AFTER they are done playing because that is the only way they are actually getting the "pay". You have to be really smart to get a degree and play division 1 at the same time. And you have to get your degree in something that still allows you to play the sport. And if you can barely graduate HS how are you going to play sports and go to class.
Are the priorities jacked? Hell yes. But if this is how they are going to do it something needs to change. And isn't it like only <1% make it to the pros. So if you never really got your degree while you were there, what are you supposed to do after they have used you all up?
So true! I'm sorry things got to the point they did for your DH. It was certainly different for our sport and our coaches wanted to see us succeed in school and in our future careers. I can certainly see this happening in more than one school/sport, and frankly it's sad. Athletes give a lot to their school, it's disheartening to see little given back to them especially in terms of their future and degrees if their degrees interfere with the sport they play.
Missing class is very true and lets not touch on some teachers who seem to have it out for athletes with little to NO slack for missed classes or tests.
I'll just throw in my usual WOT here. Those two programs are bad for universities and bad for student athletes, and it trickles down into high schools and non athlete students. The whole thing is bad bad bad.
I kind of laugh during March Madness when commercials come on from the NCAA about student athletes and how they go on to become doctors, lawyers, scientists, and so on. When people complain about "college sports," they usually aren't complaining about the swimmers from the D3 school, even if it is Kenyon, or the soccer players from the D2 school. it really is mostly about football and basketball.
I also laugh because for the top tier schools (top tier for those sports), they don't even PRETEND that these boys go to class or that school is a priority. the NCAA basketball schedule is insane. When you see the tournament start and UNC is in California or wherever for weeks on end, it's just a joke that the athletes are even supposed to attend class.
I know though that the above is not the norm for most college athletes (my brother was a college athlete), and that there are enormous benefits to playing a sport, especially for women, even at the college level. so I dont want to sound like I am anti-college sports or anti-NCAA. hell my husband was a D1 athlete. I always forget about that. HA.
but I do think the NCAA can't have it both ways for the big money-maker sports. If the players are student-athletes, then they need to be students first. If they are athletes whose primary purpose is to bring glory and publicity to the school, they need to be compensated accordingly.
The whole "free education" thing doesnt work if the players aren't ACTUALLY getting an education (my husband has told me stories of being in classes at Rutgers with football players, who would come in the second day of class with the semester long project completed, and everyone knew it was the tutors who had pulled an all nighter and gotten it done).
But division 1 athletes miss so much class with traveling for games and practice. Most do not get a degree while in college. My H played division 1 football and had to change his major because his coaches did not want to hear about a lab interferring with practice. Once he realized that he was not going to be a professional FB player, he quit because he wanted a degree. I think that these colleges should have to give these players a full ride AFTER they are done playing because that is the only way they are actually getting the "pay". You have to be really smart to get a degree and play division 1 at the same time. And you have to get your degree in something that still allows you to play the sport. And if you can barely graduate HS how are you going to play sports and go to class.
Are the priorities jacked? Hell yes. But if this is how they are going to do it something needs to change. And isn't it like only <1% make it to the pros. So if you never really got your degree while you were there, what are you supposed to do after they have used you all up?
So true! I'm sorry things got to the point they did for your DH. It was certainly different for our sport and our coaches wanted to see us succeed in school and in our future careers. I can certainly see this happening in more than one school/sport, and frankly it's sad. Athletes give a lot to their school, it's disheartening to see little given back to them especially in terms of their future and degrees if their degrees interfere with the sport they play.
Missing class is very true and lets not touch on some teachers who seem to have it out for athletes with little to NO slack for missed classes or tests.
Why should professors give slack for athletes who miss classes and tests? That is so not their problem. If I'm not going to give any slack for the rest of the class who undoubtedly have work, other tests to study for, social commitments, etc. that could interfere with getting the work done for my class, why are athletes a special case? The athletic director doesn't give a good gotdayum about my classes, so why would I cater to him/her?
Where I teach, our coaches give travel dates at the beginning of the semester so the student and I both know when they'll be out. The onus is then on the student to arrange to do the work for me *ahead of time*--never after the due date. I have no obligation to change my syllabus for student athletes. And that's a generous policy. Many other professors say "Sorry! You miss the test, you miss the test." Students are there to be students first as far as I'm concerned. The athletic program wouldn't exist without the college.
ETA: And I'm not meaning to jump all over autumnfire's ass. The whole attitude that athletes deserve red carpet treatment in college bugs me.
