National Collegiate Athletic Association |
CommentMay 11, 1998
Guest editorial -- Sunday competition needs another look
By Merrill J. Bateman On April 22, the NCAA Division I Board of Directors eliminated its long-standing policy that allowed some flexibility with regard to Sunday play.
And while it's true that only Brigham Young University in Utah and Campbell University in North Carolina formally objected to the rescinding of the rule, BYU is not alone in observing the Sabbath by setting apart one day of the week for worship, family, visiting, study and rest. All across America, government entities, businesses, professional services and educational institutions have made this same decision. For more than 30 years, the NCAA has honored the beliefs of those schools with policies prohibiting Sunday play. By allowing flexibility, it has recognized that colleges and universities should not have to sacrifice athletics opportunities in order to maintain their religious beliefs. It has recognized that qualified student-athletes should be able to compete without compromising personal values based on constitutionally protected freedoms, such as those relating to religious choice. During this time, scheduling adjustments to accommodate such beliefs have been rare. But they have occurred, and the NCAA, out of its respect for religious freedom, has allowed these changes. While the NCAA Division I Board of Directors has changed its policy, BYU has not -- nor will it. Unfortunately, for standing by its religious principles, BYU, which has a strong athletics tradition, could be denied entering NCAA championship competition. Student-athletes, who have worked their entire lives to reach such a milestone, deserve the opportunity to compete, whether they represent BYU or any other institution. The NCAA for three decades has supported this principle. Why the shift? While other explanations -- such as student travel schedules -- have been cited for the change, the true reason would appear to be the possibility of enhanced television revenues for such college sports as baseball, softball, golf, tennis and gymnastics. And so in a day and age when money increasingly seems to be the dominant motivating factor, the NCAA has made a significant departure from its own principles. Now, unless some flexibility in scheduling is restored, student-athletes will be discriminated against on the basis of religion. For this reason, BYU and Campbell University are calling for a vote to override the adoption of NCAA Proposal 98-32, (which negates NCAA Bylaw 31.1.4.1 on Institutional Policy). Under NCAA Division I rules, the membership may call for a vote to override the adoption of a legislative change. Numerous universities have already agreed to support the call for an override. Within the next 60 days, the NCAA must receive at least 30 requests for an override vote. Upon receipt of 100 requests for an override vote, the legislation will be suspended until final action is taken by the Division I membership. BYU has long appreciated the NCAA as an association that supports the total development of the student-athlete. These core values have been of greater concern than economics or competitive advantage. Over the last 30 years, the NCAA and its member institutions have not been harmed by a policy that allows for flexibility and respect for religious traditions. The revised policy, however, could force institutions that value religious observance to choose between religion and athletics -- a choice no institution should have to make. Merrill J. Bateman is president of Brigham Young University. Letters to the Editor -- Programs seek to raise alcohol awarenessYour front-page article detailing the debate currently taking place in athletics departments across the country was excellent ("A brewing dilemma on campus,"April 16). You mentioned a program we started at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. As multimedia partners with the university, we eliminated alcohol advertising on our radio network and launched a public service campaign to help the university proactively address the issue of binge drinking. Tar Heel Sports Marketing funded the campaign and contributed significant media to raise awareness of the issue. Our coaches and student-athletes acted as spokespersons and were very effective. The most encouraging news is that this campaign, combined with other university initiatives, seems to be having an impact. Student admissions to campus health services and local student DUIs are down from previous years. I encourage other broadcasters and schools to look closely at how this can work for them. I am happy to share our materials and experience with interested athletics departments and sports marketing firms across the country.
James A. Heavner
TEAMThe NCAA has indeed been modest in touting its efforts to foster means for member institutions to actively combat alcohol-related incidents surrounding sporting events. In reference to Kay Hawes' article in the April 6 issue of The NCAA News, no mention was made of the NCAA's eight and one-half year involvement with the Techniques for Effective Alcohol Management (TEAM) Coalition, a federally sponsored, public-private partnership of organizations including the four major sports leagues, broadcasters and advocacy groups whose strategies are facility alcohol management training and public information and education campaigns. Through TEAM, the NCAA has actively promoted alcohol awareness with print and television public service announcements. Several of the television PSAs have been recognized for their creative excellence and have received high visibility placement during NCAA events and championship game broadcasts. Even more proactively, three NCAA member institutions, acting as pilot sites, have implemented a university-level policy- and practice-based alcohol management program for athletics events under a two-phase grant program sponsored by the National Highway Safety Administration. Representatives from the pilot schools will develop a campus-specific training curriculum this summer that soon will be available to all member institutions. We applaud the NCAA's effort in addressing the concern of binge drinking and alcohol-related incidents involving our students. Together, with what the NCAA has already accomplished through TEAM, I believe we can be successful in combating these serious issues.
