| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
OutdoorsKid
Joined: 14 Jul 2020
Posts: 38
Location: KY
Back to top |
 Posted: 08/08/20 11:54 am ::: |
Reply  |
|
[quote="purduefanatic"]
| OutdoorsKid wrote: |
| Maybe forcing schools to pay athletes for practice time, weight room time, playing time, required physical therapy, etc. will make them realize just how costly to the student it is to be under contract with the university to essentially perform. Most schools could not handle paying even minimum wage for all of those hours. Then perhaps schools will reduce the amount of time required of student athletes, and instead of expecting student athletes to be under their control year round, make sports truly seasonal again and pay players for their time commitment. This, in turn, will allow schools to return to the idea of letting players practice together maybe for a month before the season starts, and then when the season ends, require no time commitment on the player's part until the month before the next season. |
| Quote: |
| And if schools are paying them for their time, then it would only seem right that the student-athlete pay to go to school, pay for gym rental/weight room fees, pay their coaches the going hourly rate for an individual trainer while they are receiving skill instruction, rent the gym for practices/workouts, pay their tutor(s) as needed, buy their meals, buy their plane tickets/bus tickets for road games, purchase their shoes/practice gear/uniforms, bring their own supplies for the training room, pay the trainer for all the work they do on them, etc. |
Students who are not athletes may pay a student activities fee that includes access to weight rooms, gyms, and other workout facilities, as well as trainers. Why would student athleties be treated differently if they were being paid for required practice time?
Faculty salaries get paid by those who pay tuition, or by donations to academic programs. Because so many athletics programs lose money (I worked at a mid-major where the department lost between $1 and $2 million a year, to give just one example), tuition dollars paid by non-athletes end up being used to subsidize athletics. These same students often have to pay for tickets to attend athletics events, so the non-athletes pay twice. Maybe a fairer system is to have student athletes pay tuition and earn scholarships based on their academic abilities.
Students buy their textbooks, their musical instruments, and their clothes. It might surprise you to read this, but I don't think it is a stretch to ask them to buy a uniform and shoes. If they were on salary and paid a living wage, that's a lot more than what many other students get who work jobs waiting tables to pay for college.
| Quote: |
| Investing. That's what schools are doing with all the money they spend on them for everything (scholarship, books, travel, meals, housing, equipment, etc). That's what kids are doing with all the time they spend on everything |
The investment is to perform for the university, but the university could instead invest most and maybe all of the money elsewhere in other students.
The investment that athletics makes is not so much about life after university, and that is part of the rub for me, because I think universities have an ethical obligation to not just educate, but to help students get their first job in their profession for which they are prepared to pursue. What does playing basketball prepare you for besides maybe being an assistant coach or DOBO? Be honest. I have a hard time placing a student in a good job if they have not had a (paid) internship experience before they graduate. But if they have a paid internship experience before they graduate and it is not a train wreck, they will have offers and land in good jobs.
I am *all about* taking students to other cities, other countries, and do it, and I raise money to cover most of the costs. So good for you for traveling with them. But how much of the world do these students really see when they travel? How much do you attempt to immerse them in local culture, visit historical sites, learn about local traditions, ways of doing business, politics, literature, religions, or the natural envirnment and how it differs from home, just to name a few possitibilities? Maybe you take them to the Caribbean for 4 days, and then spend a couple of hours on the beach each day, right?
I think your travel is a selling point, and I am all about it, but I also think that it's fair game to question whether the resources that get devoted to that are really just about recruiting fun and playing basketball, or are they really being used to support greater immersion in the local community or country? Because that's what good stewards of other people's money do: they raise questions.
| Quote: |
| I would just add that during my career as a coach (mid major and major), our kids were allowed to leave but just had to come back for summer camps, where they got paid well and treated like queens by the kids. It's not like it was a week of hell. We also had many players throughout the years that actually liked staying near the campus during the summers (heaven forbid) and working out and working a part-time job. |
Good that they were paid well and had the option of working off campus. That's healthy. Good for you.
| Quote: |
| Many of your posts seem to paint a very negative image of athletics. I'm sorry you have all these bad experiences, but even though there are some issues that certainly need to be addressed, it isn't really as horrible as you portray. And yes, there are coaches that abuse their position of authority, abuse kids, etc...but there are bad apples in every single profession out there. |
There are coaches who abuse their positions of authority. There are coaches whose behavior is over-the-top (Read Pat Summit's autorbiography where she tells a story about a manager puking their guys out in practice, and the manager was basically told that if you leave, don't come back -- how is that not abuse?). NOT OK.
