A team loses a road game, so the coach withholds the players' meal money as a form of punishment.

A player is singled out daily for humiliation and verbal abuse by the coach.

A coach pressures a player to change majors, threatening a loss of playing time if the player does not comply.

Though it may not be pervasive behavior, the dark underbelly of college athletics has been known to manifest itself in examples such as those. While the vast majority of coaches are responsible professionals who conduct their programs and themselves with the utmost integrity, some coaches and behaviors slip below the radar screen.

And unlike other relationships from which a student-athlete can walk away at any time, the student-athlete/coach relationship is an interdependent one that almost always favors the coach. Though a coach's job security is strongly linked to the team's win-loss record, the ability of the student-athletes to achieve their academic and athletics goals depends entirely on the coach's willingness to let them do so.

The student-athlete/coach relationship by nature requires both parties to spend large amounts of time together. Hours spent on the road and in practice forge a bond that is likely to affect the student-athlete far beyond the playing field and long after college is over.

Coaches do not need a license to hold a position of such influence, yet they are charged with molding young adults and motivating and disciplining them at a time when great change takes place in the student-athletes' personal lives.

Not every coach handles that responsibility with care.

A gymnast who recently completed her collegiate career said she thought she knew what she was getting into when she signed with her coach and university. "I was familiar and comfortable with the coach. I had heard how much fun college gymnastics would be," she said.

But any hopes for fun quickly evaporated with her coach's insistence on mandatory weekly weigh-ins and constant degradation of her and her teammates' bodies.

"She would pull out our recruiting videos and ask us why we didn't look like that anymore. She'd tell us we were fat gymnasts. Half my team was bulimic," she said.

When she was injured, she said she was denied adequate medical attention. Later, when she had surgery for a different injury, she said she was pushed by her coach to hasten rehabilitation, which ultimately led to more surgery.

"I felt pretty worthless after I left the program," the gymnast said. "A lot of girls are still screwed up in their heads with body image because of what she said. It never should have been like that."

Where to turn

One student-athlete who plays water polo said that before joining the team, "I knew that my coach was a very rough type of coach, that he was a yeller." Though she describes herself as "a pretty thick-skinned person," the experience turned sour quickly because her coach behaved "like a child."

On a week-long training trip, she said he gave each player just $40 in food money for the week. "Needless to say, we did not have enough money for meals, so we went without a few times while he would eat in front of us, saying that we should have spent our money more responsibly," she said.

In practices and at competition, instead of giving his players constructive criticism, she said he resorts to name-calling and foul language.

"I realize that a coach needs to break down players, but with him there is so much verbal abuse, and he never builds them back up," she said.

She said his frequent meltdowns after losses and his penchant for singling players out for humiliation have led to high player and assistant coach attrition.

When the former gymnast looked for support at her university, she said she found none, except for her academic advisor. She said she tried to schedule appointments with the athletics director, but the appointments would "mysteriously go away" and she would wind up in a meeting with her coach.

When asked if she ever sought out her senior woman administrator or faculty athletics representative for help, she said she was unaware such people existed. "The only person I felt I could go to was (my academic advisor). I would be in his office crying day and night," she said.

As for the water polo athlete, she said, "I had to do research on my own." She e-mailed the athletics director who in turn sent her to the coach's direct administrator. "Groups of players have gone to the overseer for water polo and the overseer says 'We'll check into it' or 'We'll stop in at practice more,' but they didn't do anything," she said.

Finding an impartial ear to unload on can be difficult for a student-athlete in such situations. The often-talked-about "safeguards" that are supposed to protect student-athletes are sometimes just that -- talk, and little else. The administrators student-athletes are often encouraged to seek out are either too low in the hierarchy to effect change or are the people who hired the coach in the first place. No matter who gets the message, criticism of the coach may be regarded as criticism of the administration's judgment.

Ed Etzel, who conducts exit interviews for West Virginia University's student-athletes, said seeking help within the athletics department could reveal a two-pronged problem.

"I think there's an element of fear," he said. "Student-athletes may be reluctant to be honest because of the fear of retaliation, such as less playing time."

Etzel said many athletics directors say they have open-door policies, "but in reality they don't." He said they are either unavailable or they encourage the student-athlete to resolve the problem with the coach without their help.

In this way, the philosophy of the athletics department usually determines the course for the student-athlete/coach relationship. Misalignment of the department's stated mission and the way it actually conducts itself is what can lead to a breakdown of the system, ultimately leaving the student-athlete dangling.

"Student-athletes get a lot of mixed messages," said one seasoned academic advisor. "A coach will say his main priority is academics, but then he'll schedule six consecutive weekend road games."

Then the athletics department, which claims academics is a priority, does nothing to change the schedule.

The advisor said he has observed "a use and abuse of students on the academic side" and has seen great limitations on some student-athletes' personal freedoms.

