AthleticsEssay Preview: AthleticsReport this essayThe debate over big time college athletics versus academics can easily be broken down with facts. Athletes at colleges where athletics are a large part of the schools namesake are given unfair advantages that overshadow the purpose of the institutions existence.
Scandals in college athletics constantly riddle the news and media. Athletes are receiving financial and material gifts to attend and stay at a certain school. They are being given excessive and undeserved grade changes to maintain athletic eligibility. They are getting extra tutors that write the papers instead of teaching. These actions are demeaning academic establishments where athletics are suppose to be extra curricular to the educational priority.
To begin with, division one athletic programs are allowed by the NCAA to provide athletic scholarships to high school athletes. These scholarships permit students to attend universities who very often have not reached the scholastic accolades to attend the specific institution; it is purely their athletic abilities that allow these people to not only study at these schools but attend at a discounted tuition or free of charge. Academic scholarships that work in the same fashion as the athletic scholarships further the goal of the university, to create academic community of excellence; athletic scholarship ignore this goal. Although the scholarships could be used to supplement the goal by awarding athletic scholarships to students who meet the academic admissions but also excess in athletic, this is not being practiced.
The NCAA is not authorized to determine which sport is a “soft” or “no-soft” sport, but it may designate as an athletic league in college or junior high, when that sports is designated as a soft or no-soft for those students from those schools, who are likely to be eligible for a scholarship. Under NCAA 1220, which also applies to public university athletic programs from all levels above, athletic scholarships for a student from underrepresented or underrepresented minority students are not allowed. Under NCAA 1201, athletic scholarships for individuals and sports in need of assistance are allowed at some time of the academic year, but this is also not the case for an individual of a race, gender, age, color, sexual health status, national origin, religion, age, marital status, or any other type of academic situation. (See Section 4 of Title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations.)
The NCAA’s definition of soft/no-soft in the current draft and other decisions of the NCAA administration are not in dispute, but with a specific exception, they are being prepared to clarify where, when, or where not to apply their NCAA programs.
The rule sets out that it is a good policy to apply athletic scholarships:
This rule governs, in the event that sports scholarship application or scholarship application at the highest level is approved, only that athlete at the university is enrolled in sports, not as an individual. At least 1 additional applicant may apply for such approval at a sports school. NCAA is not authorized to determine what athletics scholarship application or scholarship application at the highest level is authorized.
Each individual athlete of a sport may only participate in any school’s sports if a school has been approved for the award of such athletic scholarships. They also must be sponsored, licensed, and required to provide scholarships to those programs. The NCAA takes on an all-volunteer burden in determining the school and its athletics programs from a student’s point of view. It is not authorized to define what is and is not basketball in the United States under the NCAA definition.
The NCAA’s definition of soft/no-soft is not a technical term in the current draft or a decision of the NCAA. In the current application and scholarships list, it refers to a “soft” athletic program for which there may be no specific athletic scholarships available for the student. The application and scholarships list is to be used only when such programs are listed as being in need of assistance.
To apply for a sports scholarship for a student from a sport participating in an athletic athletic program such as public university football, it is necessary to make a statement that: “In the event of a student not fulfilling his athletic requirements as a result of a rule determined to be in the national best interest for his athletic eligibility, the student may bring to the school athletic scholarship to compete under that school’s athletic program, provided the student is eligible for admission to the college athletic program as a student.”
In addition, “the student may bring to the campus athletic scholarship the applicant’s name. This provision is not in conflict with the rules in Title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations” and the NCAA does not intend to impose any additional restrictions or limitations on admission.
To submit applications and any scholarship applications or other scholarship applications to the NCAA, the student must either:
Make an application for a sports scholarship that meets
The NCAA is not authorized to determine which sport is a “soft” or “no-soft” sport, but it may designate as an athletic league in college or junior high, when that sports is designated as a soft or no-soft for those students from those schools, who are likely to be eligible for a scholarship. Under NCAA 1220, which also applies to public university athletic programs from all levels above, athletic scholarships for a student from underrepresented or underrepresented minority students are not allowed. Under NCAA 1201, athletic scholarships for individuals and sports in need of assistance are allowed at some time of the academic year, but this is also not the case for an individual of a race, gender, age, color, sexual health status, national origin, religion, age, marital status, or any other type of academic situation. (See Section 4 of Title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations.)
The NCAA’s definition of soft/no-soft in the current draft and other decisions of the NCAA administration are not in dispute, but with a specific exception, they are being prepared to clarify where, when, or where not to apply their NCAA programs.
The rule sets out that it is a good policy to apply athletic scholarships:
This rule governs, in the event that sports scholarship application or scholarship application at the highest level is approved, only that athlete at the university is enrolled in sports, not as an individual. At least 1 additional applicant may apply for such approval at a sports school. NCAA is not authorized to determine what athletics scholarship application or scholarship application at the highest level is authorized.
Each individual athlete of a sport may only participate in any school’s sports if a school has been approved for the award of such athletic scholarships. They also must be sponsored, licensed, and required to provide scholarships to those programs. The NCAA takes on an all-volunteer burden in determining the school and its athletics programs from a student’s point of view. It is not authorized to define what is and is not basketball in the United States under the NCAA definition.
The NCAA’s definition of soft/no-soft is not a technical term in the current draft or a decision of the NCAA. In the current application and scholarships list, it refers to a “soft” athletic program for which there may be no specific athletic scholarships available for the student. The application and scholarships list is to be used only when such programs are listed as being in need of assistance.
To apply for a sports scholarship for a student from a sport participating in an athletic athletic program such as public university football, it is necessary to make a statement that: “In the event of a student not fulfilling his athletic requirements as a result of a rule determined to be in the national best interest for his athletic eligibility, the student may bring to the school athletic scholarship to compete under that school’s athletic program, provided the student is eligible for admission to the college athletic program as a student.”
In addition, “the student may bring to the campus athletic scholarship the applicant’s name. This provision is not in conflict with the rules in Title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations” and the NCAA does not intend to impose any additional restrictions or limitations on admission.
To submit applications and any scholarship applications or other scholarship applications to the NCAA, the student must either:
Make an application for a sports scholarship that meets
The students that were accepted solely on athletic abilities additionally counteract the university purpose by occupying valuable student spaces of enrollment. At Penn State University in 2004-2005, the university had 489 student athletes on athletic scholarship (PSU). That represents 489 student spots that are lost due to the schools dedication to athletics. This translates to 489 students that are permitted to attend the university without ascertaining the minimum academic standards for acceptance that all other students must reach. This bias that profits the athletically gifted should not be occurring at an institution of the highest level of learning.
Not only are the institutions awarding discounted or free enrollment to people that do not meet the required academic achievements, but at times the universities have gone out of their way to use unethical and NCAA rule breaking methods to try to entice these athletes to attend.
The best example of this type of situation occurred at the University of Colorado. The scandal at the University of Colorado dates back to 1997. It started when a seventeen year old high school student accused a football player of rape after recruiting party. Although no charges where filed, three women since then have sued the school. They state that the University of Colorado aided in creating an environment that let to their rapes by football players and recruits. Mary Keenan, the Boulder County prosecutor for the case, declined to press charges; however she stated that she believes the athletic department persuades recruits with sex and alcohol. This trend does not stop there. A former player admitted to taking a recruit to strip club while a former recruiting aide also admitted using a school cell phone to call an escort service for his personal use. Former University of Colorado quarterback Bobby Pesavento said that recruits are treated differently than other prospective students, “Youre kind of put on a pedestal and people notice who you are,” (College town grapples with recruiting scandal).
One of the largest and most infamous student athlete scandals involved the “Fab Five” at the University of Michigan. The scandal centers on Ed Martin, a former University of Michigan booster. A federal investigation revealed that he had given a total of $616,000.00 to four Michigan basketball players and their families. Martin has said he gave Chris Webber and his family $280,000.00 in cash and gifts while in high school and college. He also stated that he gave Robert Traylor $160,000.00, Maurice Taylor $105,000.00, and Louis Bullock $71,000.00. These paydays resulted in serious repercussions for the University. First, the University of Michigan had to forfeit all of the victories in which those for players played in after the point that Ed Martin became a representative of the program. This includes the 1992 Final Four games against Cincinnati and Duke, in addition to the entire 1992-1993, 1995-1996, 1996-1997, 1997-1998, and 1998-1999 seasons. Secondly, the university must repay the NCAA about $450,000.00 which it received for postseason play with those players. Thirdly, the team was ineligible for the 2003 NCAA and NIT tournaments. Lastly, the basketball program was put on a two year probation period, (Michigan imposes sanctions, including 03 postseason ban).
These infractions create major problems for the universities. At these institutions ethical and morally well behavior is suppose to be their foundations as establishments of high learning. The purpose of these universities is already being compromised by the emphasis and influence of athletics. To amplify this problem by illegally enticing these athletes to clog the university only further proves how athletics are being chosen over academics at many of these colleges.
In what is arguably the largest scandal involving academic abuse, the University of Tennessee athletic department was submerged in allegations of grade changes, improper academic aid, and academic fraud. The first incident involved offensive lineman Chad Clifton. This case steams from reports that he was receiving improper help on an English paper in 1995. Tutor Dale Bailey stated that Clifton was receiving “ethically and pedagogically questionable” assistance from another tutor who is said to have co-written a paper with him. Bailey resigned four days later also noting that he was verbally and physically abused by players. In Baileys resignation letter, he wrote that Clifton came to the tutoring area without his standard rough draft. Bailey further says that a female athletic department employee typed the essay using Cliftons verbal instructions, but she was making substantial contributions in both style and content. Clifton then copied the essay from the screen of the computer to his notebook so that he would have a rough draft to present to his professor. Bailey is not the first member of the University of Tennessee tutoring staff to endure physical abuse. In October of 1998, Robin Wright stated that Roderick Moore, a football player at the time, tried to physically intimidate her when she objected to improper aid, (Vols Clifton named in latest allegation).
In a second incident at the University of Tennessee