FB: Northwest Conference

[RedandPurple]

"For the first time in the history of college sports, athletes are asking to be represented by a labor union, taking formal steps on Tuesday to begin the process of being recognized as employees."

Any thoughts on the players at Northwestern wanting to form a union?

Read more here:  http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/10363430/outside-lines-northwestern-wildcats-football-players-trying-join-labor-union

[OldCatProf]

The concept of D1 footballl and basketball players being represented by a union is intriguing and, of course, the NCAA and its DI members will use every means available to fight off the idea. On the other hand, I expect that many folks sympathetic to unions and even folks who are not fans of unions will express support for the idea. Whether such an idea will survive a court challenge is not addressed here.

IMHO, unions are beneficial only when the powerful few are clearly exploiting the less powerful many. Speaking of exploitation, I believe this to be the case regarding D1 football and basketball (and perhaps other D1 sports too).  Sure, these athletes receive scholarships to prestigious (and to not-so-prestigious) universities as compensation. But, do they get a quality education? As a faculty member for more than 25 years at 3 highly-successful-sports D1 universities I question whether even 50% of the "student athletes" receive a quality education. What they typically receive is a series of watered down courses and manufactured-majors designed to keep them eligible rather than to provide an education. (Oh what a crock the term "student athlete" is in most of these programs.) 

I have little regard for the NCAA at the D1 level. The de facto "minor league function" that D1 football and basketball serves is an embarrassment to most faculty and should be so to the NCAA. But, the NCAA has sold its soul to build the billion-dollar-monsters that are D1 football and basketball. For these reasons and other related ones, I became a D3 fan over the years and haven't attended a D1 football or basketball game in recent memory. IMHO, all university sports programs should be bound by D3 standards and rules. If the professional leagues want/need farm teams, let them build their own. D1 sports, such as football and basketball have become the Financial Tail that wags the University Dog. Enough already.

[Mr. Ypsi]

OldCatProf, I agree with every word you said.  I taught at U of Michigan and (most of my career) at Eastern Michigan University - one very major, the other rather minor.  I knew a handful of bball and fball players who were good students and received a good education, but they were definitely in the minority.  (Athletes in the 'minor' sports were often excellent students - I don't recall a single female soccer player at EMU, for example, ever receiving below a B in my statistics class!)

Let's face facts - only a minority of bball and fball athletes at the major programs have any interest whatsoever in education (so the scholarship is not really of value to them); they are there to try-out for the NBA or NFL.  The fact that very few of them will make it is perhaps the real tragedy. 

[badgerwarhawk]

Don't athletes have some responsibility in determining how good of an education they receive?  I'm not saying that I disagree with the points you've made Old Cat I'm just suggesting that the quality on their education is to some degree determined by themselves. 

[OldCatProf]

Don't athletes have some responsibility in determining how good of an education they receive?  I'm not saying that I disagree with the points you've made Old Cat I'm just suggesting that the quality on their education is to some degree determined by themselves.

You make a good point.

My thinking though, is that the greater responsibility is on the "grownups" who structure the system such that the often (usually?) immature and unsophisticated 17-18-19 year-olds end up trapped by a system more interested in keeping them eligible than in facilitating a useful education. By the time a "kid" figures out he is being exploited, he's likely too far along into the system to be able to change academic direction or major field of study.   

[emma17]

Don't athletes have some responsibility in determining how good of an education they receive?  I'm not saying that I disagree with the points you've made Old Cat I'm just suggesting that the quality on their education is to some degree determined by themselves.

You make a good point.

My thinking though, is that the greater responsibility is on the "grownups" who structure the system such that the often (usually?) immature and unsophisticated 17-18-19 year-olds end up trapped by a system more interested in keeping them eligible than in facilitating a useful education. By the time a "kid" figures out he is being exploited, he's likely too far along into the system to be able to change academic direction or major field of study.

You make some good points OldCat.
I'll take exception to one word/concept that you used- "exploited". 
I hear that word and my skin crawls, hair stands on end, teeth grind, fists clench, blood pressure rises, feet sweat (I don't know why) and I become generally irritable. 

Exploitation:  Utilization of another person or group for selfish purposes. 
I understand your point that Universities are profiting from the athletes.  The problem I have with the term (and I think you intended it by stating "by the time a kid figures out...") is that it paints a picture of "victimization".  IMHO one of the greatest reasons this country struggles is this very concept of victimization.  People purchased credit cards with high interest rates or loans with high interest rates- They didn't make a bad decision, they were victimized. 
Good athletes go to university on a full ride, but they don't make the pros- they were victimized. 

To me, it's like this.  If the word exploitation is to be used, it applies to both sides.  High school athletes with dreams of making the big time (and don't even pretend that they aren't acutely aware of the bad odds of making it) exploit the university/scholarship system to help them achieve their dream.  Universities that see athletics as an important contributor to financial gain as well as enhanced student life, exploit the student/athlete.   

Both sides know full well what is going on, there aren't victims, just an unspoken agreement that we are all aware of.           

[badgerwarhawk]

Point taken, I just not sure that a union would change any of that.  I just don't know enough about it at this point to have a firm opinion one way or the other.   It is an interesting idea though.  The NCAA will probably oppose it and my hunch is their member institutions would probably oppose it as well.   We'll see where it goes.

[OldCatProf]

Don't athletes have some responsibility in determining how good of an education they receive?  I'm not saying that I disagree with the points you've made Old Cat I'm just suggesting that the quality on their education is to some degree determined by themselves.

You make a good point.

My thinking though, is that the greater responsibility is on the "grownups" who structure the system such that the often (usually?) immature and unsophisticated 17-18-19 year-olds end up trapped by a system more interested in keeping them eligible than in facilitating a useful education. By the time a "kid" figures out he is being exploited, he's likely too far along into the system to be able to change academic direction or major field of study.

You make some good points OldCat.
I'll take exception to one word/concept that you used- "exploited". 
I hear that word and my skin crawls, hair stands on end, teeth grind, fists clench, blood pressure rises, feet sweat (I don't know why) and I become generally irritable. 

Exploitation:  Utilization of another person or group for selfish purposes. 
I understand your point that Universities are profiting from the athletes.  The problem I have with the term (and I think you intended it by stating "by the time a kid figures out...") is that it paints a picture of "victimization".  IMHO one of the greatest reasons this country struggles is this very concept of victimization.  People purchased credit cards with high interest rates or loans with high interest rates- They didn't make a bad decision, they were victimized. 
Good athletes go to university on a full ride, but they don't make the pros- they were victimized. 

To me, it's like this.  If the word exploitation is to be used, it applies to both sides.  High school athletes with dreams of making the big time (and don't even pretend that they aren't acutely aware of the bad odds of making it) exploit the university/scholarship system to help them achieve their dream.  Universities that see athletics as an important contributor to financial gain as well as enhanced student life, exploit the student/athlete.   

Both sides know full well what is going on, there aren't victims, just an unspoken agreement that we are all aware of.         

Emma 17,

You are correct (by the definition of exploitation that you quoted) that the exploitation goes both ways. I was using exploitation, however, in a harsher sense. That is, the definition of exploitation that I would use here is " the use or manipulation of another person for one's own advantage;" the operative word being manipulation. In this case, I'm not sure how a 17-18 year-old athlete manipulates the D1 system to get a scholarship. Perhaps he somehow fakes his highlite tape...which would qualify.

On the other hand, those older, wiser, and experienced collection of adults who benefit from the current system (e.g., coaches, athletic directors, university presidents, alumni fundraisers, to-name-a-few) do so by exploiting/manipulating the kid. The benefits enjoyed by the adults are grossly disproportional to the benefits accruing to the kid. The athlete seldom graduates with an education let alone a useful degree. The more highly visible the football/basketball program, the more likely this appears to be the case.

One point on which we fully agree is victimization. While the term (in the strict sense) probably applies here, I too am tired of hearing every failure in life being blamed on victimization of some sort or another. Get over it. 

[02 Warhawk]

***Potential Dumb Question***

Sorry, this is a little off topic... but speaking of scholarships, does any money actually changes hands when an athlete gets a scholarship to attend a university? For instance, does the athletic department physically pay the admissions office for his time at their school? Or does the student just go for free, where nobody is paying anyone?

Thanks in advance.

[emma17]

***Potential Dumb Question***

Sorry, this is a little off topic... but speaking of scholarships, does any money actually changes hands when an athlete gets a scholarship to attend a university? For instance, does the athletic department physically pay the admissions office for his time at their school? Or does the student just go for free, where nobody is paying anyone?

Thanks in advance.

It's been a while, but when I got my full ride at UWW..., oh wait a minute.

[emma17]

Don't athletes have some responsibility in determining how good of an education they receive?  I'm not saying that I disagree with the points you've made Old Cat I'm just suggesting that the quality on their education is to some degree determined by themselves.

You make a good point.

My thinking though, is that the greater responsibility is on the "grownups" who structure the system such that the often (usually?) immature and unsophisticated 17-18-19 year-olds end up trapped by a system more interested in keeping them eligible than in facilitating a useful education. By the time a "kid" figures out he is being exploited, he's likely too far along into the system to be able to change academic direction or major field of study.

You make some good points OldCat.
I'll take exception to one word/concept that you used- "exploited". 
I hear that word and my skin crawls, hair stands on end, teeth grind, fists clench, blood pressure rises, feet sweat (I don't know why) and I become generally irritable. 

Exploitation:  Utilization of another person or group for selfish purposes. 
I understand your point that Universities are profiting from the athletes.  The problem I have with the term (and I think you intended it by stating "by the time a kid figures out...") is that it paints a picture of "victimization".  IMHO one of the greatest reasons this country struggles is this very concept of victimization.  People purchased credit cards with high interest rates or loans with high interest rates- They didn't make a bad decision, they were victimized. 
Good athletes go to university on a full ride, but they don't make the pros- they were victimized. 

To me, it's like this.  If the word exploitation is to be used, it applies to both sides.  High school athletes with dreams of making the big time (and don't even pretend that they aren't acutely aware of the bad odds of making it) exploit the university/scholarship system to help them achieve their dream.  Universities that see athletics as an important contributor to financial gain as well as enhanced student life, exploit the student/athlete.   

Both sides know full well what is going on, there aren't victims, just an unspoken agreement that we are all aware of.         

Emma 17,

You are correct (by the definition of exploitation that you quoted) that the exploitation goes both ways. I was using exploitation, however, in a harsher sense. That is, the definition of exploitation that I would use here is " the use or manipulation of another person for one's own advantage;" the operative word being manipulation. In this case, I'm not sure how a 17-18 year-old athlete manipulates the D1 system to get a scholarship. Perhaps he somehow fakes his highlite tape...which would qualify.

On the other hand, those older, wiser, and experienced collection of adults who benefit from the current system (e.g., coaches, athletic directors, university presidents, alumni fundraisers, to-name-a-few) do so by exploiting/manipulating the kid. The benefits enjoyed by the adults are grossly disproportional to the benefits accruing to the kid. The athlete seldom graduates with an education let alone a useful degree. The more highly visible the football/basketball program, the more likely this appears to be the case.

One point on which we fully agree is victimization. While the term (in the strict sense) probably applies here, I too am tired of hearing every failure in life being blamed on victimization of some sort or another. Get over it.

Thanks for finding common ground on victimization- it is soooo frustrating.
An example of a 17-18 yr old kid "manipulating" the system is this- they are recruited as student athletes. I've little doubt that the majority of kids being recruited are told all about the low chances of turning pro and therefore, the great importance of an education. Let's not make the exception the rule as yes, I'm sure some recruiters skip this step. In any event, IMO the overwhelming majority of scholarship athletes absolutely understand the concept of why they need a good education AND that through the scholarship, as a student -athlete, the university makes it possible.
These kids chose to manipulate the system when they KNOWINGLY dismiss the advice of education and choose, on their own free will and understanding, to take meaningless courses simply to retain eligibility. In doing this, they manipulate the entire purpose of the Student-Athlete program to their perceived advantage.
Their gamble pays off much less often than the gamble taken by the university.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Don't athletes have some responsibility in determining how good of an education they receive?  I'm not saying that I disagree with the points you've made Old Cat I'm just suggesting that the quality on their education is to some degree determined by themselves.

You make a good point.

My thinking though, is that the greater responsibility is on the "grownups" who structure the system such that the often (usually?) immature and unsophisticated 17-18-19 year-olds end up trapped by a system more interested in keeping them eligible than in facilitating a useful education. By the time a "kid" figures out he is being exploited, he's likely too far along into the system to be able to change academic direction or major field of study.

You make some good points OldCat.
I'll take exception to one word/concept that you used- "exploited". 
I hear that word and my skin crawls, hair stands on end, teeth grind, fists clench, blood pressure rises, feet sweat (I don't know why) and I become generally irritable. 

