The year was 1989. My wife and I were living in Evansville, Ind. It’s a long story.
But hearing Patsy Cline on the jukebox at Joey’s Bar and watching Hoosier high school basketball was a treat. And something else was a pleasant diversion from life entirely too close to corn fields: the Evansville Downtown Quarterback Club.
It met once a month and often brought in big names: among them two-time Heisman Trophy winner Archie Griffin of Ohio State, and Major League Baseball all-star (and current Los Angeles Dodgers manager) Don Mattingly, an Evansville native.
The one I remember most was Dick Schultz, the former University of Virginia athletic director who was then the president of the NCAA. He spoke about the state of the NCAA and the growth of opportunities for student-athletes, most notably women, to compete in intercollegiate sports.
He also addressed student-athlete misperceptions. He underscored how athletes–in some quarters still denigrated as “dumb jocks”–actually graduated at higher rates than the student body at large. I still recall his pause for emphatic effect.
His presentation was well received. He then fielded questions ranging from TV-network deals to dealing with those student-athlete stereotypes.
And then there was some friendly fire.
Someone asked if he could break down those graduation rates among student-athletes. Setting aside cross-country, tennis, golf, soccer, field hockey and the like, what were the rates for the two big revenue sports, football and men’s basketball? Moreover, any way of parsing that further? Say, by race? And by status? For example, any notable disparity in the SATs, GPAs and graduation rates of stars, starters and bench-warmers?
The QB Clubbers turned as one to see where that heat-seeking query had come from. And, yes, I had fired it off.
Schultz demurred and then said he didn’t have such specific data. With a forced smile and a “Who-the-hell-are-you?” look, he then acknowledged that the graduation rates for field hockey may, indeed, be higher than for football and basketball.
But the point, he underscored, was that student-athletes were accountable and overall were doing just as well–actually better–than students who didn’t play intercollegiate sports. And that he was proud of what the member institutions and their athletes were doing. So there.
Fast forward to now.
Recent scandals at schools such as the University of North Carolina and Oklahoma have unearthed schemes that enable football and basketball players–with the aid of enabling “learning specialists,” online sleight of hand and dubious majors–to walk away with diplomas they may not even be able to read. Minimal literacy, a degree in African-American Studies and a marketplace not overly enamored of those who were counting on making it as professional athletes is no scenario for success.
So much for that graduation data. As Benjamin Disraeli once noted: “There are lies, damn lies and statistics.”
But 25 years later, we are finally seeing signs of addressing the rampant hypocrisy that is embedded in the incestuous, multi-billion-dollar relationship between the marketplace and big- time collegiate athletics. The courts are now involved and references to antitrust laws and unions are in the mix.
But you know what? Rather than celebrating that an uber commercialized “amateur” sports system that masquerades as an educational entity will have to share more of its profits, I’m disappointed that more effort isn’t being made to reform.
Apparently there’s no rebottling the gridiron genie of greed. So, some of the spoils will now filter down to some of the players, and life goes on with mercenaries and sham students representing universities that will share a bit more of what they have sold out to TV networks for.
Too bad the winner is modern marketing–not systemic reforming. Too bad uniformly credible academic standards–from admissions through ongoing eligibility–wasn’t the focus. Too bad too many blue-chip football and basketball prospects in need of remedial schooling will still get to prep for the pros on a college campus. And too bad big time intercollegiate athletic programs will still require inordinate time–during the season and “off” season–from their student-athletes.
Too bad we’re not talking about “athlete-students.”