So true! I'm sorry things got to the point they did for your DH. It was certainly different for our sport and our coaches wanted to see us succeed in school and in our future careers. I can certainly see this happening in more than one school/sport, and frankly it's sad. Athletes give a lot to their school, it's disheartening to see little given back to them especially in terms of their future and degrees if their degrees interfere with the sport they play.
Missing class is very true and lets not touch on some teachers who seem to have it out for athletes with little to NO slack for missed classes or tests.
Why should professors give slack for athletes who miss classes and tests? That is so not their problem. If I'm not going to give any slack for the rest of the class who undoubtedly have work, other tests to study for, social commitments, etc. that could interfere with getting the work done for my class, why are athletes a special case? The athletic director doesn't give a good gotdayum about my classes, so why would I cater to him/her?
Where I teach, our coaches give travel dates at the beginning of the semester so the student and I both know when they'll be out. The onus is then on the student to arrange to do the work for me *ahead of time*--never after the due date. I have no obligation to change my syllabus for student athletes. And that's a generous policy. Many other professors say "Sorry! You miss the test, you miss the test." Students are there to be students first as far as I'm concerned. The athletic program wouldn't exist without the college.
When I say 'slack'. I mean they should be more willing to let me take a test the day before or the following monday. And not be so stuck on it has to be during class. I cannot change when I have to travel for a game, for the school. It's not like I'm playing hooky. Plus we were always ones to give our schedules to our teachers. Not to ask them to cater their class to us but to see in what ways we can work around obstacles.
But to say that I should fail a test (essentially) because I'm playing a sport FOR the school is just absurd. No the teachers shouldn't bow down to us, but they should especially with proper notice be willing to WORK WITH the student athlete. I worked hard for my degree it wasn't easy at all, especially juggling both athletics and school. Never once did I complain. I made a point to go to my professors and try to find a compromise. Not all were willing and personally speaking I feel that's poor on their part. If I was lazy, and didn't do my work when I was there or showed no interest in the class then yes show no remorse over the missed test. But if I'm engaging, finish my work, get good grades and am always in class besides when I am away playing a game FOR THE SCHOOL yes I expect SOME slack to be given.
We start missing out on the sport we were PAID to come and play for you could very well risk loosing your scholarship. I feel it's short sighted to even ask why athletes are treated special. Like we just get a free pass in school or something. I'm not sure about other sports but from my own experience I lack understanding as to why the student athlete who was give 40k to come to the school to play the sport there should be a little give and take. It doesn't mean the Athlete is working any less harder by any means. Dare I assert that I had to work harder. The work didn't just go away it was always there. In terms of project deadlines that is on the Athlete, you knew when it was due and you should have put together things and handed it in early. I'm speaking about tests in particular and or classes where your attendance went towards your grade (again just in my own experience not speaking towards other sports or schools)
^^^ Tell me about it. Every single one if the girls I graduated with went on to get an advanced degree and my senior year, our team had the highest cumulative GPA of any D1 swimming program in the country. A year later they axed the men's team and eliminated scholarships to the women's team, turned the coaching position into a part time position with half the salary, and used the.money to rebuild and renovate the football field and increase the scholarships to that program.
I'm laughing because that's so sad. Like just ridiculously sad. It makes me understand more why my school did not have a football team. At the time I didnt like it, because I think it affected campus spirit, but looking back I think it was smart. Our swimming facility was the nicest athletic facility on campus.
I always wondered how athletics are at a school like Johns Hopkins, where the majority of the school is D3, but lacrosse is D1 (which I think is unusual to have a school split like that). I am sure those lacrosse players stick out like a sore thumb.
Why should professors give slack for athletes who miss classes and tests? That is so not their problem. If I'm not going to give any slack for the rest of the class who undoubtedly have work, other tests to study for, social commitments, etc. that could interfere with getting the work done for my class, why are athletes a special case? The athletic director doesn't give a good gotdayum about my classes, so why would I cater to him/her?
Where I teach, our coaches give travel dates at the beginning of the semester so the student and I both know when they'll be out. The onus is then on the student to arrange to do the work for me *ahead of time*--never after the due date. I have no obligation to change my syllabus for student athletes. And that's a generous policy. Many other professors say "Sorry! You miss the test, you miss the test." Students are there to be students first as far as I'm concerned. The athletic program wouldn't exist without the college.
ETA: And I'm not meaning to jump all over autumnfire's ass. The whole attitude that athletes deserve red carpet treatment in college bugs me.
I completely agree. If the NCAA actually cared about the student part of student-athlete, they would mandate that competitions take place on weekends only. Evenings permitted if the two teams are within two hours of each other (i.e. IU v. Purdue).
The formation of these mega-conferences should be proof enough that the NCAA doesn't give a shit about the student part of student athletes. Texas A&M in the SEC with Florida? I mean, really, come the fuck on with that. The expansion of the ACC a few years back put Boston College and Miami in the same conference. Utter bullshit.
Why should professors give slack for athletes who miss classes and tests? That is so not their problem. If I'm not going to give any slack for the rest of the class who undoubtedly have work, other tests to study for, social commitments, etc. that could interfere with getting the work done for my class, why are athletes a special case? The athletic director doesn't give a good gotdayum about my classes, so why would I cater to him/her?
Where I teach, our coaches give travel dates at the beginning of the semester so the student and I both know when they'll be out. The onus is then on the student to arrange to do the work for me *ahead of time*--never after the due date. I have no obligation to change my syllabus for student athletes. And that's a generous policy. Many other professors say "Sorry! You miss the test, you miss the test." Students are there to be students first as far as I'm concerned. The athletic program wouldn't exist without the college.
When I say 'slack'. I mean they should be more willing to let me take a test the day before or the following monday. And not be so stuck on it has to be during class. I cannot change when I have to travel for a game, for the school. It's not like I'm playing hooky. Plus we were always ones to give our schedules to our teachers. Not to ask them to cater their class to us but to see in what ways we can work around obstacles.
But to say that I should fail a test (essentially) because I'm playing a sport FOR the school is just absurd. No the teachers shouldn't bow down to us, but they should especially with proper notice be willing to WORK WITH the student athlete. I worked hard for my degree it wasn't easy at all, especially juggling both athletics and school. Never once did I complain. I made a point to go to my professors and try to find a compromise. Not all were willing and personally speaking I feel that's poor on their part. If I was lazy, and didn't do my work when I was there or showed no interest in the class then yes show no remorse over the missed test. But if I'm engaging, finish my work, get good grades and am always in class besides when I am away playing a game FOR THE SCHOOL yes I expect SOME slack to be given.
We start missing out on the sport we were PAID to come and play for you could very well risk loosing your scholarship. I feel it's short sighted to even ask why athletes are treated special. Like we just get a free pass in school or something. I'm not sure about other sports but from my own experience I lack understanding as to why the student athlete who was give 40k to come to the school to play the sport there should be a little give and take. It doesn't mean the Athlete is working any less harder by any means! (again just in my own experience not speaking towards other sports or schools)
I think the disconnect is that many professors don't feel like athletics are "for the school." They're seen as a separate, antagonistic entity. Because they do divert focus away from academics, and they do take students out of class, and they do create a hero worship atmosphere that is bad for a collectivistic, intellectual college environment. I'm not saying that attitude is right, but I absolutely see how it comes about. Personally, I see athletics as being good for individual growth and as promoting buy-in to the institution, but then the sports at my school suck big time. There's no hero worship because there are no heroes!
After my long spiel I do agree that the emphasis needs to be put back on the schooling. But I feel like a lot of what a student athlete does isn't viewed in full. Yes we were students but we also worked our asses off every day training for our sport and sacrificing many luxuries regular students got. This is not a means to complain in any way.
Maybe the PP was right in that some sports ruin it for other sports. For my own my coaches put a huge emphasis on schooling. Games you can't change but they made sure our practices were at 6am for a reason. So that it wouldn't interfere with classes or our ability to do homework at night (minus traveling weekends). Many girls on my team went on to lead very successful careers. A few doctors even.
When I say 'slack'. I mean they should be more willing to let me take a test the day before or the following monday. And not be so stuck on it has to be during class. I cannot change when I have to travel for a game, for the school. It's not like I'm playing hooky. Plus we were always ones to give our schedules to our teachers. Not to ask them to cater their class to us but to see in what ways we can work around obstacles.
But to say that I should fail a test (essentially) because I'm playing a sport FOR the school is just absurd. No the teachers shouldn't bow down to us, but they should especially with proper notice be willing to WORK WITH the student athlete. I worked hard for my degree it wasn't easy at all, especially juggling both athletics and school. Never once did I complain. I made a point to go to my professors and try to find a compromise. Not all were willing and personally speaking I feel that's poor on their part. If I was lazy, and didn't do my work when I was there or showed no interest in the class then yes show no remorse over the missed test. But if I'm engaging, finish my work, get good grades and am always in class besides when I am away playing a game FOR THE SCHOOL yes I expect SOME slack to be given.
