10/24/2013: Duck PR flack Rob Moseley has the story – a pretty good one – with some insight into the effort it takes to turn an athletic scholarship into an actual education.
Duck football player does well
Tagged Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
Once upon a time, a very long time ago, I was good at something and got offered a contract
for a professional baseball organization. I was 18 at the time.and that would mean dropping out of college at the time., which at the time seemed okay because I didn’t know anything (still don’t but hope to someday).
Now I was a decent baseball player in terms of fielding and throwing and base running and I though I was an okay
hitter, but it was always a dead pull and I couldn’t hit off field for shit. Then that summer we had a tournament game against a team from Everett Washington who had a pretty good pitcher named Larry Christenson (who would go on
to become an excellent MLB pitcher). In my very first bat against him, he threw a 90 mph baseball right at my head
that curved over the center of plate for a strike while I meanwhile had bailed into nearby Puget Sound. That was my moment of reality that I wasn’t near good enough and a baseball future would ultimately be a poor choice (in retrospect I would not argue that my academic life was a good choice).
So I had my reality moment, didn’t sign the contract, remained in college, etc, etc.
So does this story have a point? Yes I think so.
The reality that you will make it as a pro, being a college athlete is extremely remote yet we don’t offer opportunities,
for students like Hawkins, to fall back on something. I have always believed that Athletic Scholarships should be constructed to support a student academically for 6 years as they exercise their 4 years of athletic eligibility. That then gives them an actual chance to be a student and also would allow them not to take classes during their term
of competition. We should want this young people to be successful in life through education first, and athletics second.
Your idea ” I have always believed that Athletic Scholarships should be constructed to support a student academically for 6 years as they exercise their 4 years of athletic eligibility” is most constructive. Have you considered making it as a Motion to the Senate?
Would the NCAA allow that? If so it seems like that would be ideal, and probably better than paying students a nominal wage (focusing on teaching to fish, rather than throwing leftover fish while they’re in school so to speak).
As far as I know the NCAA does not allow this and never has nor ever discussed the possibility.
I use to have some mild influence with Myles Brand and did talk to him twice about raising
this issue. Most ADs were strongly against it as they felt it would interfere with their production
They currently have 5 years to play 4 which adds the possibility for a red-shirt year whether due to injury or a desire to see a player mature, but is not structured towards anything academic.
While the idea of 6 academic years to 4 playing years is admirable for a real ‘student’-athlete, it must be recognized that, generally speaking, we crossed that rubicon long ago.
They are not guaranteed 4 year scholarships, much less 5. The coaches can cut a players scholarship for whatever reason, or for none. It’s a meat market. They do get 5 years eligibility to play, but that’s a lot different from a 5 year scholarship!
Yes, you are correct, but I didn’t say they were guaranteed 4 or 5 year scholarships or mean to imply it. I said they have 5 years to play 4, referring to Dog’s comment above regarding the NCAA allowances.
I guess the wires of communication were crossed, and of course THAT hasn’t happened before.
OK, finally I see the value of UOM.