National Collegiate Athletic Association |
CommentJanuary 19, 1998
Student-athlete view -- Division I process needs more trust
BY KERRY McCOY As a former student-athlete, a current coach and an administrator (based on my position as a Division I Student-Athlete Advisory Committee representative to the Management Council), I have had the opportunity to gain a unique perspective on college athletics.
The reason I felt this way, and why so many student-athletes feel this way, is simple. We dedicate so much of our time, day in and day out, giving 100 percent of ourselves to our schools and our sports. Our goal: to be successful and to represent our schools with pride. Yet, every time we turn around, there seems to be another rule that says we can't do this and we can't do that. Sometimes, these rules pay no attention to student-athlete welfare or education -- two words often used to define the purpose of the NCAA. From a coach's perspective, I find other problems with the rules. In the NCAA, coaches are asked to take on two responsibilities. First, coaches are expected to field a competitive team that will best represent their school, their sport and, arguably, their alumni. Simultaneously, they must look out for the welfare of their student-athletes. I've been around coaches my entire life and I really do believe they strive to fulfill both of those responsibilities. However, the truth is that the success of coaches is not measured by how they tend to the welfare of their student-athletes but rather if they win or lose. Coaches ultimately have the responsibility to produce, and production is defined by victories. If coaches post a losing record, they run the risk of losing their livelihood, regardless of the beneficial experience they may have provided for student-athletes. With so much at stake, coaches cannot miss the chance to prevent a rival coach from gaining a competitive advantage. This obsession with the level playing field comes about through legislation that is often against the best interests of student-athletes. But in reality, coaches are not the only ones responsible for such ill-reasoned legislation. Many are simply responding to the pressure placed on them by a system that has wandered from the very principles for which it was founded: preserving student-athlete welfare and academic integrity. Why have we wandered from these two noble principles? To satisfy an obsession with the level playing field, which is fueled by a lack of trust in one another and in student-athletes. The rules-making process is driven by the assumption that a rival is going to stretch the rules as much as possible to provide extra benefits to student-athletes and that greedy athletes are eager to find such opportunities. For example, at the moment, full scholarship athletes do not have the opportunity to work because schools have feared that such an opportunity could be manipulated, creating an unfair competitive advantage. Student-athletes in revenue sports lose a year of eligibility if they transfer because schools cannot guarantee that they will not raid rival programs. Student-athletes do not have a vote in the Division I structure because some do not trust student-athletes to make rational and informed decisions. Those examples deal specifically with student-athletes and student-athlete welfare because this is where I propose we start to trust one another (in fear of being called naive, I will not suggest that institutions start trusting one another). Currently, it seems that many people in the NCAA perceive student-athletes as elementary school children who do not understand the difference between right and wrong and basically do not trust student-athletes to make the right choice. It's a shame -- a shame because this distrust among the membership only ends up hurting student-athletes. If the NCAA is to truly live up to its goal of enhancing the educational experience of its student-athletes, it needs first to place some trust in those athletes. Ultimately, trust at this level will result in trust at all levels. How can we do this? For starters, trust that most student-athletes are student-athletes because they both love their sport and desire an education. Realize that the experiences that a collegiate student-athlete receives through being on a team, whether or not he or she competes, cannot be measured by wins and losses. That is a very small part of the total equation. The total experience is derived from the friendships they forge, the discipline they develop and the personal goals that they achieve. You cannot reach out and touch those things; they can be measured only by the glow of joy and satisfaction that the individual student-athletes give off after they enjoy these experiences. So think about these two factors when contemplating legislation. Think about what is worth more: the possibility of preventing a rival coach from gaining an "edge" for the upcoming year or watching one of your student-athletes attain something that will last a lifetime. Also realize that most student-athletes can make rational decisions if given the opportunity. Do not take it for granted that every student-athlete is out to "loot and plunder" the town. Most just want the opportunity that many nonstudent-athletes are afforded. Let's help student-athletes grow into responsible adults. After all, aren't we supposed to be educators? Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to say that student-athletes do not play a role in this process. Student-athletes need to realize and accept the fact that the NCAA is not a monster organization that wants to control their lives. If it were, then we would not have some of the opportunities we have now. Consider some of the many worthwhile NCAA programs -- postgraduate scholarships, the degree-completion program, the Woman of the Year award, the Hall of Champions, the honors program and the life skills program, among others. Student-athletes also have to work at building relationships with their administrators and to let them know what issues are important to them. If that can happen, the administrators would have a better understanding of how rules affect the student-athlete and make better, more informed decisions. So, the bottom line is this: Student-athletes, coaches and administrators need to open our eyes. We must see that the world is not a place where numbers, words and equations are most significant, people are. In the world of college athletics, there is definitely more than meets the eye. We need to ask questions before we make judgments. We need to open our minds and try to make things better for all, not just better for ourselves. Kerry McCoy is a member of the Division I Student-Athlete Advisory Committee. He is a recent graduate of Pennsylvania State University, where he competed in wrestling. Comment -- Surrender comes first in beating addiction
BY ED WISNESKI In college athletics, those who surrender generally lose. In alcoholism and addiction, only those who surrender to their disease have a chance to win.
