Faculty Athletic Representatives Roused into Action?

Yes, occasionally the NCAA proposes something so outrageous, in this case softening academic demands on men's basketball programs, that it happens, as reported by Doug Lederman at Inside Higher Ed:

“The general feeling [of faculty athletics representatives] is that some of what’s in the early stages of the document takes the approach of fixing the APR by tinkering with the matrix instead of getting substantively at why the APR is low in the first place,” said Josephine R. Potuto, the Richard H. Larson Professor of Constitutional Law and faculty representative at the University of Nebraska at Lincoln, who heads a group of faculty representatives from NCAA Division I-A universities that wrote to NCAA leaders last week. “The predominant if not exclusive focus should be on the root causes, not on the APR.” . . .

Faculty athletics representatives from the Pacific-10 Conference, in a November 3 letter to Myles Brand and Dan Guerrero, the athletics director at the University of California at Los Angeles who heads the basketball academic enhancement group, said the problem isn’t that basketball players as a group are less academically prepared, but that the players many Division I colleges have historically chosen to recruit and admit are less prepared for academic success.

“Now, faced with academic penalties as a consequence of such recruitment practices, these programs seek to blame the students they recruited for the lack of success they have experienced,” the Pac-10 faculty leaders write. “[W]e are concerned that this opening statement ... is really meant to provide a justification for recommendations ... that would reduce the impact of the NCAA’s Academic Performance Program ... on men’s basketball.” . . .

The basketball working group’s report does offer several substantive proposals aimed at bolstering the academic performance of basketball players once they’re in college, including performing adequately in several credit hours of required summer school.

But its report focuses heavily on a set of changes that would limit the pain that teams feel when their players fail to make progress toward a degree. One would grant exceptions so that teams would not be punished under the Academic Progress Rate when athletes leave a college because of a coaching change. Another would give teams an extra point when a player graduates early (perhaps making up for points they’ve lost because players haven’t graduated at all). Yet another would provide more leeway (some if already granted) if players leave college early to go pro.

In other words, the proposals would serve to further enable behavior which, with the exception of quick graduation, the NCAA should be discouraging. Progression please Myles, not regression.

Bar Battery, SMU Suspensions, and Faculty Oversight

Two West Virginia football players have been charged with battery:

Two West Virginia football players have been charged with battery stemming from an early morning incident at a Morgantown bar in late October.

Tight end Maxwell Anderson, 21, and 20-year-old Jeremy Kash, the starting holder on special teams, are scheduled to be arraigned on the misdemeanor charge on Dec. 3 in Morgantown Municipal Court.

Morgantown Police Sgt. Harold Sperringer said the incident took place on Oct. 25. There was a fight inside a bar, and people filed a complaint with police saying they had been attacked by the players.

WVU Coach Bill Stewart says he's looking into the situation, but hasn't made a decision yet.

Four SMU football players have been suspended for the season:

Four members of the SMU football team have been suspended for the rest of the season.

Aldrick Robinson, Emmanuel Sanders, Derius Bell and Justin Smart will not participate in practices and the final two games of the season according to a source within SMU football. Sanders is a junior while Robinson, Bell and Smart are sophomores.

The suspensions are for minor infractions such as, class problems and being late to meetings.

The players were informed on Monday.

This is part of the "three strikes" rule implemented by June Jones when he came to SMU. It was under that policy that Justin Willis was suspended from Spring Football.

Inside Higher Ed reports on potential conflicts of interest regarding faculty oversight of athletics:

At the University of Michigan, football is king. . . .

When the team made the 2007 Rose Bowl, it might have been hard for many fans to get tickets, but at least seven faculty members knew they would be guaranteed seats. The university’s athletics department not only ensured that members of its Committee on Academic Performance — a faculty body that makes recommendations in cases of athlete eligibility — received tickets, it also covered their travel expenses. Members of the university’s Advisory Board on Intercollegiate Athletics — a group of faculty, alumni, athletes and administrators that advise the athletic director — received the same incentive. . . .

