Interesting take on Tresselgate & state of CF
from Omaha World-Herald's Tom Shatel:
"....we're on the verge of some kind of revolution in college sports. The TV money is now through the roof. I think the kids will eventually get a slice. It feels like we're headed for a playoff. Maybe a super division of top 60 schools.
Whatever happens, it will be all about money, power and winning. You want integrity? Go to church."
Link:
http://www.omaha.com/article/20110604/SPORTS/706049815#shatel-tressel-d…
There is a Couch Slouch column in the Washington Post every day that may be syndicated in which there are questions from readers that are answered. Two of today's questions and answers involve Tressel:
Q: To avoid problems in the future, do you think the next OSU football coach will just add a tattoo artist to his coaching staff? (Ron Strah; Chagrin Falls, OH)
A: Pay the man, Shirley. (This is the highest compliment given for questions, BTW.)
Q: Does Jim Tressel get another job? (Dan Belkin; Pittsburgh)
A: I believe Wal-mart currently has a hiring freeze.
A set amount of money for each player a month is acceptable I believe. Normal average student goes to college and usual works while they attend college. A football player goes to school and dedicates his hours to football. The normal student has money but still has to pay for his rent and student loans. The football player has bills to pay as well for what his scholarship doesn't make up, whether thats through his rent, food, or what not. The player still needs money on the side for gas, clothes, food, etc. People get upset that the normal student has to pay for his tuition while the football player gets his for free due to the fact that his skill brings the school tons of money. However, in the athletes current state he's going to need money for current things like a sandwich every now and then from subway. While people complain he gets a free education he doesn't need money. Most players also don't grow up in the best environments too so you got to keep that in mind because his parents can't probably help him out too much. The normal student doesn't have to start paying for his tuition until 6 months after he graduates so that student has time to pay that off.
The "normal" student I was friendly with when I was at Michigan didn't have a car or work. Some came from money, some didn't. If, however, you asked them if they would sign up for free room and board, academic support as needed, training table buffets, etc. with no time for a job or take out 4 years of loans to pay for room and board with the opportunity to work part time for spending money I'm pretty sure they all would have opted for the former.
or fall camp.
the free daily conditioning program with personalized training.
There are plenty of average students, working on a thesis, or project, that ends up earning the Unviversity money, while the student only gets a degree. On the flip side, I did work in the West Engineering tow tank for pay, which earned the University money.
I guess if I were from a disadvantaged background, was not allowed, nor had time to earn money in a summer job, and saw everybody wearing jersey's with my number on them, it would be frustrating. (Not to mention seeing a bunch of students in non-revenue sports who are "advantaged" in my eyes playing on scholarship largely from the revenue my sport generates.)
I can see feeling justified in taking money offered (maybe even a discount on a reasonable car), even if I knew it was wrong in that instance. I could not justify theft from the University for the luxury of a free tattoo though.
Most of us struggled through college, working summers, driving beaters, eating raman noodles so we have enough to go out with on Friday night, and forgoing discretionary purchases like expensive tattoos. However, the average student doesn't earn a drop for the University in comparison. So I agree that some "cost of living" stipend to cover normal expenses outside of tuition, room, and board is reasonable.
I'm willing to bet anything you brought into the University pales in comparison to what a high talent football player like Denard or TP brought to their Universities.
I just don't get what the big deal is. If someone wants to give me a deal on a car because they like that I can throw/catch a football really well who does it hurt?
I would sign up for an instant to do Mike Duke's job (Wal-Mart CEO) and take $18.7m in benefits, however, that doesn't mean I could do it; 99.9% of the general population cannot do the job of a BCS football player, let alone at an elite football school.
These aren't "normal" students, they're huge moneymakers more on par with a low-level research professor (and probably mid level ones for Denard/Braylon/Woodson/ect.).
Good point. Having it made is all relative.
First of all, not everyone is built for the academic world of college, and there's nothing wrong with that. Your "normal" friends were there to study. Many football players would not feel that going to a place like UM would be the path for them if it wasn't for football.
Secondly, your "normal" friends don't do anything that brings in millions of extra revenue for the university.
couldn't these kids just take out small student loans like the rest of us had to for incidentals and other day to day? I mean even if the kid wanted 500 bucks a month for spending money which would be kinda silly thats only 24 grand over 4 years, drop in the bucket compared to most people who pay there way at a major university.
... I despise when people say idiotic things like, "Whatever happens, it will be all about money, power and winning. You want integrity? Go to church."
It is a defeatest attitude that says we should just be okay with immorality and there is nothing we can do about it. It's no better than Pryor saying people cheat, murder, whatever... Our integrity is defined by our behavior. If there are rules, we should follow them. If we disagree with them, we should petition to change them not subvert them. Only in the most drastic situations, after you've exhausted all other options, should you act in defiance of the rules.
Our systems and our society are only as strong as its individuals demand for them to mean something. As soon as we become apathetic to integrity, we begin a slow death spiral defined by corruption, inefficiency, and chronism... in other words eveything a free society fights against.
I don't know Tom Shatel, but I hope he wrote these words because they make for good sports talk, not because he lacks moral courage.
or maybe you just read the excerpt and skipped the rest?
Shatel's not saying it's OK--he's acknowledging the dark side of CF that's always existed and commenting on the constant tug of war between integrity and corruption that are a reality.
A prime motivation for founding the Big Ten in 1895 was to control "a rampant professional spirit that had ranged throughout nearly all universities leaving corruption in its wake.", as a Harper's Weekly writer wrote when the original 7 universities met in Chicago.