"They sign a piece of paper and suddenly we control their entire lives," he said. "We tell them what to study, when to sleep, where to work, what they eat. What about the rights of these individuals?"

He has witnessed coaches infringing on student-athletes' rights by pressuring them to change their majors so that classes don't interfere with practice times. And coaches have tried to pressure him to advise students against what's truly in their best interests academically. One coach went so far as to change a student-athlete's class schedule without the student-athlete's consent because the coach believed the classes would be too difficult for the athlete.

The advisor said the most frustrating aspect of his job is determining what his role is in the eyes of the athletics department when it comes to dealing with student-athletes who are experiencing conflict with their coaches. Though the academic advisor job description strictly states one role, the job truly is defined by the student-athletes and their needs. Student-athletes traditionally seek out their life skills coordinators or academic advisors. And to a certain extent, they have a right to expect confidentiality.

Advisors such as this one experience their share of conflict with the athletics department, which feels a sense of entitlement to know what complaints are brought against coaches, especially ones with possible legal ramifications. At risk to his job, his loyalties favor the student-athlete.

"Not every coach is a bad person and not every student-athlete is squeaky clean, but there's a power differential there," West Virginia's Etzel said. "The coach can exert different power treatments."

On the destructive side, Etzel said, "There are all types of undiscussables."

That's where mind games, excessive punishments or the harassment of a player enter the picture. Worse yet, such coaches may be under the impression that their methods are harmless to the student-athlete's mental or physical well-being and effective in achieving their goals and the goals they have for the team.

Mediation through evaluation

Becky Ahlgren, assistant director of education outreach at the NCAA, said that if going to the CHAMPS/Life Skills coordinator is not an option for the student-athlete, counselors at the campus counseling center are good places to start. "They are neutral parties who are there to assist the student-athlete in understanding all kinds of personal problems," she said.

In recent years, the Divisions I and II national SAACs have addressed problems by way of subcommittee actions and discussion groups. The Division II SAAC was instrumental in modifying the 20-hour practice limitation for multisport athletes. Division I has addressed student-athlete/
coach conflict on a broader scale.

Michael Aguirre, chair of the Division I SAAC and a former football student-athlete at Arizona State University, said the group has not addressed the development of a specific mediation program for student-athletes and coaches.

"Often times, decisions like those are viewed by our committee as best left to the individual institutions," he said. "I can tell you that the student-athlete/coach relationship has been under close examination by our committee, particularly the trust gap that exists between the two groups."

The "trust gap" is an umbrella term describing a student-athlete perception that coaches and administrators don't always create policy that is in their best interests. The term often is used in the same breath as "student-athlete welfare."

About two years ago, the Division I Management Council and the Division I SAAC created an ad hoc subcommittee to look at the issue. "Ultimately, it was difficult for the group to come up with any concrete solutions since the problem may vary from campus to campus," Aguirre said. "Probably the best thing to come out of the committee was a comprehensive evaluation system for coaches, administrators and all student-athlete support resources."

An evaluation form was created for institutions to distribute to their student-athletes. Aguirre said the purpose is to give student-athletes more opportunities for honest feedback instead of just the exit interviews.

"Ideally, the SAAC would like the student-athletes to identify and deal with issues with coaches before they feel they have to leave the team," said Aguirre, who has participated in the mediation between an athlete and her coach. But in cases where they fear going to the coach, he said, "Student-athletes are more likely to silently try to deal with the issue."

Realm of influence

Jeff Janssen has devoted a good part of his professional career to navigating the intricacies of the student-athlete/coach relationship. A former sports psychologist at the University of Arizona, Janssen left the college setting to specialize in peak-performance training for coaches. Though he said he has heard his share of horror stories about negative student-athlete/coach relationships, his decision to focus on the coaching aspect was due in part to his belief that "it all starts at the top. If you look at a winning program, winning on and off the court, it's the coach who sets the tone.

"I see the coach as a pivotal factor. They're such important mentors in the lives of young, impressionable student-athletes."

Etzel agrees. "The coach's influence can be powerful," he said. "Some athletes look at their coaches as gods or goddesses, on a pedestal. There's a lot of potential for harm."

Janssen said the coach's willingness to self-evaluate is crucial. "I challenge coaches to have their players evaluate them, too," he said. "Many coaches are reluctant because they know they're doing things that they're not proud of. When all is said and done, I ask them, 'What do you want your student-athletes to say about their four- or five-year experience with you?' "

With so many dynamics at play and such close ties formed between coaches and student-athletes, the student-athlete/coach relationship naturally will experience turbulence. In most cases, that turbulence is settled constructively. "Most coaches understand and abide by ethical principles and do not engage in threatening or destructive behaviors," the NCAA's Ahlgren said.

But those who do resort to unacceptable means in dealing with student-athletes would do well to remember some advice from Etzel.

"If you can't help someone, don't hurt 'em," he said.

Open in new window Return to home page

© The National Collegiate Athletic Association