The Committee on Academic Performance reviews cases of athletes who have fallen below the university’s standards. Previously, the faculty committee itself decided whether the students should remain eligible to compete. Under the change, the panel recommends a course of action for the provost to consider in deciding whether that athlete should be able to play, practice only or sit out entirely as a result.

Hanlon said presenting tickets to these individuals does not present a conflict because the faculty members only advise the provost. . . .

*HEAD* *DESK*

Carole Browne, biology professor at Wake Forest and co-chair of the Coalition on Intercollegiate Athletics — an alliance of faculty senates that seek to reform college sports — said these incentive packages are commonplace. For example, because she serves on a similar athletics board at Wake Forest, Browne is offered season tickets to both men’s basketball and football home games. She said she does not accept the tickets, though, because she disapproves of the practice.

*APPLAUSE*

Inside Georgetown Athletics

There is an interesting article in today's Hoya about Prof. Wayne Knoll, the Faculty Athletic Representative at Georgetown. It is an excellent illustration of how things should work, but all too often do not:

For instance, he remembers 1982 very well. A young Patrick Ewing had enrolled in Knoll’s literary analysis class shortly after arriving on the Hilltop for his second semester. Ewing, according to Knoll, was shy and respectful, especially given his notoriety. He was also a dedicated student.

The day after a victory against Syracuse in February, Knoll recalls seeing Ewing standing outside his classroom. Ewing had played an integral role in the win the evening before, but at that moment he was visibly crippled by the flu.

“I told Patrick to go home!” recalls Knoll. “There was no reason for him to be in class when he was so clearly suffering.”

But Ewing wouldn’t budge.

“Dr. Knoll, I don’t want to miss class,” the budding superstar replied. “The basketball season has started now, and I’m worried I’m going to miss a lot of classes.”

Knoll was impressed with Ewing’s dedication to academics — Patrick had even turned in the paper that was due that day.

Later that season, the basketball team was in Utah for the opening round of NCAA Tournament games. Ralph Dalton, another player who was serving as the team’s academic captain that season, Ewing and three other team members were all enrolled in Knoll’s literary analysis course.

The five players gathered around to talk to Knoll. Dalton spoke first.

“Dr. Knoll,” he began, “We’ve finished all of your assignments! And we’re going to win! And we’re going all the way! So can you give us the rest of the assignments so we don’t fall behind?”

What was Knoll’s response to his intrepid student-athletes?

Chuckling, Knoll remembers, “I ended up giving them more assignments — all the way up through the National Championship.” . . .

Knoll is proud to point out that during his tenure as FAR, Georgetown has never had an academic-athletic scandal. He also cherishes the esteem that other schools have for Georgetown.

“Our Jesuit influence and motto is not just lip service, we really value the concept of a healthy mind and a healthy body,” Knoll says. . . .

Many years ago, Knoll remembers an afternoon when several members of the varsity football team came to him frustrated with the state of their program. Recent incidents involving public urination, intoxication and academic difficulties certainly signaled to Knoll that a change in the culture of the team was necessary.

Working with former Athletic Director Frank Rienzo, Knoll says he was shocked to discover that the coach’s response to the difficulties was a simple “boys will be boys” mantra.

That’s not the way we handle things here at Georgetown.

In terms of the problem players, Knoll’s directive to the coach was to “get them all out of there, off the team.” When the head coach was finally fired, Knoll played an essential role on the hiring committee as they vetted new candidates. According to Knoll, the main criterion for the new coach was not an athletic winner, but one “who understood the place of athletics on this campus as a part of Georgetown.” . . .

Its obvious that Knoll would not survive as FAR at any school with FBS football. But, then Georgetown has, in its wisdom, made the principled decision to opt out from that sewer.

It should be noted that student-athletes at Georgetown have a 91% graduation rate, only three percentage points below the overall student body. The football team boasts a graduation rate of 96%. Only the rates for the basketball teams, at 73% for the women and 60% or the men are significantly lower than those for other students. Lets hope that on-court fortunes are not the only thing that John Thompson III is able to turn around.