Your response that there are bad apples in every single profession is a disappointing one, as the effect, intended or not, is to minimize the bad behavior that is occuring. That does not address the trauma that the players who are abused experienced. And it's a crappy atttitude to have, frankly. If there is a problem in your (former?) profession, acknowledge it. Full stop.
| Quote: |
| Lastly, yes, it is very time demanding to be a Division I athlete. Not everyone can do it. School, coupled with a high level sport would be the equivalent of working 2 jobs. It's tough. But also extremely rewarding. They challenge themselves to do things that the vast majority of people cannot do. They graduate with a degree and no debt. They get to travel the country and the world for free. They develop friendships and bonds that last forever. They learn leadership and teamwork skills that most people their age don't get. |
They can learn those skills in classrooms, in internships, through service learning and other learning experiences. And this leadership stuff -- well, let's have an honest conversation about they really learn. Enumerate the skills, provide the evidence, etc. And let's compare that with, say, what a student learns through a semester-long leadership program based on research about leadership and its antecedants, for example.
They (and other physcially able classmates who are not athletes) can challenge themselves to do hard things through PE classes. I've played a lot of sports over the years (including hoops) and remain very physically active. The hardest sport that I participate in is rock climbing, not basketball.
Does this mean that I don't like basketball or think that colleges should not have basketball teams? No. I think there are problems with college athletics that need to be addressed. I'm not a sheep-fan who is going do nothing but heap praise and awe on athletes, coaches, and AD's. If you want that, then don't read my posts.
|
|
GEF34
Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 14109
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/08/20 6:55 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Being a student athlete is a choice, no one is forced to be a student athlete. If they choose to be a student athlete, they are accepting all they comes with being a student athlete. Many have tried it and decided it wasn’t for them and stopped being a student athlete and many have chosen not to do it.
And if you don’t want as much emphasis to be placed on winning and improving in the sport the first thing that needs to happen is coaches can’t be judged based on performance. How many times do you read this coach hasn’t gone to the NCAA tournament they should be fired. But what if that coach allows all their players to have internships and has 100% graduation rates, and the team has an overall gpa of 3.4, there’s not mention of that as a counterpoint, there’s no mention of the do this and this off the court so they should stay, there is just more they don’t win, they haven’t finished higher than 8th in their conference, they can’t make the NCAA tournament, etc.. So if you don’t think coaches should focus on winning and improving their team, how about not judging them based solely in winning. At lower division you aren’t judged as much on winning, but at the DI level, especially the high DI level you are.
And there are a lot of things that go into a scholarship that people who complain about it don’t understand. And there are a lot of things employees (coaches and staff) have to pay for that students athletes don’t, but if they are treated as “employees” most student athletes or even students in general couldn’t afford what employees have to pay so that means they would have to go into debt, which most people don’t understand.
As far as jobs go, I’ve seen many athletes get jobs out of college, but they are ones that got involved in their major, made connections with people (through both athletics and their major), and they didn’t have internships prior to graduation. And while yes internships can helpful, there are other things that can be done that are also helpful and many things that are more time accessible to athletes, but if they choose not to do it or not to reach out to see if there is a way something can be worked out because that specific time is during practice they is also on the athlete.
|
|
OutdoorsKid
Joined: 14 Jul 2020
Posts: 38
Location: KY
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/08/20 8:06 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GEF34 wrote: |
| Being a student athlete is a choice, no one is forced to be a student athlete. If they choose to be a student athlete, they are accepting all they comes with being a student athlete. Many have tried it and decided it wasn’t for them and stopped being a student athlete and many have chosen not to do it. |
So put up or shut up?
| Quote: |
| And if you don’t want as much emphasis to be placed on winning and improving in the sport the first thing that needs to happen is coaches can’t be judged based on performance. How many times do you read this coach hasn’t gone to the NCAA tournament they should be fired. But what if that coach allows all their players to have internships and has 100% graduation rates, and the team has an overall gpa of 3.4, there’s not mention of that as a counterpoint, there’s no mention of the do this and this off the court so they should stay, there is just more they don’t win, they haven’t finished higher than 8th in their conference, they can’t make the NCAA tournament, etc.. So if you don’t think coaches should focus on winning and improving their team, how about not judging them based solely in winning. At lower division you aren’t judged as much on winning, but at the DI level, especially the high DI level you are. |
Agreed.
| Quote: |
| And there are a lot of things that go into a scholarship that people who complain about it don’t understand. And there are a lot of things employees (coaches and staff) have to pay for that students athletes don’t, but if they are treated as “employees” most student athletes or even students in general couldn’t afford what employees have to pay so that means they would have to go into debt, which most people don’t understand. |
Every college prof I know reaches into their pockets to pay for various supplies for teaching and other parts of their job. Universities are not funded well for all that they need to do, or are least using what they have for other priorities in some cases. It was much less this way 30ish years when I started working full-time at universities.
| Quote: |
| As far as jobs go, I’ve seen many athletes get jobs out of college, but they are ones that got involved in their major, made connections with people (through both athletics and their major), and they didn’t have internships prior to graduation. And while yes internships can helpful, there are other things that can be done that are also helpful and many things that are more time accessible to athletes, but if they choose not to do it or not to reach out to see if there is a way something can be worked out because that specific time is during practice they is also on the athlete. |
I think it is possible at some universities, some student athletes get special support in creating professional connections and finding jobs. And I think some of it is done pretty quietly because donors/boosters are involved. Now if we are going to talk about above-board activities, well, I don't think athletics departments have placement offices. Can you give me an example of one that does?