Exploitation:  Utilization of another person or group for selfish purposes. 
I understand your point that Universities are profiting from the athletes.  The problem I have with the term (and I think you intended it by stating "by the time a kid figures out...") is that it paints a picture of "victimization".  IMHO one of the greatest reasons this country struggles is this very concept of victimization.  People purchased credit cards with high interest rates or loans with high interest rates- They didn't make a bad decision, they were victimized. 
Good athletes go to university on a full ride, but they don't make the pros- they were victimized. 

To me, it's like this.  If the word exploitation is to be used, it applies to both sides.  High school athletes with dreams of making the big time (and don't even pretend that they aren't acutely aware of the bad odds of making it) exploit the university/scholarship system to help them achieve their dream.  Universities that see athletics as an important contributor to financial gain as well as enhanced student life, exploit the student/athlete.   

Both sides know full well what is going on, there aren't victims, just an unspoken agreement that we are all aware of.         

Emma 17,

You are correct (by the definition of exploitation that you quoted) that the exploitation goes both ways. I was using exploitation, however, in a harsher sense. That is, the definition of exploitation that I would use here is " the use or manipulation of another person for one's own advantage;" the operative word being manipulation. In this case, I'm not sure how a 17-18 year-old athlete manipulates the D1 system to get a scholarship. Perhaps he somehow fakes his highlite tape...which would qualify.

On the other hand, those older, wiser, and experienced collection of adults who benefit from the current system (e.g., coaches, athletic directors, university presidents, alumni fundraisers, to-name-a-few) do so by exploiting/manipulating the kid. The benefits enjoyed by the adults are grossly disproportional to the benefits accruing to the kid. The athlete seldom graduates with an education let alone a useful degree. The more highly visible the football/basketball program, the more likely this appears to be the case.

One point on which we fully agree is victimization. While the term (in the strict sense) probably applies here, I too am tired of hearing every failure in life being blamed on victimization of some sort or another. Get over it.

Thanks for finding common ground on victimization- it is soooo frustrating.
An example of a 17-18 yr old kid "manipulating" the system is this- they are recruited as student athletes. I've little doubt that the majority of kids being recruited are told all about the low chances of turning pro and therefore, the great importance of an education. Let's not make the exception the rule as yes, I'm sure some recruiters skip this step. In any event, IMO the overwhelming majority of scholarship athletes absolutely understand the concept of why they need a good education AND that through the scholarship, as a student -athlete, the university makes it possible.
These kids chose to manipulate the system when they KNOWINGLY dismiss the advice of education and choose, on their own free will and understanding, to take meaningless courses simply to retain eligibility. In doing this, they manipulate the entire purpose of the Student-Athlete program to their perceived advantage.
Their gamble pays off much less often than the gamble taken by the university.

One thing that I think is being overlooked: hyper-competitive 17-18 year olds, who have been treated as 'stars' for years by the point of enrollment, will almost inevitably think they are the exception to the odds.  Many, many, many of them are absolutely certain (whatever warnings may be given) that THEY will be NBA or NFL millionaires, so why bother with an edumacation?! 

Also, the taking of 'meaningless courses' is not always of the student's 'own free will and understanding' - I have heard of a number of cases of 'real' students who had to quit and give up their scholarships because their course of study would interfere with the coaching staff's demands.  Understandably, it is the fairly rare student who is so well-grounded at that age that they will voluntarily give up their scholarship (and the sport they love) for the sake of a real education.

[emma17]

Don't athletes have some responsibility in determining how good of an education they receive?  I'm not saying that I disagree with the points you've made Old Cat I'm just suggesting that the quality on their education is to some degree determined by themselves.

You make a good point.

My thinking though, is that the greater responsibility is on the "grownups" who structure the system such that the often (usually?) immature and unsophisticated 17-18-19 year-olds end up trapped by a system more interested in keeping them eligible than in facilitating a useful education. By the time a "kid" figures out he is being exploited, he's likely too far along into the system to be able to change academic direction or major field of study.

You make some good points OldCat.
I'll take exception to one word/concept that you used- "exploited". 
I hear that word and my skin crawls, hair stands on end, teeth grind, fists clench, blood pressure rises, feet sweat (I don't know why) and I become generally irritable. 

Exploitation:  Utilization of another person or group for selfish purposes. 
I understand your point that Universities are profiting from the athletes.  The problem I have with the term (and I think you intended it by stating "by the time a kid figures out...") is that it paints a picture of "victimization".  IMHO one of the greatest reasons this country struggles is this very concept of victimization.  People purchased credit cards with high interest rates or loans with high interest rates- They didn't make a bad decision, they were victimized. 
Good athletes go to university on a full ride, but they don't make the pros- they were victimized. 

To me, it's like this.  If the word exploitation is to be used, it applies to both sides.  High school athletes with dreams of making the big time (and don't even pretend that they aren't acutely aware of the bad odds of making it) exploit the university/scholarship system to help them achieve their dream.  Universities that see athletics as an important contributor to financial gain as well as enhanced student life, exploit the student/athlete.   

Both sides know full well what is going on, there aren't victims, just an unspoken agreement that we are all aware of.         

Emma 17,

You are correct (by the definition of exploitation that you quoted) that the exploitation goes both ways. I was using exploitation, however, in a harsher sense. That is, the definition of exploitation that I would use here is " the use or manipulation of another person for one's own advantage;" the operative word being manipulation. In this case, I'm not sure how a 17-18 year-old athlete manipulates the D1 system to get a scholarship. Perhaps he somehow fakes his highlite tape...which would qualify.

On the other hand, those older, wiser, and experienced collection of adults who benefit from the current system (e.g., coaches, athletic directors, university presidents, alumni fundraisers, to-name-a-few) do so by exploiting/manipulating the kid. The benefits enjoyed by the adults are grossly disproportional to the benefits accruing to the kid. The athlete seldom graduates with an education let alone a useful degree. The more highly visible the football/basketball program, the more likely this appears to be the case.

One point on which we fully agree is victimization. While the term (in the strict sense) probably applies here, I too am tired of hearing every failure in life being blamed on victimization of some sort or another. Get over it.

Thanks for finding common ground on victimization- it is soooo frustrating.
An example of a 17-18 yr old kid "manipulating" the system is this- they are recruited as student athletes. I've little doubt that the majority of kids being recruited are told all about the low chances of turning pro and therefore, the great importance of an education. Let's not make the exception the rule as yes, I'm sure some recruiters skip this step. In any event, IMO the overwhelming majority of scholarship athletes absolutely understand the concept of why they need a good education AND that through the scholarship, as a student -athlete, the university makes it possible.
These kids chose to manipulate the system when they KNOWINGLY dismiss the advice of education and choose, on their own free will and understanding, to take meaningless courses simply to retain eligibility. In doing this, they manipulate the entire purpose of the Student-Athlete program to their perceived advantage.
Their gamble pays off much less often than the gamble taken by the university.

One thing that I think is being overlooked: hyper-competitive 17-18 year olds, who have been treated as 'stars' for years by the point of enrollment, will almost inevitably think they are the exception to the odds.  Many, many, many of them are absolutely certain (whatever warnings may be given) that THEY will be NBA or NFL millionaires, so why bother with an edumacation?! 

Also, the taking of 'meaningless courses' is not always of the student's 'own free will and understanding' - I have heard of a number of cases of 'real' students who had to quit and give up their scholarships because their course of study would interfere with the coaching staff's demands.  Understandably, it is the fairly rare student who is so well-grounded at that age that they will voluntarily give up their scholarship (and the sport they love) for the sake of a real education.

Yes, no doubt many superstar athletes ignore the warnings (advice to take education important), but they aren't being manipulated to do it.  They aren't being told one thing and then required to do another for the sake of profit to the university.  The student athletes are educated on the importance of an education (they even see it during commercials of the sports they watch on tv).  They are making a choice of informed free will when they select an easier track of courses.  The fact that the university "offers" these easier courses doesn't make it guilty of manipulation or exploitation.  Those easier courses are offered to all students, not just superstars. Regular kids take those courses as well.  Were they too manipulated?   
 
What should we think when a non-athlete, non-scholarship kid drops out after paying tuition and expenses for a couple of years?  Should we think the university exploited them by falsely advertising college life or the degree of difficulty of classes- just so the university could profit? 
No, you'd have to search long and hard to find a superstar college athlete that is blind to the importance of a college education and the odds of making it to the pros.  I don't care how competitive the kid is, the decision to forego a serious education for their sport of choice is an informed decision.   

[badgerwarhawk]

All of you make very valid and well reasoned points but none of it answers the question of what a union would do to change any of that.  I don't see how a union will change anything recruiters do and the athletes who figure they're just passing time until they go pro won't do anything different.  The biggest hangup I've got with the whole deal is I just don't see how unionizing will change anything.

[RedandPurple]

All this union talk brings up this question. Would a unionized team go on strike if told to by their union boss?

Anyone know which Linfield home game is the Hall of Fame game this year?