I disagree. If you are a professor these days, you are being told that there is no money for conferences, no money for raises, no money for office furniture. You're jealously guarding your three dry erase markers that you haul from class to class because you bought them with YOUR money. And this is happening at the same time that ADs and coaches if big money sports are getting paid literally TEN times your salary, AT LEAST, millions is being spent on athletic.facilities and university presidents who are not even remotely academic in their own right are telling professors that this arrangement is actually good for the.school because it increased endowment, an endowment that is inevitably used to build more athletic facilities.
I have no qualms with professors sending a very clear message.that a university is first and foremost a place for education. BECAUSE IT IS!
When my H was teaching, he made 40 thousand American dollars, which was then further reduced because he had to take 2 furlough days per year (which is bullshit because the same amount of work has to get done) and had to pay a larger portion of his health insurance and pension costs. THANKS, SCOTT WALKER.
He could get the school to pay for conference registration, but he had to stay with friends because there was no funding for travel or a hotel. Meanwhile, he's told he has to bend over backwards to accommodate the travel schedule of athletes, who are getting all their gear paid for. Why should he have to come in after hours to administer makeup tests and accept papers late when he's continually getting paid less money?
Why should professors give slack for athletes who miss classes and tests? That is so not their problem. If I'm not going to give any slack for the rest of the class who undoubtedly have work, other tests to study for, social commitments, etc. that could interfere with getting the work done for my class, why are athletes a special case? The athletic director doesn't give a good gotdayum about my classes, so why would I cater to him/her?
Where I teach, our coaches give travel dates at the beginning of the semester so the student and I both know when they'll be out. The onus is then on the student to arrange to do the work for me *ahead of time*--never after the due date. I have no obligation to change my syllabus for student athletes. And that's a generous policy. Many other professors say "Sorry! You miss the test, you miss the test." Students are there to be students first as far as I'm concerned. The athletic program wouldn't exist without the college.
When I say 'slack'. I mean they should be more willing to let me take a test the day before or the following monday. And not be so stuck on it has to be during class. I cannot change when I have to travel for a game, for the school. It's not like I'm playing hooky. Plus we were always ones to give our schedules to our teachers. Not to ask them to cater their class to us but to see in what ways we can work around obstacles.
But to say that I should fail a test (essentially) because I'm playing a sport FOR the school is just absurd. No the teachers shouldn't bow down to us, but they should especially with proper notice be willing to WORK WITH the student athlete. I worked hard for my degree it wasn't easy at all, especially juggling both athletics and school. Never once did I complain. I made a point to go to my professors and try to find a compromise. Not all were willing and personally speaking I feel that's poor on their part. If I was lazy, and didn't do my work when I was there or showed no interest in the class then yes show no remorse over the missed test. But if I'm engaging, finish my work, get good grades and am always in class besides when I am away playing a game FOR THE SCHOOL yes I expect SOME slack to be given.
We start missing out on the sport we were PAID to come and play for you could very well risk loosing your scholarship. I feel it's short sighted to even ask why athletes are treated special. Like we just get a free pass in school or something. I'm not sure about other sports but from my own experience I lack understanding as to why the student athlete who was give 40k to come to the school to play the sport there should be a little give and take. It doesn't mean the Athlete is working any less harder by any means. Dare I assert that I had to work harder. The work didn't just go away it was always there. In terms of project deadlines that is on the Athlete, you knew when it was due and you should have put together things and handed it in early. I'm speaking about tests in particular and or classes where your attendance went towards your grade (again just in my own experience not speaking towards other sports or schools)
Curious, but do you know if band members or students in non-athletic events had to deal with the same push back from professors? I ask because unless we are going to start mandating that no University event happens during the week except evenings, I don't think it is fair to single it out to just athletic events. I mean like band members that have to travel with the football team, or students going away for a conference. Or music students that have to perform at events that are held during the day.
Of course a lot of the burden is placed on the student to make it up, but I have no doubt that there are some professors that think no one should ever miss their class ever, or are unjustly harsh toward some student athletes.
the other issue re: the professors is that if you are at a D1 school, and you are being told you have to make accommodations for the football players and basketball players, I can see the professor being salty already and by the time the swimmer or runner comes around to ask if they can take the test on a different day, it's just the straw that is breaking the camel's back.