As for the "other things", without more detail, I can't comment.
I can say that having been responsible for tracking job placement for every student in the largest major at a university where 100% placement was a serious goal, students without internships in the technical field that I oversaw did not find placement in their field. In my current job, where I have even more responsibility for student placement in a particular major, internships are also extremely important. And in some majors, you have to have a variety of practical internship-type experiences (pharmacy, for example, and pharm school can be accessed as juniors at some universities now) before graduation.
In any event, I think it would be interesting to track student athletes over time at all D I programs to see a) how many get support in finding jobs related to their majors, b) where that support comes from and what does it entail, and c) whether they are allowed to do internships during summers or the school year in addition to their classwork and sports, for example. It'd be great if someone who does not work for the university or the NCAA or isn't a contractor who makes money selling stuff to support athletics departments (so not NIKE,or UNDERARMOUR, for example) did the study.
|
|
readyAIMfire53
Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 7370
Location: Durham, NC
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/08/20 9:02 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
McCallie should have been fired from Duke when the "investigation" happened. AD should have been fired for the same reason: keeping an incompetent and abusive coach for WAY too many years.
_________________
Follow your passion and your life will be true down to your core.
~rAf
|
|
GEF34
Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 14109
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/08/20 9:25 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| OutdoorsKid wrote: |
| GEF34 wrote: |
| Being a student athlete is a choice, no one is forced to be a student athlete. If they choose to be a student athlete, they are accepting all they comes with being a student athlete. Many have tried it and decided it wasn’t for them and stopped being a student athlete and many have chosen not to do it. |
So put up or shut up?
| Quote: |
| And if you don’t want as much emphasis to be placed on winning and improving in the sport the first thing that needs to happen is coaches can’t be judged based on performance. How many times do you read this coach hasn’t gone to the NCAA tournament they should be fired. But what if that coach allows all their players to have internships and has 100% graduation rates, and the team has an overall gpa of 3.4, there’s not mention of that as a counterpoint, there’s no mention of the do this and this off the court so they should stay, there is just more they don’t win, they haven’t finished higher than 8th in their conference, they can’t make the NCAA tournament, etc.. So if you don’t think coaches should focus on winning and improving their team, how about not judging them based solely in winning. At lower division you aren’t judged as much on winning, but at the DI level, especially the high DI level you are. |
Agreed.
| Quote: |
| And there are a lot of things that go into a scholarship that people who complain about it don’t understand. And there are a lot of things employees (coaches and staff) have to pay for that students athletes don’t, but if they are treated as “employees” most student athletes or even students in general couldn’t afford what employees have to pay so that means they would have to go into debt, which most people don’t understand. |
Every college prof I know reaches into their pockets to pay for various supplies for teaching and other parts of their job. Universities are not funded well for all that they need to do, or are least using what they have for other priorities in some cases. It was much less this way 30ish years when I started working full-time at universities.
| Quote: |
| As far as jobs go, I’ve seen many athletes get jobs out of college, but they are ones that got involved in their major, made connections with people (through both athletics and their major), and they didn’t have internships prior to graduation. And while yes internships can helpful, there are other things that can be done that are also helpful and many things that are more time accessible to athletes, but if they choose not to do it or not to reach out to see if there is a way something can be worked out because that specific time is during practice they is also on the athlete. |
I think it is possible at some universities, some student athletes get special support in creating professional connections and finding jobs. And I think some of it is done pretty quietly because donors/boosters are involved. Now if we are going to talk about above-board activities, well, I don't think athletics departments have placement offices. Can you give me an example of one that does?
As for the "other things", without more detail, I can't comment.
I can say that having been responsible for tracking job placement for every student in the largest major at a university where 100% placement was a serious goal, students without internships in the technical field that I oversaw did not find placement in their field. In my current job, where I have even more responsibility for student placement in a particular major, internships are also extremely important. And in some majors, you have to have a variety of practical internship-type experiences (pharmacy, for example, and pharm school can be accessed as juniors at some universities now) before graduation.
In any event, I think it would be interesting to track student athletes over time at all D I programs to see a) how many get support in finding jobs related to their majors, b) where that support comes from and what does it entail, and c) whether they are allowed to do internships during summers or the school year in addition to their classwork and sports, for example. It'd be great if someone who does not work for the university or the NCAA or isn't a contractor who makes money selling stuff to support athletics departments (so not NIKE,or UNDERARMOUR, for example) did the study. |
Student athletes have opportunities such as career nights, alumni days and job fairs where former athletes are invited back to interact with current athletes, they say was colleges have those events. As for you’re implication that these are not “legal”, I don’t understand why you think that.
I’m not understanding what your point about college professors having to pay for things, I didn’t imply they don’t pay for things, I said people who think athletes should be paid as employees don’t understand what staff has to pay for. In addition to things you referenced, staff has to pay for gear, insurance, living situation, food, school (if they want to go to school), so let’s so ever athlete is paid hourly. How many would be able to afford all of that in addition to books fees, student fees, plus whatever what they want to do on their own time. I understand regular students have to do a lot of that, but since people want to act like student athletes don’t get anything out of that (not you specifically), let’s see how many would be able to go to college if they have to pay for all of that.
As for your put up or shut up comment, if a person chooses to do something and knows what they are going into, they have the option to not do it. As I’ve mentioned you see it all the time where student athletes decided to not be an athlete anymore because they decide it’s not for them. And if you don’t want to “shut up” as you put it, how many actually talk to the coach as opposed to complain to other people. You say in your experience the coaches didn’t allow internships, how many of their athletes actually asked if they could do an internship, how many presented an internship opportunity to their coach and asked if the coach would allow them to miss summer practice to do it. In my experience if the student athlete has no plans over the summer then yes they are expected to be at summer practices, but if they have a legitimate reason, like a job or internship they have been given the chance to go. But if a student athlete doesn’t speak up and they just assume some of that also falls on the student athlete and not just the coach.
Nike has a summer internship program at their various locations, and a lot of student athlete from all across the country participate every year. I know last summer the university of Arizona had 2 student athletes stationed at the Portland office, and they obviously weren’t expected to be in Tucson and Portland at the same time.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11140
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/09/20 10:37 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Colleges can avoid paying athletes by allowing boosters to pay them whatever the boosters want, and allowing athletes to have agents. (Why would the NCAA ban agents unless it feared that agents would wake up athletes to their actual contributions?)
As for placement, I majored in history and philosophy, and you know, no internships were available to study Spinoza. I don't know the percentages but I'd guess a significant group of college degrees are in liberal arts that do not lead to immediate employment. (I also did a fair amount of acting in college, and there were many drama majors who never got paid a dime for their talents. Same with music, art, etc. ...)
Finally, accountants are very, very good at manipulating numbers and there is zero reason for athletics to show a profit -- and a powerful reason (don't pay athletes) to show a loss.
And on top of that, measuring the benefits of the free marketing athletics brings in, plus the increase in alumni and donor interest, adds substantial value to the programs.
So I don't believe college athletics are a negative for the bulk of schools, or we would see more schools dropping out of D-1 -- when in fact, schools keep opting in despite the supposed "losses."
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
vossy
Joined: 13 Aug 2019
Posts: 17
Location: Long Beach
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/09/20 3:27 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| OutdoorsKid wrote: |
| There are coaches who abuse their positions of authority. There are coaches whose behavior is over-the-top (Read Pat Summit's autorbiography where she tells a story about a manager puking their guys out in practice, and the manager was basically told that if you leave, don't come back -- how is that not abuse?). NOT OK. |
The story I recall from Summit's book is that she ran players until they puked one practice when they all showed up hungover. Not sure I disagree with that strategy in that case.
Big money athletics just seems completely incompatible with the college experience. Excellent piece on that here:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2020/08/07/college-sports-embraced-reckless-greed-with-coronavirus-crisis-bill-has-come-due/
|
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15734
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
|
elsie
Joined: 08 Apr 2016
Posts: 276
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/09/20 10:22 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
no nursing student or teaching student nor music major nor pre med student etc etc gets treated like royalty as they travel around the country and sometimes the world....
they leave college with huge loans to payback which take years and years....
no glory for them....
I love athletes but they are blessed in physical ability and size....
at least I know that our local team gets a pretty good stipend, pretty good exposure, mingle with the high and mighty at various functions...they are universally admired and loved....
its enough what they get.....
lets not get anymore into professional sports than we already have with this marketing angle...
|
|
FrozenLVFan
Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 3511
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/09/20 11:27 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
I don't see any reason why schools should "employ" student athletes at all. Take a step back and tell me why an institution of higher education should have a bunch of athletes on its payroll at an enormous expense, not just for the athletes' pay, but for all the expenses of running the athletic dept. I think everyone would agree that only a small fraction of those students will go on to become professional athletes. Imagine the backlash that would happen if a nursing school or education dept or IT dept only placed a similar percentage of its graduates into their chosen fields.
Let the pro leagues set up their own farm systems and let the schools go back to being schools. The current situation is ludicrous. And as for overworking said athletes...a lot of them are taking gut classes and getting far more help than the average student. Anyone think they have it tougher than a pre-med student taking a bunch of science classes with extra lab time and a couple of work-study jobs?
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11140
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/10/20 10:41 am ::: |
Reply |
|
How many history majors get placed in jobs right out of college? How many art majors? And so on ...
But that said, I agree completely that the present model doesn't work.
If you want to argue that scholarships and other advantages are enough for athletes, then it would seem that coaches would not need to be paid any more than assistant professors, or maybe for a long-time coach who's published some books, a full professor. And assistant coaches should be paid like TAs.