Too many young people who need help for chemical dependency never relinquish their denial. It's particularly difficult for athletes who have been taught self-discipline for most of their lives. The number of college students in America who will die from alcohol-related causes equals the number who will receive advanced degrees. A better understanding of alcoholism and addiction by more administrators, coaches and professors might help change that startling statistic. That is one of the reasons Betty Ford started the PIR program. The mission of the center is not only to treat people with chemical dependency but also to educate others about the nature of the disease and the treatment for it. All walks of life Every weekday at 8 a.m., approximately 80 in-patient alcoholics and addicts participate in a meditation walk along a path framed by oleander trees that surround a cluster of seven dormitory and administrative buildings and a serene pond with a fountain. As I passed the pond and stared at McCallum Hall, I thought of a line from "The Great Gatsby" that captured perfectly my preconceived notion of the occupants of that dorm: "The very rich are different from you and me." But after group therapy, lectures, meals, one-on-one discussions, pick-up basketball games, Alcoholics Anonymous meetings and other activities with those patients, I realized that they were neither very rich nor very different from me. Contrary to popular perception, the residents at the Betty Ford Center are not all millionaire movie stars and professional athletes being pampered in a plush country club setting. Less than one percent of the 28,000 alcoholics and addicts from all over the world who have gone through the program since 1982 have been "celebrities." The average annual income of the patients is around $50,000. Some receive scholarships from the center when their insurance runs out, provided they have demonstrated sincere commitment to getting sober. "Those people" -- as many of us ignorantly and thoughtlessly refer to alcoholics and addicts -- are lawyers, doctors, students, entertainers, school teachers, carpenters, CEOs and the homeless. I interacted with all of them. They sleep four to a room -- no matter how many Oscars or Super Bowl rings they possess. About the only thing the residents at Betty Ford have in common is their inability to abstain from alcohol or drugs even when they know their actions will result in harmful consequences to themselves or society. They have in their brain what Dr. James West, a former medical director of the Betty Ford Center, calls the "metaphoric switch." Once it is turned on by alcohol or drug use, it stays on the rest of their lives. An addict or alcoholic is never "cured" of his or her disease. A disease, not a weakness I am convinced that those who consider addiction a sign of personal weakness, rather than a disease, would quickly change their minds if they had heard the painful confessions of horrible self-destruction that I did when patients bared their tortured souls in their life stories during group therapy. Some of them had reached the pinnacle of success, only to come crashing down because of the insanity of their uncontrollable use of alcohol and/or drugs. These intelligent people did not will their own ruin. I gained enormous respect for the power of addiction. In one case, an alcoholic who had stayed sober for 81Ž2 years, fell off the wagon for one drink and ultimately was hospitalized for the addiction a week later. That's how quickly this progressive and eventually terminal disease can destroy an addict who relapses. For addicts and alcoholics who have attained sobriety, every day is a battle. One of the keys to the effectiveness of the Betty Ford Center is its holistic approach. I observed a treatment planning session that included a nutritionist, counselor, case worker, recreation specialist, clergyman, family therapist, nurse and doctor. Each offered assessments and recommendations for treatment of each patient. An integral part of the treatment program includes a week-long stay by the family or significant other of each patient when they work on their own issues as well as the patients'. 