Jerald Sachs
Problem is self-imposedThe advertisement of alcoholic beverages on college campuses, as your article states, is a major problem -- a problem that is self-inflicted by many NCAA institutions. The NCAA and its institutions need to reexamine their purpose: education. If we go back to this simple philosophy, the answer to this dilemma is simple. An organization or institution does not advertise potentially illegal behaviors to its population. Is the money that important? Is money that hard to find? Or is it just easier to go after money from the big companies? If you eliminate the alcoholic beverage companies, there are still many companies out there willing to advertise. It makes you wonder how many companies are out there that want to work with colleges and universities but cannot get in because of the blockades set up by the big companies. The little companies are out there and they are plentiful. It just requires more leg work. If making the "quick buck" is the ultimate goal, then this note will fall on deaf ears. But how much money in the till equates to the life of one student? Is $250,000 the price tag that makes it OK? Do not think that I am naive. I understand college athletics has become a big business, especially on the Division I level. However, John T. Kaestner's comments are absurd: "... the vast majority of people who watch and listen to intercollegiate athletics are of age." "This is our prime audience: sports enthusiasts, age 21-35, generally male." I'm sorry, but during the 10 years I coached high-school football, I remember quite a large population of people outside of the "prime audience" age group. The beverage companies may be trying to reach a certain age group, but they are going through those who are hurt the most by the way they do it. I also do not agree with Mr. Kaestner's comments on other sports (track, baseball, etc.) being eliminated without alcoholic beverage company money. Without the money, those in charge of raising money would have to work a little harder and be more creative in their fund-raising tasks. Mr. Kaestner's third statement also is interesting. The statistic that 65 percent of the students on campus are of legal drinking age catches me by surprise. Is this number representative of the undergraduate population or the combination of undergraduate/graduate students? In my experience, it is the undergraduates who make up the majority of those who attend games and events. On the positive side, I would like to applaud the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and Susan Kitchen on their policy. I am certain that enforcing their policy is difficult, but they do because they feel it is in the best interests of the students. Also, I applaud Sen. Joe Biden for the proposed resolution. However, it is unbinding and therefore lacks much, if any, power. An across-the-board stance needs to be made. Just restricting advertisement during championship events is not enough. By the way, why does the NCAA restrict the advertisement of those products only during championship events?
Mike Nuncio Opinions -- Encouragement puts girls on road to sports involvement
Kathy Smith, fitness columnist "Obviously, not every parent is athletic. But you don't have to be Michael Jordan to give your little girl a ball and throw it back and forth with her. Sometimes, that's all it takes, letting her know that you encourage her to try. "You might also try taking her to watch other kids play. Seeing them, she'll probably want to emulate them. If she does, let her know that you think it's fun and appropriate for her to get involved. "Then, once she is on the field, encourage her gently. Too often, a girl who's just learning a game -- soccer, for example -- is turned off by her parents' wild exhortations on the sideline to play harder and harder. While a sense of competitiveness may occur naturally in time, your trying to instill it in her too early usually only backfires. "Winning the game or contest is beside the point. A girl first has to take pleasure and pride in the process itself. She has to believe that what you consider a win is simply her effort and participation. And you have to trust that, as her skill level improves, her interest and enthusiasm will likewise grow. "Nor does your daughter have to display the obvious talent of Jackie Joyner-Kersee. I remember hearing the great Olympic speedskater Bonnie Blair talk about how completely inept she was at every sport. But she kept trying sport after sport until she finally found skating, because in the Blair house, participation itself was the prize. "As it is in our house. Kate, now 9, still plays soccer and has added basketball to her mix. Meanwhile, 6-year-old Perrie is following in her sister's sneakers. Both have discovered the thrill that comes from trying your hardest and being responsible for and to your teammates. "As their mom, I couldn't be more pleased. It's impossible not to see how these experiences are building their character in wonderful ways. Win or lose, they're learning sportsmanship, poise and grace under fire."
Donna A. Lopiano, executive director "If you take as a premise that it takes 15 to 20 years to make a professional athlete, then you couldn't have a professional league until you have athletes with that much time of equal access to the weight room and good coaching. So the 1996 Olympics were a real benchmark, because that time frame had taken place. It was really the late 1970s when Title IX got into swing. All of a sudden, in the mid-1990s, the woman athlete is there."
Turning pro early
Dean Smith, former men's basketball coach Discussing decisions by North Carolina men's basketball players Antawn Jamison and Vince Carter to turn pro before their eligibility expired: "To me, it's a rather easy decision. It really bothers me sometimes that many in the media point out that someone that stays in college for their senior year and chooses not to go pro is a better guy than those who go."
|
The so-called "BYU Rule," the press reported, was no longer.