The NCAA News - Comment
June 17, 1996
Guest editorial -- Every graduation is cause for celebration
BY ED HARRIS
West Texas A&M University
Pomp and circumstance.
Nearly every student entering college yearns to hear that traditional graduation melody, to walk across the stage, shake the hand of the president or dean of the college and receive his or her diploma. Splendid memories captured for a lifetime.
Recently, Emmitt Smith, the multimillion-dollar star player for the Dallas Cowboys, had the opportunity to live out and capture those special memories. Smith left the University of Florida in 1990 following his junior year for a lucrative career in the National Football League. He returned to Florida in 1991 and finished his degree in public relations this spring.
Smith's graduation was more pomp than circumstance. Media across the country portrayed the event as a major accomplishment, a success story and an awakening to today's youth on the importance of finishing their education. Smith furthered his persona as a role model.
Granted, Smith did send a message to the youth and all the players leaving college early for the quick money of the pro ranks. However, athletes returning to school is not all that new or a subject. Many student-athletes return to school after an interruption of their college career to complete their degrees. Every school probably can lay claim to a similar story.
Maurice Cheeks established himself as a hot commodity for the National Basketball Association draft following a solid four-year career ending in 1978 at then-West Texas State University. Once in the NBA, he etched his name in the league record books for steals and assists, mainly playing for the Philadelphia 76ers.
Maurice, who was recruited to play for the Buffs out of the Chicago prep leagues, played on one NBA championship team, rolled in a seven-figure salary, played in the NBA for 15 years and was considered one of the best point guards ever to play the game. Yet he returned to Canyon and West Texas A&M to finish his degree in the late '80s, which was still during his heyday on the court. He had the choice of five major academic institutions in Philadelphia, but decided to return to the Texas Panhandle where he started college.
West Texas A&M University is very proud of Maurice for having the fortitude and determination to return and complete his degree. He set the example for Emmitt to follow when the media did not pay much attention to graduation. Maurice is now employed as an assistant coach in the Philadelphia 76ers organization.
More recently, West Texas A&M graduated Harvey Hale this past May. Who is Harvey Hale, many would ask. He lettered at West Texas A&M for three years in the early '80s and exhausted his eligibility playing basketball for the Buffs. He chose not to complete his degree requirements immediately and entered the work force. He recanted that decision later on and has earned credits toward his degree by taking one or two courses per semester while working full-time. Another success story for an athlete returning to college, but without all the big bucks and national media attention to go with it.
Another side of the picture is all the nontraditional, nonathletic students who return to college after quitting for one reason or another. It would be a rare occurrence for any college not to have at least once graduate candidate fitting that mold each year. Often they must combine raising a family, working full-time and going to school either part-time or full-time. Based on the ability of these students, to complete their degrees is a true success story -- one that rarely ever receives its due attention.
Emmitt Smith deserved the attention of graduating, but the media played its own version of pomp and circumstance for Emmitt Smith. The larger story is that many students and student-athletes play out this story every season. Dropping out, then returning to college and completing one's degree stands far beyond Emmitt Smith. We salute all who persevere.
Ed Harris is director of athletics at West Texas A&M University.
Letters to the Editor -- Academic progress rule may be too rigid
Letters to the editor
In recent years, the NCAA has adopted a new set of standards for college athletes formally known as Bylaw 14.4.3.2.2. It is more commonly referred to as the "percentage rule" among people in the athletics community.
Much to my surprise, I have not come across any written opposition to this set of rules even though the subject seems to be an everyday topic of discussion in training rooms, coaches' offices and playing fields across America. For this reason, I feel it is my obligation to express my concern in hopes that others may soon do the same.
The purpose of the "percentage rule" is to make sure that student-athletes are pursuing a degree while participating in athletics. I will be the first one to admit that many athletes and institutions have taken advantage of the system by employing "stay-eligible" curriculums that allow athletes who normally would be ineligible for participation the ability to play sports while just getting by in school.
The problem I have with the NCAA's efforts to control nonmotivated students is that I now am suffering from the regulations put forth in Bylaw 14.4.3.2.2.
Didn't the NCAA consider the effects these rules would have on legitimate, serious student-athletes? Here are a few ways in which the new policies have made my life, and those of many other intrinsically motivated student-athletes, more difficult than need be:
(1) Ambiguity in degree requirements is magnified when percentages are used to identify where athletes should be academically in relation to others. Depending on one's major, some students may require a larger number of units to graduate than others.
(2) A change of major results in the loss of degree-applicable units.
(3) Some curriculums do not accept elective units as degree-applicable.
(4) Experiencing new fields becomes too difficult because athletes have to worry about reaching certain percentages instead of exploring other significant interests.
In addition to these inequalities, I predict that several new problems will occur as a result of the percentage rule:
(1) Athletes will be more likely to pick easier majors than challenge themselves in areas that interest them.
(2) Changing one's major may no longer be an option for some. The fear of being declared ineligible, regardless of whether they feel trapped in their current major or not, looms over many young athletes as a result of meeting the percentage-rule requirements.
(3) Athletes may choose to attend schools with lower academic standards in order to ensure that they will be able to participate in sports.
