Athletics: Exploiting, academically damaging, or a positive aspect of university culture?

College athletics in the United States is a unique industry in that universities use college athletes to generate publicity, increase future student enrollment, and most noticeably, generate revenue for the school.  At competitive institutions, athletes can bring in over $1 million in revenue for the school, yet the athlete does not receive any portion of that money.

Last year, several football players at Ohio State sold memorabilia, rings, jerseys, and other significant items in order to “help their families.” The players were required to pay the money back that they received for selling their items but were not suspended from the upcoming bowl game because the athletes were not properly informed of the regulations regarding profiting from their memorabilia (there was an additional violation regarding a tattoo parlor and receiving discount tattoos). This is a unique situation in that these student athletes bring in large sums of money for their school but aside from potential scholarships, they are not paid for their performance. I am conflicted in saying that student athletes are used by universities and “the current system allows adults (coaches and their assistants) to get rich by exploiting children—a form of financial child molestation.” However, when universities require student athletes to devote the majority of their time to training, practice, and games, how are athletes supposed to financially support themselves with a job when their sport monopolizes their time? I do not think paying athletes is the answer, but I also see no problem with athletes choosing to sell their personal items to help their families, pay their way through college or spend for personal reasons. Unfortunately, the NCAA does. 

Athletes tend to have a more privileged course during their time in college because the university often requires them to receive more accommodations than other students such as selecting classes weeks before every other student in order to accommodate their practices, lifting schedule, and game schedules. Since the university allows student athletes additional privileges, they are often held to a higher standard in terms of their behavior off the field or out of the gym. The quarterback for LSU was recently arrested for bar fighting along with another athlete who were both suspended indefinitely. Locally, two football players at CSU were cited at the 2,000+ person pool party in August for harassment and disorderly conduct and were suspended for the next game. Athletes receiving special accommodations sometimes begin to forget the privileges they are receiving while in college and act as though they are above the rules. Are we fostering this mentality because of the way athletes are treated at some institutions or does the rigorous schedule universities require student athletes to maintain encourage the development of life skills like respect, punctuality, teamwork and dedication?

An interesting argument was presented that when athletes or coaches misbehave or break the rules presented by the NCAA, top university administration should also be held accountable. By doing so, presidents would be less likely to support or cover up violations by their athletics department holding the university accountable to its mission and purpose of education, integrity, and honor.

Vedder brings up another interesting argument regarding Utah’s decision to cancel all afternoon classes so students could attend the first football game of the season starting at 6 p.m. Classes beginning at 3 p.m. were even canceled to give student an opportunity to get into the stadium and tailgate early. Understandably, the university wanted to encourage students to participate in the game festivities, encourage school spirit, and hopefully help students find some sort of connection to the campus, but is disregarding the importance of classroom learning beneficial to the student and exemplifying the academic mission of a university? Colleges were established to educate students, supply them with a quality education hopefully resulting in a degree, and prepare them to enter the real world. By canceling classes in order to attend a game, the university’s message to be a dedicated student and work hard in the classroom loses its basis and winning a game following a drunken tailgate you were excused from class to go to become the message students are receiving. I struggle to understand the reasoning behind the university making the executive decision for all faculty and students to cancel class instead of allowing students to make the decision to attend the class they paid plenty of money for or attend a game.  

I do think athletics is an important aspect of college and has the ability to help students connect to each other and develop a loyalty to the university, but the desire to win at any cost has started to overshadow the purpose of higher education.