Saturday, December 3, 2016

Schooled

One documentary that came back to Netflix this month is the documentary "Schooled: The Price of College Sports." To those outside college athletics it brings attention to all the things the student-athletes face on a daily basis. While they primarily focus on Division I, student-athletes at Division II and III face similar issues.

College athletics, particularly Division I football and men's basketball, has become a real money-maker for the NCAA and the institutions but there is an elephant in the room. The elephant in the room is that the people responsible for generating all this revenue are 18-,19-,20- and 21-year-old student-athletes, who are not allowed to see even a small percentage of the money received without threatening their eligibility. 

It's been written about, talked about on sports talk shows and even brought up at the annual NCAA Convention held every January.

Division I and II are the only divisions in the NCAA that can offer athletic-based aid while any financial assistance at the Division III level can only be academic-basis. The majority of athletic scholarships are one-year, renewable scholarships.

It wasn't until four years ago that the NCAA allowed school's to start giving out multi-year scholarships but few schools refrain from doing so for a variety of reasons. This means student-athletes have to fight every year just to be able to stay in school. Depending on a student-athlete's socio-economic status they may not even be able to afford to be in school if it was not for their athletic scholarship.

Everyone knows attending college is not cheap but scholarships usually don't cover the entire cost of attending an institution. Full athletic scholarships in Division I and II typically cover tuition, room and board, books and other required school supplies.

If on a student-athlete's syllabus it states "a tablet is preferred but not necessary" even though in class it is pretty much an necessary, the institution can not pick up the cost of the tablet for the student-athlete. That would constitute an extra benefit and the institution would be forced to self-report. But depending on a student-athlete's socio-economic background, he/she may not be able to afford that tablet that all his/her classmates have and it could hurt their academic progress. School's are very selective and specific with what they say is required vs. what is actually necessary.

That's just one example of an additional cost of attendance that is not covered in a student-athlete's scholarship. Another example is food. Because they are student-athletes who train and practice for two to three hours each day they are constantly burning more calories than the regular student. Most college meals plans are designed for the regular day-student, meaning a student-athlete stands the chance of burning through their meal plan at a higher rate than the non-student-athlete.

This came to light two years ago just before the Men's Basketball Division I title game between UConn and Kentucky. UConn star guard and eventual tournament Most Outstanding Player, Shabazz Napier made a comment to a reporter about "going to bed hungry."

Napier's remarks may be little egregious because it's hard to believe that with all the resources UConn has for student-athletes - especially their men's basketball program, Napier was really going to bed on an empty stomach.

But his comments to the reporter worked. In 2012, the Power Five conferences (ACC, SEC, Big 10, Big 12 and Pac-12) passed legislation to allow athletic scholarships to cover the entire cost of attending the institution. It is has been reported that Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) schools budgeted for $73 million worth of cost of attendance to be added to athletic scholarships.

While I'm all for increasing the money given in scholarship to students, I'm not sold on giving a $2,000 or $3,000 check to a 18-,19- or 20-year-old. That's a lot of money to these kids and some have never seen that kind of cash in their life. They have no idea on how to spend and the worry that they are going to blow on something as frivolous as new Jordan's or at the local club is very real.

I would be more willing to sign off on this as a good idea if it were treated like an EBT card where the institution can monitor what and where the student-athlete is spending their money. In addition, like EBT cards the institution would have total control as to where the card can be used. It can only be used at grocery stores on food items and a few retail stores but the cost per item has a limit (i.e. $50 for a shirt, $75 for pants).


1 comment: