The seeming tension between academics and the growing athletics apparatus at Power Five schools is a constant source of dialogue for athletic department and university administrators. The latest word in this discussion is a broad set of concepts put forth by the Power Five conferences that count as another step to better regulate time requirements for student-athletes.
That this conversation is happening is certainly a boon for those accustomed to feeling like scholarship runs secondary for scholarship athletes, but reading the proposals can stir questions about why such common sense measures are both required and, secondly, not already in place.
The concepts outlined by the P5 fall into three categories:
1. A ban on required activity for a consecutive eight-hour period overnight.
2. A period at the ends of seasons in which no required activities can occur.
3. Taking travel into consideration when determining athletes’ required weekly day off during the season.
Even just looking at these topics in the most general of terms, they appear as obvious needs for student-athletes to function as both students and developing humans. For example, the notion that that student-athletes get eight consecutive hours overnight (possibly of sleep?) wherein they aren’t required to do athletic activity seems like the type of no-brainer measure that it is confounding it needs to be put in writing at all, much less as late as 2016. The same goes for proposing that travel days for student-athletes don’t count as the NCAA-mandated “day off” they receive once a week while in-season. As nearly anyone who travels on a regular basis can attest, flying or busing hundreds of miles should not be considered a “day off” intended to let athletes’ bodies rest or academics to be completed.
While it is laudable that administrators are moving towards making common sense adjustments for student athletes, unfortunately not included in this round of discussions is day-of-competition time regulations. A current loophole through which many programs subvert NCAA time rules, any athletic activity on a day of competition, including the competition itself, only counts as three hours against the weekly twenty-hour limit, regardless of actual time spent. Perhaps this will be for another committee to tackle, but it certainly needs consideration if true change for student-athletes can be made.
Discussions around dividing time for student-athletes sometimes feel like arguments between labor and management, two divisive sides fighting for their own cause. On one side, many coaches and athletic officials vie to minimize the regulations on eligible time they can spend with their players. On the other side, school administrators and, to a large degree, the players themselves, strive for greater time for studies and recuperation. If the development, well-being, and education of young men and women is the ultimate goal of universities and their athletic teams, then this tension shouldn’t be the case. Instead, the common sense objective of caring for and supporting student-athletes should lead not to two sides struggling against one another but speaking in unison on the same behalf.
Amendments like the ones proposed by the P5 conferences are positive steps towards greater unity of purpose between athletics and academics. However, that they’re needed at all is an unfortunate indicator of the status quo with regards to student-athletes and their schooling.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.