MacRaven - Dave Haxton's Weblog

Thu, 19 Jul 2007

You know what really pisses me off about this? Beyond the horrifying cruelty to animals? The fact the we (taxpayers) funded this asshole from the get go, and in fact paid for his college education. 100%. Because he's a big, fast thug who can run with a little ball.

The NCAA allows each division 1A college football program 85 scholarships and each division 1AA college 63 athletic scholarships. In division 2 there are 36 Scholarships.

To retain division I status, a football team must have 76.5 football scholarship players and can carry 85 active scholarship players. In division I-AA, schools have 63 scholarships, usually divided among 85 players.source

And that's just football - baseball, track and field, swimming, lacrosse, hockey - think of a sport, and there's a scholarship associated with it.

I have yet to understand exactly what the ability to toss a ball or whack a puck has to do with scholarship.

Michael Vick got a free ride through Virginia Tech courtesy of one of these "scholarships" - now I dare you to Goolge for a full academic scholarship, based strictly on intellectual achievement, offered by directly by VT (not from a foundation or other third party). I couldn't find any.

If college athletics were subject to the same rules of accurate advertising they'd have to change the name of these programs to "thugships".

Just despicable.

AP - When a Bad Newz Kennels dog was wounded in a losing fight, NFL star Michael Vick was consulted before the animal was doused with water and electrocuted. That's just one of the gruesome details that emerged Tuesday when the Atlanta Falcons quarterback and three others were indicted by a federal grand jury.

(link) [Yahoo! News: Top Stories]

/Politics | 6 writebacks | permanent link

On 7/19/2007 08:22:32
Thud wrote

I have no sympathy for Vick in the least. He apparently kept his nose clean in college, though, and did pretty much what he was supposed to. There are a lot of kids who've benifited greatly from athletic scholarships, and not just as athletes. I'd hate to see those programs ended just because Vick's celebrity went far too far to his head; I'd rather blame how our sports programs operate rather than programs that let people go to school who otherwise can't afford it. As far as the taxpayer money is concerned, Vick's football performance *did* earn VT far more money than his education cost. That small investment in him has had enormous economic returns, allowing Tech to rely more on their licensed prodict and ticket sales -- as well as increased enrollment -- and less on state and federal funding.

On 7/19/2007 14:36:23
Ben Waggoner wrote

You know. . . most of the athletes that I've taught over the past ten years have been really good students. Some have been naturally smarter than others, as far as I can judge, but most have had enough discipline to suck it up, get the work done, and do passably well to outstandingly well. I don't begrudge them their athletic scholarships at all; they're actually "student athletes". The exceptions, as best I recall, have always been football players. I've yet to have a football player who excelled in the class, while I've had several who absolutely bombed. (I've heard of a few who do well, but never been lucky enough to have one myself.) The pattern held true when our university was Division II; we've recently moved up to Division I-AA, so we'll see if that holds. My theory is that the athletes in sports like soccer, softball, women's soccer, etc. know that their college years are probably the end of their sporting career, so they're better able to take the discipline they've learned on the field and apply it to the classroom, even if they don't especially care for the course. But I wonder if the football players all believe, maybe just subconsciously, that they'll be the ones to make it big in the NFL, make huge amounts of money and not have to play by the rules of civil society. My university has had fewer than ten players make the NFL in its entire history -- but I still wonder if that sense of a shot at fabulous wealth and fame makes them unwilling to waste time on a college course that they won't need to bother with anyway if they make it big. I'd love to be proved wrong, though.

On 7/20/2007 06:26:34
Dave H wrote

Numbers, please

Not to dispute too much, Thud, but I'd like to see the numbers proving that VT's sports programs generate more revenue than it takes the state to fund them. Be sure to include the (lack of) property taxes paid on the stadia and other facilities, the interest on the bond issues used to fund them, and all of the other associated (but never seemingly reports on the glowing balance sheets turned in by athletic directors) costs of running what have become professional sports programs. If this is true (which I doubt), then may I suggest that universities drop the sham of scholarships and simply pay these kids to play football (or whatever), calling them professional athletes (which is what, in fact, they are already). Then the kids could afford their own education, and the university could spin off the team(s) and get back to it's real business: education. And Ben, as for most student athletes being ultimately good students, I doubt you not! But let them qualify for scholarships based on, well, scholarship, and not their ability to run and jump. There are thousands of amateur, semi-pro and big time professional sports leagues and teams in this country: lots of places for athletes to be athletic. Public colleges and universities should not be among them. Thanks for the comments and Be well, Dave H

