There’s a reason ‘student’ comes first in ‘student-athlete.’
______
First, let me say I applaud the drive and determination of the students who speak fervently for the rights of collegiate athletes. In a recent Good Men Project post, I wrote about the need to speak with conviction. These young men from Northwestern University that recently won their case with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to be recognized as university employees are doing so, and for a cause they care about passionately.
According to the National Collegiate Players Association website, there are 11 specific goals associated with the desire for recognition of athletes as university employees, thus allowing for unionization and collective bargaining rights. These goals are:
1. Minimize college athletes’ brain trauma risks.
2. Raise the scholarship amount.
3. Prevent players from being stuck paying sports-related medical expenses.
4. Increase graduation rates.
5. Protect educational opportunities for student-athletes in good standing.
6. Prohibit universities from using a permanent injury suffered during athletics as a reason to reduce/eliminate a scholarship.
7. Establish and enforce uniform safety guidelines in all sports to help prevent serious injuries and avoidable deaths.
Don’t like ads? Become a supporter and enjoy The Good Men Project ad free8. Eliminate restrictions on legitimate employment and players ability to directly benefit from commercial opportunities.
9. Prohibit the punishment of college athletes that have not committed a violation.
10. Guarantee that college athletes are granted an athletic release from their university if they wish to transfer schools.
11. Allow college athletes of all sports the ability to transfer schools one time without punishment.
Only two items (#4 & #5) directly relate to improvements in educational opportunity. Based on this list, I think the push for student athletes to be recognized as university employees is more about the students’ desire for dollars than for diplomas.
◊♦◊
So why am I caught up on this issue? Well, one item the leaders of this movement have used as a critical point within their argument is how football can prevent athletes from achieving their academic goals. For example, former Northwester quarterback Kain Colter stated during the NLRB hearing that Northwestern football essentially ruined his dream of becoming an orthopedic surgeon.
It would seem that young men who believe football requirements interfere with academic success and career dreams would make academically-based changes the cornerstone of their case for union rights.
So is this effort really about making a significant difference for the student–athlete?
|
If this push for unionization is about athlete health and safety (which comprise four of the 11 NCPA goals), then make that the headline. Bring together some young men that have suffered serious injuries with whom we can empathize. We need to care for our athletes’ health and safety, no question. I can get on board with that argument.
If this push for unionization is primarily about higher scholarships and desired endorsement revenue, (which is, at its core, how it seems), at least be transparent about it. Yes, athletes earn their scholarship through the many hours devoted to their sport, and yes, universities make astounding amounts of money from football programs in particular. That doesn’t mean any college athlete attending an institution of higher learning deserves money beyond what funds their education, meals, and lodging.
So is this effort really about making a significant difference for the student–athlete? Is it really meant to improve academic opportunities for the 99% of athletes that will never become professional players and therefore will need to enter the working world with a degree and a strong GPA? Is it about improving the opportunity to learn–the reason universities exist?
I am not convinced.
____
Image credit: Marit & Toomas Hinnosaar/flickr
I would be wary to lump athletes in non-revenue generating sports with those from revenue generating sports. One is a big business and the other isn’t. The biggest question I have about NCAA rules are why are athletes held to a completely different standard than coaches? Coaches can negotiate endorsement deals with local car dealerships, restaurants, etc. and make money off their fame as a coach. But, an athlete is not allowed to do the same exact thing. Why is that? The school can sell a jersey with the number, but no nameplate, for the star football or basketball player… Read more »
I think one thing you’re missing is the distinction between a revenue sport and non-revenue sport. Should an athlete who helps bring in millions of dollars be given the same compensation (scholarship dollars) as an athlete who doesn’t? Since men’s athletics bring in more money than women’s athletics and if the athletes are correct that the schools consider them athletes first (ie they’re required to spend most or a significant amount of their time on athletics), why wouldn’t this be a Title IX issue if women are not similarly pressured? Dr. Linda Sax found an inverse relationship between sports and… Read more »
John, my apologies if you mistook my anecdote about my wife as saying this would not be a Title IX issue as well. That was, in fact, part of my point–that this applies to women (i.e. more than just football players). Your point about whether a university views a sports program as a revenue generating activity is an important one. At the same time, let’s say University XYZ clearly does not view a sports program as a revenue generating activity. Will that change the dynamic mentioned in Dr. Sax’s quote? Why do women have a strong peer network that balances… Read more »
“Where is the male peer network that can guide our young men?”
If boys leave high school less prepared than girls, maybe that’s the wrong place to look.
“Across the various measures, the impact was greater on male students than on female students. After six months of coaching, for example, the impact of coaching added 2.5 percentage points to female students’ retention rates, and 6.1 percentage points to the rates for men.”
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/03/10/study_finds_value_in_coaching_college_students_on_academic_and_life_issues
Only two of the items in the list increase dollar amounts for the students. I’m not sure how you can declare that that makes it the core of the purpose.
And yes, I do think an organization making astounding amount of money off of employees who are making the tinest fraction of the income they generate is a problem.
Mark, thank you for your comment. The suspicion this is about money is purely my own … a gut feeling. What I’m not seeing enough of is evidence that this movement will do anything to improve how the student part of the student-athlete performs. I’m curious too about your second comment. What about those student athletes on scholarship that devote the same number of hours to their sport, juggle the same difficult course loads, but do not participate in a sport that generates significant revenue? Should they be paid as employees as well, even though the university and NCAA has… Read more »
” What I’m not seeing enough of is evidence that this movement will do anything to improve how the student part of the student-athlete performs.” As if money doesn’t pay for tuition. I think there are clearly two possible ways to go about solving this. One is for schools to allow students to be part-time students and athletes. After 4 years of athletic eligibility is used up, they enter school full time with a full scholarship. The other way is to treat them as employees. Employees will sometimes get tuition waivers. If you pay them the equivalent of a college… Read more »
John, thank you for your comments and for joining the conversation. Money does pay for tuition, but the case that Peter Ohr of the National Labor Relations Board in Chicago had to rule upon was if student athletes on full scholarship are considered university employees. Their tuition, room and board, and meals are all accounted for. You make an interesting case for the part-time student/part-time athlete. It would allow for equal focus on each (sport and academia). As for matching revenue from the sport to pay, wouldn’t that swing the pendulum even further away from academics? Programs not making money… Read more »