National Collegiate Athletic Association |
CommentJanuary 4, 1999
Guest editorial -- Reno is acceptable as NACDA meeting site
By Joseph N. Crowley
On occasion, someone will express surprise that people actually live in our cities, that there are real neighborhoods, schools, churches, shopping malls, theater, opera, art galleries and symphony orchestras. Tourists see the bright lights of downtown, or of the Strip, and have a hard time comprehending that beyond all that are people leading normal lives, doing what people do elsewhere in this big country. I have lived in Nevada -- in Reno -- for 33 years. My wife and I have raised a family here, four children who attended local schools, graduated from the local university, and chose -- all of them -- to live here. Three of them are married and bringing up their own children (six in all) in the same city where they were raised. They made the choice to settle here for the same reason my wife and I decided to call Reno our home -- they (and we) love the place. But I understand people are going to continue asking those questions. In a sense, that is why I am writing this column. The National Association of Collegiate Directors of Athletics (NACDA) will hold its annual convention in Reno next June. Given the givens, some NCAA institutional representatives and staff members, among others, have wondered why. The spread of legalized casino gambling around the nation; the fact that Nevada is where it all began; the variety of serious issues associated with gambling; the creation by Congress of a national commission to examine these issues; the occurrence of sports betting scandals on several college campuses in the last few years; the presence in Nevada of legal bookmaking on college athletics events -- these are the givens involved. These are the considerations that have led people to ask: Why is NACDA in Reno in 1999? It's a fair question. I would like to have a go at answering. Beginning in 1987, I enjoyed 10 years of substantial involvement in the NCAA. I came to understand early on that, despite the presence of scores of committees, councils and other bodies meeting regularly in a plethora of locations across the country, no NCAA-sponsored gathering ever met in Nevada. And I knew the reason. It struck me as odd, though, that a number of Association committees convened regularly at Lake Tahoe, within easy reach of the Nevada border; that NCAA-sanctioned I-AA postseason football games often had been played at Mackay Stadium, on my campus; that conference basketball tournaments and other sports championships had been (and still are) played at the university's Lawlor Events Center or at other campus facilities. It took some doing, but when I chaired the NCAA committee that prepared the legislation on Division I certification in the early 1990s, I got permission to hold one of the meetings in Reno. During my tenure as NCAA president, the then-functioning Executive Committee met at Lake Tahoe and came to Reno for a reception. Also during that time, the NCAA executive staff came to the university for a two-day meeting. So, there is a history of college athletics organizations meeting in (or very near) my home state, of college athletics contests with NCAA standing being played on Nevada fields and courts. Why then, the concern about one more convention in June? It cannot simply be legalized gambling, because there is some form of this activity in 48 of the 50 states. One doubts that it is casino gambling, since that is available now in 27 states. No. It's just that Nevada is the only state that allows wagering on college sports. That and those recent betting scandals involving college games. One ought not to question the validity of this concern. The integrity of the college game is threatened by these scandals. In a context of increasing commercialization of intercollegiate athletics and of challenges to the appropriateness of the claim to continuing amateur standing, betting scandals are of greater consequence now. Sending a message to the public at this time of our collective determination to preserve the credibility of intercollegiate athletics is certainly appropriate. Despite the problems, NACDA is coming to Reno in June. Speaking for both the university and the community, I am pleased about that. We will now have an opportunity to discuss, in an appropriate setting, some of the issues alluded to above and provide some context within which these issues can be better understood. Toward that end, I have proposed to the NACDA leadership that a panel be assembled to present to the delegates a variety of perspectives on sports gambling. That proposal is now under consideration. Nevada has traveled a long distance since a conservative Republican administration, feeling the terrible impact of the Great Depression, steered into law in 1931 a provision allowing legalized gambling. The state has developed over those years the nation's most comprehensive and effective regulatory framework to control commercial gaming. That framework encompasses the sports books. Included among its mandates is a prohibition of wagering on athletics contests involving Nevada's two public universities. It is well understood in the state that sports betting is a huge enterprise nationally -- nearly $120 billion a year, by one recent estimate. Even though only $2.5 billion of that total was bet in the legal sports books of Reno and Las Vegas, the need to assure the public that their legal bets are honestly and accountably handled remains a high priority. The state's universities have seen gambling as a natural focus for scholarly inquiry. On my campus, the Institute for the Study of Gambling and Commercial Gaming has enjoyed a worldwide reputation for the quality of its research reports and conferences. Gaming research is a serious undertaking at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Both universities have long been alert to the potential for problem gambling among students (though recent reports that six to eight percent of college students nationwide are problem gamblers are decidedly not borne out by our experience in Nevada). The NACDA convention offers a chance to hear from local scholars about their views of sports gambling. Should the proposed panel be approved, I would expect its members to include: * Bill Eadington, professor of economics at the University of Nevada and director of the Institute for the Study of Gambling and Commercial Gaming. * Richard Davies, noted historian at the university, author of "America's Obsession: Sports and Society Since 1945" (Harcourt Brace, 1994), now at work on a history of sports gambling in the United States. * Lou Phillips, who traveled from an academic setting to a career that led him to the top echelon of casino hotel administration and who has returned to the intellectual life here as Mead Dixon Distinguished Professor of Gaming Management. These are outstanding scholars and great teachers. With their help, we can provide NACDA delegates with an exciting and instructive panel discussion. I hope we can get this panel established, that it will contribute to making the 1999 convention a memorable one, and that the delegates will leave Reno feeling they were very glad they came. Joseph N. Crowley is the president of the University of Nevada. Comment -- Are actions consistent with NCAA purposes?
Kelly J. Higgins One of the articles in the October 26 issue of The NCAA News concerned the Division I Management Council's approval of the recommendations of the Division I Championships/Competition Cabinet's Exempted Contests Subcommittee regarding exempted events in football and basketball.
In April, as the athletics director at the University of Alaska Fairbanks, I had the opportunity to meet with the subcommittee and discuss with them the ramifications of their directions and proposals. To put it mildly, their explicit and implied statements stunned me. "Our objective is to take care of Division I members, otherwise..." In years past, the exemptions were a means for institutions in such far-reaching places as Hawaii and Alaska to attract quality opponents to play at their site. This is not the case now. The plethora of newly exempted events has obscured the original intent of the exemptions. The events are now clearly a means to attract high-quality teams to play in tournaments that have little or no direct linkage to member institutions. Many support great causes, but in reality their primary reason for existence is to support television income and increased opportunities for each Division I institution to add games to their schedules. The clear message to me in April -- and now to the public -- is: We (Division I) are here to promulgate rules that benefit only Division I institutions regardless of the ramifications to the member institutions that created many of these events to assist with their own athletics survival -- events that have greatly benefited many Division I members. These were special exemptions, hence the original title of the subcommittee and legislation meant to help the geographically disadvantaged members of the NCAA. Now the slow trickle of change since restructuring is threatening to become a flood that reminds me of the words of warning presented by the few members who foresaw the potential for danger inherent in the process several years ago. Now there is a new reality, one in which Division I appears to want absolute control of what you (Division II institutions) fought long and hard to build. With this new reality, one of the original missions of the subcommittee -- to control the expansion of these exempted events -- has changed, much as the name of the committee. Over the last few years, the new rules have caused a large increase in costs to sponsoring members, the cancellation of several events sponsored by Division II member institutions, and an explosion of events that are in direct competition with events sponsored by Division II member institutions outside of the contiguous United States that are clamoring for (and receiving) exempted status. Some ask me why I care now that I am at an institution not directly affected by these changes. My response is, "What is stated as the purpose of the Association? What do the principles for conduct of intercollegiate athletics mean?" It is my opinion that the current trend is running in stark contrast to those well-thought-out philosophies. Now as I review the purposes and principles of the NCAA, as well as the findings of the Knight Foundation Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, I pause to wonder, who is being served, and where are we going? As we approach yet another divided Convention, I urge each of you to ask yourself the same questions before you vote, and to pay attention to the action taking place in all divisions. Kelly J. Higgins is the director of athletics at the University of South Dakota.
Letter to the Editor -- Black coaches not getting their opportunityAs head football coaching positions open at the "major" colleges and universities, I see they are being filled by coaches who are not of color. Year after year it is the same old story -- outstanding coaches at historically black colleges and universities are being ignored for no other reason that they are not part of the "gold ol' boys network." Black head football coaches like Billy Joe at Florida A&M University; Joe Taylor at Hampton University; Pete Richardson at Southern University, Baton Rouge; Bill Hayes at North Carolina A&T State University; and Willie Jeffries at South Carolina State University consistently have strong, winning football programs -- and their athletes graduate on time. Obviously, a great many college and university presidents have their heads in the sand when it comes to diversity relative to hiring a black football coach. These same presidents agree with the recruiting of our best black athletes and our best black minds for their classrooms, but not our best black head football coaches. I applaud Bill Curry, former head football coach at the University of Kentucky. In this same publication, he said, "Let's call racism racism." The world of sports is a great place to show the rest of the world that racism has to go.
Curt Gentry Opinions -- Colleges need to assure continued quality of life
Editorial "Perhaps the best thing about the college game is that it renews itself each fall. A fresh crop of kids arrives and fans can watch them develop. Florida rooters will evaluate the exotic (for them) Mike Miller, whose high-school gym in Mitchell, South Dakota, was constructed partly of corn cobs. Connecticut followers hope that Khalid El-Amin, the former Minneapolis North playmaker, can propel the top-ranked Huskies to the Final Four. And visitors to Minnesota's hallowed Williams Arena will find out if Joel Przybilla, a home-grown 7-footer from Monticello, can help the Gophers crack the top 25.... "Not that the college game is perfect. There's no excuse for the fight that marred a game between the Gophers and the Philippines national team last month. Too many top college players are jumping early to the NBA. Eight of the pros' top 10 picks last year were underclassmen. Point-shaving scandals emerged at Northwestern and Arizona State. Recruiting violations damaged Cincinnati, and off-court criminal behavior embarrassed a number of schools. Worst of all, far too many players at too many schools fail to graduate, even after four years on the team. "The NCAA should consider changing some rules to shore up the game. Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delany suggests making freshmen and junior college transfers ineligible for varsity competition, thus putting a premium on staying with the team rather than jumping to the pros. He also wants the NBA to start a minor league for players not interested in college. "These ideas deserve consideration. College basketball is too great a tradition to allow it to fall toward the level of the NBA."
Recruiting
Bob Knight, men's basketball coach "What the NCAA should do -- and probably never will because it's simple and too good of a solution -- would be to say, 'OK, college coaches in basketball can only evaluate kids in that kid's own high-school gym under the supervision of that kid's high-school coach or in regularly scheduled high-school games home and away or in the state tournament.' That eliminates everything that all these people talk about are problems for college basketball."
Exempted contests
Rudy Washington, executive director "Between the BCA Classic and the football game that we put on, we've been able to give 10 $5,000 scholarships to minority students all over the country. (But proposed limitations to exempted contests) would make it much more difficult to put together a quality field. I'd say the future of our game is in real limbo in terms of magnitude and the ability to make money."
Athletics facilities
Mike Bobinski, director of athletics "I find it difficult, personally, to justify an overly plush athletics facility. The need to upgrade, I understand. On the other hand, when it's just how many frills can we put into it to attract an 18-year-old, aren't we taking away from the strength of the school?"
|
After you have lived in Nevada for a while, you get used to it. You get used to the questions that come your way from visitors, colleagues and friends in other states, from people you are hoping to hire: What's it like to live in a place like this? Can you raise a family here? Can you keep your kids (or yourself, perhaps) from succumbing to the surrounding temptations? Can education flourish here?
The article made me realize that my fears about the future relationship between Division I and the rest of the NCAA are still in the process of being realized.