Shatel's bemoaning the current state of CF and the relentless forces that are driving TresselGate, Cam Newton, etc. We're now in an era when even Jim Delaney's floating "compensation" for college players.
Personally, I found the reaction of Michigan's fanbase (at least as represented on this board) to NCAA violations very telling: embarrassment, surprise, and determination that it won't happen again, even though the "crime" was relatively harmless. A pride in winning, but winning the right way, even if it costs you bitterly on the field against you're worst rival.
The reason that stories like this get written is that sportswriters like writing them.
There's no crisis in collegiate athletics. Sure there are issues. The NCAA has a job to do; sometimes a very diffcult job. But university presidents all over the country aren't freaking out about paying athletes or divvying up television revenue. That's the sportswriters' argument. University presidents aren't proposing anything radical, and they have no reason to.
The OSU scandal ought to portend nothing, in my humble opinion. Sure, some players (a small number of stupid, arrogant players) broke rules that would have made them ineligible for a few games, and while those rules are a bit hypertechnical, the NCAA has to write hypertechnical rules in many cases. Rules aren't always easy to write. And, Jim Tressel broke a cardinal rule, when he was dishonest about those players' violations. I don't really think it was a firing offense for Tressel, but what's done is done. What he did was not right.
In all of this, the only "crisis" is the one that sportswriters manufacture, in order to create more of an audience for more stories. It's the offseason. Journalism, like nature, abhors a vacuum.
but also no denying it's a different world with vastly higher stakes than when Keith Jackson was calling games and the MNC was chosen before the bowlgames were played.
Now you have conference realignment, the BCS, the Longhorn Network, billion-dollar conference tv deals, college scholarships for middle school kids, recruiting services and star ratings, 24 x 7 media .......etc
In some ways, still the same "professionalism" temptations that have always existed---no crisis. But I think today's CF's seamy side is at a whole new level and growing exponentially.
Doesn't mean the game we love is dead or dying---but some unique threats.
I don't really think it was a firing offense for Tressel; presumably referring to the lying to the NCAA. I don't know if I am contradicting you here, but it seems to me like the general consensus, in blog and MSM, was that anyone caught lying to the NCAA resigns or gets fired in the end as a direct result. Am I mis-reading you?
And it may be the most difficult position that I've ever staked out for myself at MGoBlog. My opininon is more pro-Tressel than even many OSU boosters.
I am absolutely forced to agree that lying to the NCAA can and perhaps ordinarily should be a firing offense. Michigan summarily fired Alex Herron for lying, albeit under oath I think.
I like and respect your post, even if you don't agree with me (I have to expect that few will).
The last place I would look for integrity is in a church.
/just sayin
You got it right bro.
My first two years of college were at West Point, where I tried out for football and baseball and made neither. When I transferred to Michigan, I got to be friends with a guy who was too small and too slow to do much on the Michigan team except go to practice every day, get the snot knocked out of him, come back, study and repeat it all the next day. He was not on scholarship but saw benefits sufficient to make him do this for at least a couple of years even though he never saw the field in a game.
Because of my own experiences and my respect for integrity, I have no sympathy for the players who feel as if they are owed something. They agreed to take a scholarship and play by a code of rules. With the scholarship, they get food, lodging, an education and, as someone pointed out above, both the kind of specialized conditioning program and the kind of developmental program that they need in order to ever be good enough at their sport to be able to make money playing it. Virtually none of them are good enough at age 18 to play in a professional football league, and the vast majority of them will never be good enough to play in a professional football league even with all of the conditioning and coaching that they get in a major college program.
My guess is that if there were two high school students of equal ability and one went to a D-1 program for four years and the other hired coaches and conditioning staff for four years of developmental work, the one from the D-1 program would be the better player at the end of that time, and he would have gotten the training for free, instead of paying for the personal trainers and coaches out of his own pocket. If the room, board, books and tuition are worth $50K per year, my best estimate would be that the training and conditioning would be worth, at market rates, even more. Just the salaries for the coaches, divided by 85 players, adds up to another $50K or so, before even considering the other costs of the program.
Here's a weird couple of ideas I thought of to curb future scandals:
Allow the athletic department to have some nice cars for the kids to use, free. Nice ones. Athletes go to an athletic department lot, check the car out for a certain period of time, and don't pay a thing. True, non-athletic scholarship students won't get them. Too bad. But then the athletes won't need a car so that's taken out of the equation, plus even the non-stars can use one.
And how about the art majors learning how to tattoo? Hey, free tats. And this will also give the art majors a nice career opportunity.
As for the music school (and English majors studying poetry)? Yes. Rap record production. Rock record production. Whatever record production. Free record production for the athletes. UM has a wonderful recording studio; check it out, it's gorgeous, and it's loaded with nicer gear than what's in most professional studios, and it will keep the guys off the streets:
http://www.apiaudio.com/nw_710.html
Of course, Michigan athletes get a training table, but what if the waiters were from the MSU school of Restaurant and Hotel Management? Perfect! Add the Schoolcraft College Culinary Arts majors as chefs (you really must check out their restaurant, it's very gourmet), and set it up as a bar and grill. The athletes will then have their own place to hang out and take dates, all free.
Of course, some of the rules need to be changed to allow this. Just a thought or three.
The car thing really throws me. I graduated in '04 and students with cars were still the exception, not the norm. Has this really changed?
and his Trans-AM? :)
But Tressel's biggest mistake was trying to sell integrity in college football.The key word may be "sell." You can't sell what you don't have, unless you are one of the big banks. But embracing "integrity" didn't hurt Lloyd Carr.