But since coaches are paid millions, presumably they generate millions for the university -- or, to put it more precisely, the players they recruit and lead generate millions. Nobody watches Nick Saban draw up plays in his office or close a deal with an elite quarterback; people watch the games and players, not the coaches, so it's only fair that the players and coaches are compensated at roughly the same level.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15734
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/10/20 10:56 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
| But since coaches are paid millions, presumably they generate millions for the university -- or, to put it more precisely, the players they recruit and lead generate millions. Nobody watches Nick Saban draw up plays in his office or close a deal with an elite quarterback; people watch the games and players, not the coaches, so it's only fair that the players and coaches are compensated at roughly the same level. |
Mehhh....there's a (slight!) false equivalence there.
First of all, not EVERY coach is "paid millions", but yeah, certain schools with a certain level of achievement/notoriety/history pay (what I believe is) way too much. And where might any of those coaches be without their elite players?
And/But....where might any of those elite players be without their ("excellent") coaches? There are reasons kids want to play for Geno, Pat, Muff/Niele, etc.
Though it has, by now, reached irrational proportions in the ratio of what a good coach gets vs. how much an athlete receives (education/perks/etc.), it will still remain modeled after the Master-Servant, Boss-Employee, Professor-Student paradigm.
_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11140
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/10/20 4:39 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
I would argue every head football coach in Division I gets in excess of $200,000 a year -- and I think I'm lowballing. Every head men's basketball coach would be very close to that or above.
The disparity between professor/student is that the students in engineering classes generate no income for the university. The QB, on the other hand, generates a lot more than the coach.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
FrozenLVFan
Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 3511
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/10/20 5:12 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
I would argue every head football coach in Division I gets in excess of $200,000 a year -- and I think I'm lowballing. Every head men's basketball coach would be very close to that or above.
The disparity between professor/student is that the students in engineering classes generate no income for the university. The QB, on the other hand, generates a lot more than the coach. |
I don't think that's true. The coach is coaching that QB and another 80 players, directing the AC's, directing the trainers, directing every other person in the FB program, going to meetings, sitting on institutional/conference/national committees, giving interviews, looking at game film, schmoozing recruits and their families, schmoozing boosters and other donors, and a whole boatload of other things to make a successful program that generates donations, sells tickets, and justifies media contracts.
The QB has to avoid making stupid mistakes for 2 hours/week for 4 months a year and smile pretty during interviews.
|
|
GEF34
Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 14109
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/10/20 7:05 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
I would argue every head football coach in Division I gets in excess of $200,000 a year -- and I think I'm lowballing. Every head men's basketball coach would be very close to that or above.
The disparity between professor/student is that the students in engineering classes generate no income for the university. The QB, on the other hand, generates a lot more than the coach. |
That’s not entirely accurate as many undergraduate and graduate work on research studies that bring in grants for the university, and participating in various activities within organizations such as the NATA that can also bring in money for the university.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11140
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/11/20 11:57 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| GEF34 wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
I would argue every head football coach in Division I gets in excess of $200,000 a year -- and I think I'm lowballing. Every head men's basketball coach would be very close to that or above.
The disparity between professor/student is that the students in engineering classes generate no income for the university. The QB, on the other hand, generates a lot more than the coach. |
That’s not entirely accurate as many undergraduate and graduate work on research studies that bring in grants for the university, and participating in various activities within organizations such as the NATA that can also bring in money for the university. |
First, not many undergraduates contribute to money-making studies, and certainly none in liberal arts.
Second, that income pales in comparison to football and men's basketball, especially when free marketing and alumni interest/donations are factored in.
Yes, coaches have a difficult job, but so do most of us -- and coaches are vastly overcompensated compared to the revenue producers. I look at it as if the players are the sales force in a company, out there generating income. The coaches are the administrators back at the home office, and who may work more hours, but even though the sales people may not put in as much time, they're the ones who keep the company profitable.
Without the players, the coaches have no job, and coaches are much more fungible, in many ways, except for the sales aspect (recruiting) of their job.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/11/20 1:20 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| OutdoorsKid wrote: |
Students who are not athletes may pay a student activities fee that includes access to weight rooms, gyms, and other workout facilities, as well as trainers. Why would student athleties be treated differently if they were being paid for required practice time?
The investment that athletics makes is not so much about life after university, and that is part of the rub for me, because I think universities have an ethical obligation to not just educate, but to help students get their first job in their profession for which they are prepared to pursue. What does playing basketball prepare you for besides maybe being an assistant coach or DOBO? Be honest. I have a hard time placing a student in a good job if they have not had a (paid) internship experience before they graduate. But if they have a paid internship experience before they graduate and it is not a train wreck, they will have offers and land in good jobs.
I am *all about* taking students to other cities, other countries, and do it, and I raise money to cover most of the costs. So good for you for traveling with them. But how much of the world do these students really see when they travel? How much do you attempt to immerse them in local culture, visit historical sites, learn about local traditions, ways of doing business, politics, literature, religions, or the natural envirnment and how it differs from home, just to name a few possitibilities? Maybe you take them to the Caribbean for 4 days, and then spend a couple of hours on the beach each day, right?
I think your travel is a selling point, and I am all about it, but I also think that it's fair game to question whether the resources that get devoted to that are really just about recruiting fun and playing basketball, or are they really being used to support greater immersion in the local community or country? Because that's what good stewards of other people's money do: they raise questions.
Your response that there are bad apples in every single profession is a disappointing one, as the effect, intended or not, is to minimize the bad behavior that is occuring. That does not address the trauma that the players who are abused experienced. And it's a crappy atttitude to have, frankly. If there is a problem in your (former?) profession, acknowledge it. Full stop.
They can learn those skills in classrooms, in internships, through service learning and other learning experiences. And this leadership stuff -- well, let's have an honest conversation about they really learn. Enumerate the skills, provide the evidence, etc. And let's compare that with, say, what a student learns through a semester-long leadership program based on research about leadership and its antecedants, for example.
They (and other physcially able classmates who are not athletes) can challenge themselves to do hard things through PE classes. I've played a lot of sports over the years (including hoops) and remain very physically active. The hardest sport that I participate in is rock climbing, not basketball.
Does this mean that I don't like basketball or think that colleges should not have basketball teams? No. I think there are problems with college athletics that need to be addressed. I'm not a sheep-fan who is going do nothing but heap praise and awe on athletes, coaches, and AD's. If you want that, then don't read my posts. |
OK, not gonna bother responding to everything as you clearly have a very deep seated hatred toward everything college athletics. I have seen, first hand, how much athletics has helped young women grow, mature and become so much more self-confident. The fact that you are even comparing PE classes to being a D1 athlete...good lord, I don't even need to bother. The intensity level and situations you find yourself in are completely different and not even close to the same thing. Also, individual sports (such as rock climbing) are completely different from team sports. While some things you can learn are the same, there really isn't a comparison.
That said, I will comment on a couple of your comments from above. First, while students do pay an activity fee, that is for the co-rec where anybody and everybody has access to. Last time I checked, an activity fee did not provide access to Assembly Hall, Mackey Arena, Cameron Indoor Stadium, Gampel Pavilion, Thompson-Boling Arena or any other Division I basketball facility. Those are private facilities for the athletic department use only and as such, would be more expensive, just like if you were going to rent Carl's Court on Main Street to do a workout. Not to mention the access to an amazing locker room. Plus, the weight room is private, reserved solely for student-athletes. I mean, nobody else I can think of has access to a private room to work out in with a strength & conditioning coach provided just for your use so you can maximize your time. Anyway...enough on that.
The part about the job of a university...couldn't agree more. It is to help the student be successful in their chosen field. If you can't see the benefits of being a Division One basketball player and what it can do to help a student-athlete, well, I don't know what to tell you. I mean, let's just start with developing a work ethic. Maybe time management. How to deal with failure and keep going. Competing against others. Leadership - you seem to question this one. Really? I have seen amazing growth in so many players over the years as they learn how to deal with different personality types, figure out how to motivate teammates (which is very different from person to person), go above and beyond to help someone that is struggling, organizing things for the team to grow and bond, getting on a teammate when they clearly are doing something they shouldn't or acting poorly. I mean, I could go on and on about those types of things, especially in the heat of a game/practice when the intensity is spiked. You cannot possibly learn that in any leadership program. It's impossible to simulate that.
As far as job placement, come on. I have had former players that have gotten jobs quite simply because they did well in classes and were a former athlete. Many hiring professionals that I have met love hiring former athletes for many of the reasons I stated above. In addition, they have shown the ability to manage 2 full-time jobs while achieving success. They clearly have the work ethic, the drive, etc to be successful. That is a HUGE plus to every single person I have ever spoken with. In addition, it is also a MAJOR boost on their resume when applying for grad school. Letters of recommendation from a well spoken, highly successful basketball coach along with a couple of professors goes a very long way. In addition, the built-in network of not only women's basketball alums, but those of other athletic programs as well as the university as a whole, provide them a massive support system that helps get them in the door. At programs I have been to, we have invited former players back every single year to talk about their careers, how to get started, etc. This is invaluable and something not available to anybody else. When you have former players and women that are CEO's of Fortune 500 companies, leading medical experts at hospitals across the country, partners at major law firms, etc, that is a pretty big deal when they know about your current athletes, talk to them and can put out recommendations to a company or grad school.
And travel...yeah, they see things. Touring Pearl Harbor, trying traditional foods in foreign countries, exploring the Louvre, taking a tour of Moscow/Red Square so they can learn a little about Russian history, etc. All things former players have had a chance to do. Can we "immerse" them in a foreign culture? Of course not seeing as you are really there for what, a week or so at most? But we can certainly teach them history so they can have some respect and appreciation for the world in which we all live.
To even suggest that I am trying to minimize abusive coaches is not even close to accurate, and quite frankly, hurtful. Instead of viewing it that way, try looking at it as an acknowledgement of something horrible that has no place in sports or society as a whole. The truth of the matter is there has always been and most likely will always be people who are abusers. If you can figure out a way to rid us of that, I would be fully on board and support you in any way I possibly can. I have friends and loved ones that have been physically abused and/or mentally abused (as I'm sure every one of us has) and it is not pretty. I would do anything to be free of that problem.
Lastly, I don't heap praise on athletes, coaches, AD's, etc. I actually think college athletics has gotten out of control (same with professional sports as well, but that's a whole other ball of wax). However, I also subscribe to the thought that there is a whole lot of good in college athletics and what it does for a student-athlete. Sure, as I have said before, there are definitely some issues that need to be addressed as we continue to evolve. And while it would be easy to paint with a broad brush and look at everything negatively, I choose to be positive and recognize all the great things I have witnessed first-hand in the empowering and developing of great young women (have seen it in men as well, but seeing this is a women's basketball site and thread...) throughout the years.
Anyway, I spent WAY more time on this response than I intended. Look, you have your reasons why you feel you do, and you are certainly entitled to them and to express them here. After all, how can we all grow if we aren't open to hearing other thoughts, feelings, ideas, etc.
Hope you all have a great day!! May we all hope to see some women's basketball in 2020-2021.
|
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15734
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/11/20 2:43 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
I know there were a few posts above about internships. My limited experience is that the value of them is largely dependent on what field you are interested in as a career. In my previous post I mentioned connecting our successful alums with our current players. Well that has led to many internships, job shadowing, etc for our student-athletes. Those simply would not have happened for the average student.
If someone is NOT a student-athlete, they have to pad their academic resume with tons of things to try and separate themselves from the pack. A student-athlete that has shown the desire, work ethic and ability to balance all the time requirements while being successful, has already separated themselves from the vast majority of other candidates. Being able to navigate a very demanding schedule while also excelling in the classroom is a huge plus.
I know this is only a car rental company, but why do you think Enterprise tries to recruit and hire former student-athletes? Because they know they tend to be punctual, they work hard, they are teachable, they know how to function as a member of a team with so many diverse individuals and those are just a few of the many reasons. I actually spoke with one of the general managers a few years ago and was told point blank they love what they bring to the table. They also aren't hiring them to just work in their rental offices, but looking at them to move up quickly into leadership roles.
Finally, I would also add that we have adjusted our practice schedule in the past for an academic reason. For instance, we had a nursing student that had a practical (I think that was the term, but it may just have been a job shadow) and it was scheduled during our normal practice times. We moved to a different time slot so we could accommodate her schedule. Sure, we could have kept the regular time and she would have missed/shown up late to a few practices every week, but that isn't good for anybody. Nobody that is part of a team wants to miss a practice, let alone multiple.
Anyway, just food for thought. Not all coaches, schools, ADs, etc are bad and treat their athletes like crap. I feel that the overwhelming majority do actually care about their athletes. At least that is the experience I have been fortunate to have and hear about from former colleagues.
|
|
GEF34
Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 14109
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/11/20 5:11 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
| GEF34 wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
I would argue every head football coach in Division I gets in excess of $200,000 a year -- and I think I'm lowballing. Every head men's basketball coach would be very close to that or above.
The disparity between professor/student is that the students in engineering classes generate no income for the university. The QB, on the other hand, generates a lot more than the coach. |
That’s not entirely accurate as many undergraduate and graduate work on research studies that bring in grants for the university, and participating in various activities within organizations such as the NATA that can also bring in money for the university. |
First, not many undergraduates contribute to money-making studies, and certainly none in liberal arts.
Second, that income pales in comparison to football and men's basketball, especially when free marketing and alumni interest/donations are factored in.
Yes, coaches have a difficult job, but so do most of us -- and coaches are vastly overcompensated compared to the revenue producers. I look at it as if the players are the sales force in a company, out there generating income. The coaches are the administrators back at the home office, and who may work more hours, but even though the sales people may not put in as much time, they're the ones who keep the company profitable.
Without the players, the coaches have no job, and coaches are much more fungible, in many ways, except for the sales aspect (recruiting) of their job. |
You said students generate no income for the university, which is not an accurate statement. And well true a group of students doing research that brings in a million dollars is not the same as the basketball team bring in over a million dollars, that is not the statement I was replying to.
As far as the coaching comparisons you are trying to make, let’s see how college athletes would be without coaches and just athletes, it’s not going to be very successful, which is why coaches are just as crucial as the players are. And you say coaches are much more easily replaceable, if that’s the case, why do you see downfalls of programs or rises or programs with coaching changes, why do you constantly see comments about this player would be better with a different coach, or we need to fire so and so because they have run our program into the ground. If coaches are so replaceable and don’t matter as much, then they shouldn’t be the first second or even third reason for a program when they are struggling or succeeding, but that is clearly not the cases.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11140
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/11/20 8:04 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GEF34 wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
| GEF34 wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
I would argue every head football coach in Division I gets in excess of $200,000 a year -- and I think I'm lowballing. Every head men's basketball coach would be very close to that or above.
The disparity between professor/student is that the students in engineering classes generate no income for the university. The QB, on the other hand, generates a lot more than the coach. |
That’s not entirely accurate as many undergraduate and graduate work on research studies that bring in grants for the university, and participating in various activities within organizations such as the NATA that can also bring in money for the university. |
First, not many undergraduates contribute to money-making studies, and certainly none in liberal arts.
Second, that income pales in comparison to football and men's basketball, especially when free marketing and alumni interest/donations are factored in.
Yes, coaches have a difficult job, but so do most of us -- and coaches are vastly overcompensated compared to the revenue producers. I look at it as if the players are the sales force in a company, out there generating income. The coaches are the administrators back at the home office, and who may work more hours, but even though the sales people may not put in as much time, they're the ones who keep the company profitable.
Without the players, the coaches have no job, and coaches are much more fungible, in many ways, except for the sales aspect (recruiting) of their job. |
You said students generate no income for the university, which is not an accurate statement. And well true a group of students doing research that brings in a million dollars is not the same as the basketball team bring in over a million dollars, that is not the statement I was replying to.
As far as the coaching comparisons you are trying to make, let’s see how college athletes would be without coaches and just athletes, it’s not going to be very successful, which is why coaches are just as crucial as the players are. And you say coaches are much more easily replaceable, if that’s the case, why do you see downfalls of programs or rises or programs with coaching changes, why do you constantly see comments about this player would be better with a different coach, or we need to fire so and so because they have run our program into the ground. If coaches are so replaceable and don’t matter as much, then they shouldn’t be the first second or even third reason for a program when they are struggling or succeeding, but that is clearly not the cases. |
You jumped on that, as I expected someone would ...
The issue is disparity in incomes. as the old white guy (generally) sitting behind the desk is making millions (or at least hundreds of thousands) and the QB is making very much less.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
Carol Anne
Joined: 09 Apr 2005
Posts: 1739
Location: Seattle
Back to top |
|
Speebs56
Joined: 19 Aug 2015
Posts: 228
Location: Orange county, CA
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/12/20 5:41 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
How many history majors get placed in jobs right out of college?
How many history PhD's can find jobs after years in grad school? (Speaking from experience!)
There are so many conflicting goals and visions regarding what the purposes of college are - not sure those can be reconciled even with the best intentions.
|
|
GEF34
Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 14109
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/25/20 12:36 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| N/A
|
|
GEF34
Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 14109
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/29/20 7:16 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
| GEF34 wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
| GEF34 wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
I would argue every head football coach in Division I gets in excess of $200,000 a year -- and I think I'm lowballing. Every head men's basketball coach would be very close to that or above.
The disparity between professor/student is that the students in engineering classes generate no income for the university. The QB, on the other hand, generates a lot more than the coach. |
That’s not entirely accurate as many undergraduate and graduate work on research studies that bring in grants for the university, and participating in various activities within organizations such as the NATA that can also bring in money for the university. |
First, not many undergraduates contribute to money-making studies, and certainly none in liberal arts.
Second, that income pales in comparison to football and men's basketball, especially when free marketing and alumni interest/donations are factored in.
Yes, coaches have a difficult job, but so do most of us -- and coaches are vastly overcompensated compared to the revenue producers. I look at it as if the players are the sales force in a company, out there generating income. The coaches are the administrators back at the home office, and who may work more hours, but even though the sales people may not put in as much time, they're the ones who keep the company profitable.
Without the players, the coaches have no job, and coaches are much more fungible, in many ways, except for the sales aspect (recruiting) of their job. |
You said students generate no income for the university, which is not an accurate statement. And well true a group of students doing research that brings in a million dollars is not the same as the basketball team bring in over a million dollars, that is not the statement I was replying to.
As far as the coaching comparisons you are trying to make, let’s see how college athletes would be without coaches and just athletes, it’s not going to be very successful, which is why coaches are just as crucial as the players are. And you say coaches are much more easily replaceable, if that’s the case, why do you see downfalls of programs or rises or programs with coaching changes, why do you constantly see comments about this player would be better with a different coach, or we need to fire so and so because they have run our program into the ground. If coaches are so replaceable and don’t matter as much, then they shouldn’t be the first second or even third reason for a program when they are struggling or succeeding, but that is clearly not the cases. |
You jumped on that, as I expected someone would ...
The issue is disparity in incomes. as the old white guy (generally) sitting behind the desk is making millions (or at least hundreds of thousands) and the QB is making very much less. |
That is not completely true, especially as you go down to non power five conferences, as some coaches make less then the amount of tuition. And that of course doesn’t take into benefits student athletes get that coaches have to pay for out of pocket.
|
|
|
|
