National Collegiate Athletic Association
NCAA News Archive - 2007
« back to 2007 | Back to NCAA News Archive Index
SAAC members focus on student-athlete conduct
|
By Gary T. Brown
The NCAA News
The NCAA News
ARLINGTON, Virginia — Division II SAAC members turned the focus internally during their portion of the meeting with the Management Council.
They wanted advice on regulating student-athlete conduct, particularly instances of behavior that negatively influence the student-athlete experience (for example, substance abuse, hazing, gambling), despite legislation that forbids such actions.
According to SAAC members, the problem often is that student-athletes aren’t aware of the legislation, and when they are, there is a perception that the penalties aren’t enforced. For example, most student-athletes understand they shouldn’t wager on college or professional sports, but they’re not as clear about fantasy leagues and basketball pools.
Of all the conduct issues, hazing garnered the most discussion, and the most confusion. For example, John Mansuy, the faculty athletics representative at Wheeling Jesuit University, said his roundtable debate began with student-athletes asking administrators why hazing is allowed, and the administrators in turn saying, “What do you mean us, why do you allow it?”
Most summit participants felt the line is clear when it comes to “physical” hazing, but not so with emotional hazing. Some said athletics departments may have a zero-tolerance policy, but coaches may interpret what constitutes hazing differently.
Tim Selgo, athletics director at Grand Valley State University, which has strict policies that hold coaches accountable for team behavior, said he is “the sole judge and jury of what activities cross the line.” He said he makes it clear in preseason meetings with student-athletes and coaches that he’s not a fan of misconduct.
“After I make my speech about school policies, I follow that with: ‘And I hate hazing,’ ” Selgo said. “And then I pause before I move on to the next topic just to make sure that message sinks in.”
Many SAAC members agreed that an appeal from the AD or coach before the season starts is the best way to control behavior, hazing or otherwise. “Most student-athletes value that authority voice from an AD or coach as much or more than signing a team code of conduct,” said Hilary Hughes, a soccer student-athlete from Northwest Nazarene University.
Dan Dixon, a soccer student-athlete from California State University, Chico, summed up the topic by declaring: “We as athletes need to do the right thing. We need to be good ambassadors for the institution.”
The conduct discussion led to the related issue of what procedures to take or are available when conflicts arise between student-athletes and coaches or student-athletes and administrators. Some SAAC members said they are reluctant to confront an authority figure with such complaints for fear of retribution. The faculty athletics representatives on the Management Council were quick to point out their role as intermediaries on such cases.
It also depends on what the conflict is. If it’s a case of sexual harassment, for example, SAAC members said they’d be more comfortable approaching a parent or peer who would be more understanding.
Other cases may not be as serious, though. From an athletics director’s perspective, Selgo said, it may take some “drilling down” to determine whether the conflict is in fact about a coach being abusive or whether the student-athlete is upset about the coach “not being fair” or not awarding enough playing time.
The other roundtable topic regarded life-skills programming available at Division II institutions and whether such programming should be mandatory. SAAC members in April suggested the Management Council and Presidents Council sponsor legislation that requires either the NCAA CHAMPS/Life Skills program or an equivalent, but the Councils had concerns regarding cost and compliance.
SAAC members at the summit agreed to take the issue back to their group and develop a model life-skills program that institutions looking for guidance can use as a tool. Summit participants agreed that approach would be more effective than trying to legislate an outcome.
They wanted advice on regulating student-athlete conduct, particularly instances of behavior that negatively influence the student-athlete experience (for example, substance abuse, hazing, gambling), despite legislation that forbids such actions.
According to SAAC members, the problem often is that student-athletes aren’t aware of the legislation, and when they are, there is a perception that the penalties aren’t enforced. For example, most student-athletes understand they shouldn’t wager on college or professional sports, but they’re not as clear about fantasy leagues and basketball pools.
Of all the conduct issues, hazing garnered the most discussion, and the most confusion. For example, John Mansuy, the faculty athletics representative at Wheeling Jesuit University, said his roundtable debate began with student-athletes asking administrators why hazing is allowed, and the administrators in turn saying, “What do you mean us, why do you allow it?”
Most summit participants felt the line is clear when it comes to “physical” hazing, but not so with emotional hazing. Some said athletics departments may have a zero-tolerance policy, but coaches may interpret what constitutes hazing differently.
Tim Selgo, athletics director at Grand Valley State University, which has strict policies that hold coaches accountable for team behavior, said he is “the sole judge and jury of what activities cross the line.” He said he makes it clear in preseason meetings with student-athletes and coaches that he’s not a fan of misconduct.
“After I make my speech about school policies, I follow that with: ‘And I hate hazing,’ ” Selgo said. “And then I pause before I move on to the next topic just to make sure that message sinks in.”
Many SAAC members agreed that an appeal from the AD or coach before the season starts is the best way to control behavior, hazing or otherwise. “Most student-athletes value that authority voice from an AD or coach as much or more than signing a team code of conduct,” said Hilary Hughes, a soccer student-athlete from Northwest Nazarene University.
Dan Dixon, a soccer student-athlete from California State University, Chico, summed up the topic by declaring: “We as athletes need to do the right thing. We need to be good ambassadors for the institution.”
The conduct discussion led to the related issue of what procedures to take or are available when conflicts arise between student-athletes and coaches or student-athletes and administrators. Some SAAC members said they are reluctant to confront an authority figure with such complaints for fear of retribution. The faculty athletics representatives on the Management Council were quick to point out their role as intermediaries on such cases.
It also depends on what the conflict is. If it’s a case of sexual harassment, for example, SAAC members said they’d be more comfortable approaching a parent or peer who would be more understanding.
Other cases may not be as serious, though. From an athletics director’s perspective, Selgo said, it may take some “drilling down” to determine whether the conflict is in fact about a coach being abusive or whether the student-athlete is upset about the coach “not being fair” or not awarding enough playing time.
The other roundtable topic regarded life-skills programming available at Division II institutions and whether such programming should be mandatory. SAAC members in April suggested the Management Council and Presidents Council sponsor legislation that requires either the NCAA CHAMPS/Life Skills program or an equivalent, but the Councils had concerns regarding cost and compliance.
SAAC members at the summit agreed to take the issue back to their group and develop a model life-skills program that institutions looking for guidance can use as a tool. Summit participants agreed that approach would be more effective than trying to legislate an outcome.
© 2010 The National Collegiate Athletic Association
Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy