NCAA Should Admit Its March Madness Players Are Professionals

College basketball players aren’t “amateurs” anymore—if they aren’t scholars either, so be it

March 15, 2010 RSS Feed Print

Marc Isenberg is an adviser to high school and college athletes and author of The Student Athlete Survival Guide and Money Players.

Asked if he had earned a degree while playing basketball at Clemson University, former NBA player Elden Campbell replied, "No, but they gave me one anyway." That was in 1991. At the 2010 NCAA Convention in January, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan addressed the continuing contradiction between playing big-time college basketball and football and getting an education. Duncan proposed restoring freshman ineligibility and disqualifying from postseason competition teams with a graduation rate of less than 40 percent.

Freshman ineligibility would be a major step in the right direction. Disqualifying teams with lousy graduation records looks good, too—on paper, not in practice.

The NBA requires players to be 19 and one year out of high school before they become eligible for the draft, giving rise to "one and done": athletes who play one season in college, often leaving after just one semester. Of course, schools gladly accept these basketball prodigies. This is strictly a business arrangement: a showcase for the player to improve his game in exchange for his athletic and marketing services (at virtually no cost). If this perverts the mission of the NCAA and its members, there's a fix: Do not admit these athletes.

Freshman ineligibility rules require an athlete to maintain good academic standing for at least three semesters to be eligible to play for one season. This would weed out players who have no interest in academics.

On a more positive note, it would help lay the foundation for academic success. The first year in college—a difficult adjustment period for many—is a critical time to develop skills and habits necessary to perform academic work that leads to graduation. Freshmen need to go to class and have time to study, not fly around the country to away games. As Duncan, who played basketball at Harvard, put it, "Let them take real classes. Let them maintain a GPA. Let them get a sense of the college community."

Disqualifying teams with poor gradu­ation rates, on the other hand, would penalize current players for failures of former players. And if the aim is to put athletes in class and improve graduation rates, why limit it to March Madness? Why not play fewer regular-season games so student athletes miss less class time?

Unfortunately, Duncan's prescription does not address the root cause of the graduation problem: There is no way to turn back the clock to the NCAA's stated ideal of "amateurism" in big-time college sports. Duncan referred to the more than 410,000 student athletes who participate in NCAA championship sports. On average, these athletes graduate at a higher rate than the general student population, and the vast majority, as the NCAA reminds us in March Madness ads, "go pro in something other than their sport."

The NCAA's incessant references to 410,000 athletes obscure the problem. Few think we need to reform lacrosse, field hockey, or other sports in which there is no economic incentive to have "student athletes" who are not really students. Just 13,000 (3 percent) of the 410,000 athletes support the NCAA and its member conferences and colleges through billions of dollars in TV revenue through major football and basketball programs. Even among that 3 percent, it's the much smaller number with NBA or NFL potential who galvanize the fans.

Duncan blamed the low graduation rate among the 3 percent on "a small minority of renegade coaches and institutions." However, when we focus on the 13,000 revenue-producing college athletes rather than 410,000 total student athletes, the proportion of "renegades" is significantly higher.

Of course, a relatively small number of players don't graduate because they leave early to play professionally. From their point of view, it's an excellent trade-off. They can always go back to complete their education, and then they won't need financial aid or be distracted by endless hours of practice. Unfortunately, a far larger number neither graduate nor make it to the NBA or NFL. What is the best way to serve their interests?

Tags:
basketball,
college athletics,
NCAA,
sports

Reader Comments Read all comments (4)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Marc,

Great article. I just wrote about the same issue and advocated giving college athletes the option to major in a sport or its coaching.

http://shortfirstparagraphs.blogspot.com/2010/03/new-college-majors-basketball-football.html

I plan to write a post that will advocate for paying them too and is based on some data I've compiled. Good job.

Tate of DC 6:31PM March 22, 2010

Marc hits the point 100%. It is a cruel and sick joke to call the NCAA anything but a professional league. Need proof? Look to the billions of dollars in revenues, the marketing agents, the NCAA games, the bowl games, and it goes on. The worst part is it is an organization of hypocrites who arbitrarily enforce rules without due process. It enacts laws in states for its own purposes. I need operations from college injuries and last spring walked across the field with 2 coaches who could hardly walk-injuries from college and neither played Pro. The responsibility rests with the NCAA.

http://twitter.com/RalphCindrich

Ralph E. Cindrich of PA 12:20PM March 18, 2010

And I use the term loosely. I agree with Marc. I heard some friends recently decrying the example at the University of Tennessee where several football players were arrested for robbery. "A disgrace" they said. "They're getting a free education" they cried. All true, but many of these kids, especially at Division I football and basketball powerhouses are recruited off the mean streets of America's cities. They arrive often in an idyllic setting foreign to them, trying to blend into the overall student body. It sounds good, but how do some of them go out for a pizza on Friday night? How can they take a friend to the movies? Or even get home for Thanksgiving? I don't defend repugnant behavior, legal or otherwise, but I can understand the frustration of college athletes who don't have even a subsistence level for daily life. They collectively bring in billions of dollars to their respective instituions and a mere pittance, crumbs as it were, are tossed their way. I suggest that each athlete be means-tested each year, much the same as those applying for financial aid, and at certain levels they should receive a stipend in order to had a chance at a 'normal' student life.

Walter Lamkin of MO 12:53PM March 16, 2010

advertisement

Debate Club

Was 2011 One of the Worst Years for the U.S. Government in American History?

Experts debate where 2011 ranks among Washington's worst years.

Latest Video

Thomas Jefferson Street Blog

Romney's Bain Experience Wasn't Real American Capitalism

The fact that Bain Capital served to make money for investors, not to create jobs, could endanger Romney.

Why Is Mitt Romney Embracing Birther Donald Trump?

Maybe Trump is Romney's idea of a rich guy that common people can relate to?

Does Barack Obama Actually Want to Be Re-Elected?

The president's lack of enthusiasm jeopardizes his campaign.

3 Reasons Why the Scott Walker Wisconsin Recall Election Matters

Scott Walker is a canary in a coal mine.

The Right's Fixation With 'Vetting' Obama

American voters can use the past four years to judge Obama's qualifications as president

Voters Tuning Out Flood of 2012 Super PAC, Campaign Ads

This will be the year of grassroots voters, not Nielsen families.

Scott Walker's Union Fight Helps Mitt Romney Against Barack Obama

The Wisconsin governor refuses to back down from his opposition to collective bargaining.

Why Is It Only Women Who Need 'Informing' on Reproductive Health?

Men's sexual behavior could also use some "controlling."

advertisement