12-step plan The Center uses the 12-step plan to recovery of Alcoholics Anonymous. AA's motto, the Serenity Prayer, is omnipresent at Betty Ford Center. Before each activity, our group from McCallum Hall locked our arms around each other's shoulders in a circle and chanted the uplifting prayer: "God, grant us the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference." The most difficult of the 12 steps for addicts and alcoholics is the first one -- accepting their powerlessness over their disease that has made their lives unmanageable. It takes courage, not moral weakness, to surrender to their disease. That is the only way they can eventually empower themselves to attain sobriety and control over their lives. The hardest challenge for the patients, the counselors stress, is staying sober when they leave the caring community they have shared for four weeks. For most of them, their stay has given them something that makes them very rich -- hope. I, too, came away from my brief experience with hope...hope that those of us in the profession of helping young people will take the time to learn more about alcoholism and addiction. With the availability of the NCAA/Betty Ford Professional in Residence Program, you have the opportunity to begin to absorb in four days what it's taken others a lifetime to learn. Ed Wisneski, assistant athletics director at Southern Methodist University, created and directs the institution's life skills program. He is also a student in the Perkins School of Theology. Opinions -- Same song, millionth verse: Thoughts vay on I-A playoff
Jim Calhoun, men's basketball coach Comparing the different ways of determining a national champion in Division I basketball and Division I-A football: "Single elimination is very tough, too. Two bad calls. Two missed foul shots. Things happen. That's sports. But the one thing is you decide it. I'm for a football playoff. "Clearly, I always have put more stock in the writers' poll. In football, coaches have a little better chance to see what's going on because 98 percent of the games are on Saturday. We play seven days a week. Football is really difficult. Basketball is impossible. It's difficult to have guys who live in a cave, their own coaching world, decide the national championship."
Lloyd Carr, football coach "I'm not a playoff proponent. I don't think there's any way you can do a playoff and determine a true national champion. I know there's a lot of people who want to see that happen, but I think there will always be controversy."
Michael A. Tranghese, commissioner "In an effort to focus on a championship game, we're putting all the other bowls in a negative position. It's like being half pregnant. Either have a playoff or stop worrying about a 1-2 game."
Larry Smith, football coach "I think if you took a survey, almost everyone here (at the American Football Coaches Association convention) would be in favor of a playoff. Five years ago, everyone was very lukewarm to the idea. "Now, we look at it and ask, 'Why can't we have one?' The time is right for it, if we structure it so that it doesn't infringe on the athletes' class time. We know it could certainly reduce the financial strain athletics departments are dealing with."
Rapid weight loss
John Fauber, columnist "(W)restlers and other athletes need to know more about the dangers of dehydration and hyperthermia. "Research shows that quick weight cutting can alter hormone levels, impede normal growth and development, impair one's psychological state and academic performance, suppress the immune system, and lead to heat stroke and death. "I know recreational athletes who use creatine. I know others who run for hours in hot conditions or who do strenuous workouts on ozone alert days. "Some of that comes from allowing one's identity to get too wrapped up in a sport or recreational activity. "There's a fine line between healthy involvement in recreational sports and potentially self-destructive behavior. Sometimes it's a good idea to check to see whether we've stepped over it."
|
Initially, as a student-athlete, I felt that the NCAA was a group of people in Kansas whose only goal was to control the lives of student-athletes across the country. To me, it was a group that gave little consideration to how student-athletes lived or to what was in our best interests. Unfortunately, most student-athletes probably share my views. In fact, I once heard a friend call the NCAA the "National Committee Against Athletes."
That's one of the fundamental issues I learned through the NCAA/Betty Ford Center Professional in Residence (PIR) Alcoholism and Drug Addiction Awareness Program. The four-day immersion into the life of patients under treatment was one of the most meaningful and enlightening experiences in my 25-year career in college and professional sports.