On 7/20/2007 14:06:59
Thud wrote

What I claimed was that Vick's performance -- and he was a star player that gave Tech a dramatic winning season -- more than offset the cost of his scholarship. Whether or not the athletic program in general is a self-supporting in general is another matter entirely. As far as paying students as professional players, you realize that would be more expensive, right? Then the students are employees, entitled to benefits, etc., etc. Actually, in Tech's case they might be State employees, and instead of bartering atheletic performance for tuition we'd be handing over state taxes which may -- or may not -- actually be applied to tuition.

On 7/20/2007 14:08:44
Thud wrote

Furthermore... I don't see why you think athletics doesn't have a place in education. I never was athletic myself, but it seems to me as though that's been a valued part of education for a few thousand years.

On 7/21/2007 08:07:25
Dave H wrote

Athletic Education

Well, sport may have been a "valued" (by whom?) part of "education" for a few thousand years, but it's only been a part of the university for a hundred or so, and nearly exclusively in North America. Europe and (I believe) Asia have entirely different systems of organization for amateur sports, mostly officially divorced for the university system. My opposition to this institution probably deserves a more lucid explanation as a top level post, but that'll have to wait. Suffice it to say that part of it is admittedly based on pure resentment (and this is certainly making a long story short): despite a being near the top of my high school class and slated to graduate as #1 or #2, I was unable to obtain a full scholarship, while a friend who barely made C's was going to get a full ride to my chosen institution because he could throw a basketball through a hoop better than I could. I never graduated college, stopping after 1 semester because I couldn't afford it. My former friend did graduate (barely), but failed to make the NBA and, last I heard (25 years ago) was a used car salesman. I've already garnered more financially than he did - and I wonder how much further I could've gotten with the benefit of a college degree. So, Thud, you have my promise that I will expand my thinking into a full fledged post at some point, and a confession as to at least a partial motive. In the meantime, do a bit of research into the European system (clubs) - it needn't be the way it is here, and in fact can (and should) be improved, probably along those lines. Thanks for the comments, and, Be well, Dave H.

:: Categories ::

agriculture
asatru
copywrongs
humor
musings
politics
technology
index
haxton.org

:: Search ::

:: Blogroll ::

A Mindful Life
The Accidental Smallholder
Austro-Athenian Empire
Cauldron Born
Center for a Stateless Society
Dances with Ewes
Dispatches
egregores
Hardscrabble Creek
Honk & Helen
In Siberia
Laudator Temporis Acti
Lorrie's Livejournal
Masson's Blog
MyAppleMenu
NoNAIS
Notes on Religion
Numenous Thoughts
OrangeGuru
Overlawyered
Prophet or Madman
rogueclassicism
Sugar Mountain Farm
Thud Factor
Universe of Discourse
Wildhunt Blog
within the crainium

:: Archives ::

←April→
Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
	1	2	3	4	5	6
7	8	9	10	11	12	13
14	15	16	17	18	19	20
21	22	23	24	25	26	27
28	29	30

:: Site ::

Contact Me

MacRaven
Dave Haxton's Weblog
Musings, Reflections, Rants and Comments from a Hoosier Heathen husband, father, grandfather, farmer and software engineer. There's really only one of me ...

lunar phases

Unless otherwise noted, all original
work on this site is licensed under a

comment...


Notes: If you put a <mailto:> link in the URL field your address will not be mangled: this could be a bad idea as your email address could be easily harvested by bots designed for SPAM. The comments field should now format correctly for line feeds and carriage returns: when you hit the 'Enter' or 'Return' keys in your comment it should break to a new line. The text should wrap cleanly. Please let me know if it doesn't. No HTML tags will pass through - entering links seems to be the main cause of comment SPAM. Also, please be sure that Javascript is enabled in your browser before attempting to post a writeback. Sorry for any inconvenience, but this really helps cut down on the amount of comment SPAM I have to deal with.

Name:
URL:	(optional)
Title:	(optional)
Comments:
Save my Name and URL/Email for next time