It is imperative to understand that Bylaw 14.4.3.2.2 will drastically impact serious student-athletes who may be coerced into abandoning their more strenuous academic goals in order to pursue their athletics dreams. One of the reasons that I chose to attend Cal Poly San Luis Obispo out of high school was to meet both my athletics and academic aspirations.
When the NCAA imposes new regulations that impede the aspirations of highly qualified and motivated student-athletes, then it is time to reevaluate the situation. Perhaps the NCAA should adopt a system that brings athletes in to discuss their academic goals when they stray two consecutive quarters without taking at least two classes in their major. This solution is more realistic, provides a better sense of fairness and enables problems to surface before it is too late.
If there is one thing that we have all learned on the playing field, it is that communication is the key to all success. Let's get together in hopes of finding a better way before we lose one of our most valuable resources, the student-athlete.
Jonathan D. Macalutas,
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Macalutas is a senior who is majoring in industrial engineering. He is a member of the varsity baseball team.
Congratulations and concerns
My congratulations to the NCAA panel that made the decision to allow Northwestern University football player Darnell Autry the option of accepting a movie part.
From my perspective, the NCAA tries to control too many aspects of the college athlete's life and the entire collegiate athletics scene.
I would like to see the NCAA spend more of its time (and money) taking a more active role in the fight against Title IX and the dropping of so many male minor sports programs than worrying about an athlete taking advantage of an opportunity in his chosen field in the form of an "unpaid" job completely unrelated to football.
Title IX is serious. Title IX needs more of the NCAA's attention. With the funds and connections available to the NCAA, why hasn't more of an emphasis been placed on "correcting" the interpretation of Title IX?
Doesn't the NCAA care about the minor sports for males?
Beverly Chapman
Dixon, Illinois
Opinions -- Answer to agent abuse does not rest in paying players
Editorial
The Boston Globe
"We hope they (an NCAA committee examining the agent issue) vote to get tougher and to boot the leeches out of the league.
"The National Basketball Players Association, which certifies agents, should stop winking at the problem and crack down on fast-talkers bearing gifts.
"Everyone should get behind The College Athletic Integrity Act, filed by Rep. Bart Gordon, which would make the exploitation by agents a federal crime. Also deserving of support is the committee of sports lawyers trying to get uniform state laws passed around the country. Now 26 states have laws regulating agents, but they're all different and confusing.
"Student-athletes need to stand taller off the court and to know there are things worth more than money -- honor and a reputation, for instance. But they can't know that unless adults tell them by word and by action -- and by returning perspective to the game."
Denis Horgan, columnist
The Hartford Courant
"Surely, the athletes do a lot for their pay. They have to work like dogs, travel, train, perform. Some actually get an education on the side; far too many others don't. An insignificant few find college sports a passport to professional sports.
"In fact, a more caring society might say: Abandon college sports, it is an exploitation of youth by a system that drains them of their gifts and gives precious little in return. It is bread and circuses, with the universities, networks and sponsors making the money and the kids doing all the work.
"But this is not to argue that the athletes should be paid. How can that do anything else but corrupt what little is left of the educational spirit? Of course there are abuses, such as the Marcus Camby case highlights. But does that justify the extraordinarily patronizing and insulting suggestion that athletes alone among the gifted are incapable of making honest choices and need to be bought off first by the home team? Where is it justified to drag all the kids down to the level of the jackals -- in and out of academic gowns -- who would feed upon them?
"Under consideration are all manner of solutions ranging from surrender to laissez faire. These -- from virtually turning college athletic systems into financial subsidiaries of the pros to viewing athletes as de facto minor leaguers -- often seem to respond as if the problem were that the college athlete's path to professional glory alone is being victimized.
"That's too limited a damage assessment. When things go wrong with individual students, whole athletics programs are hurt too, institutions and their credibility are damaged as well, a school's essential spirit is also trifled with. To me, the problem is that for every kid taking a diamond pendant there are a thousand left high and dry and educationally shortchanged; for every slickster agent on the prowl -- and each should be hammered under the law -- there are a thousand athletics directors and alumni figures promising kids the moon and delivering nearly nothing.
"Instead of coming up with new and elaborate compromises, I've got a different idea: Work the contract.
"If a school and a youth shake hands on the exchange of athletics for tuition, ensure that both ends deliver fully and by the rules. There will be scam artists haunting the fringes, and there will be rare phenomenons leaving early. But for the vast majority of the mere mortals: You earn your way in and you earn your way out. For each and every academic program there must be standards, successes and responsibility.
"There are rules already. Don't abandon them, enforce them."
Editorial
The Hartford Courant
"The prevalence of NCAA violations of this sort is evidence that the culture of college basketball does not do enough to discourage it. There must be stronger emphasis on clean programs, incentives for graduating, and tougher penalties for violations -- meaning no special exceptions for exceptional players.
"Some say it would be more honest simply to pay college players for their abilities. But they already are well paid.
"A four-year college education is worth up to $100,000 on its face, and more in potential salary and opportunities. No one should take that for granted, no matter how well he can shoot a basketball."
|
