slotright20;842111050 said:

---

The greatest exploitation comes from awarding scholarships to kids with marginal academic backgrounds and then not giving them the resources to permit them to graduate. That is supposed to be the trade off - put in the work on the practice field in exchange for a college education.

Rick Telander wrote a book addressing many of these issues 20 plus years ago - The One Hundred Yard Lie. As I recall his conclusion was simple - do away with all athletic scholarships and special admits for athletes.

---

Actually a lot of the corruption stems from when the NCAA approved offering athletic scholarships in the 1950's. . It was then that athletics were severed from academics and it remains so for revenue sports. It has resulted in the admission of kids who have neither the skills or interest in higher education and the propagation of cheating to acquire these kids and keep them eligible or warehouse them until they are no longer of use. The NCAA aids and abets this in the interest of revenue.

slotright20;842111050 said:

---

The greatest exploitation comes from awarding scholarships to kids with marginal academic backgrounds and then not giving them the resources to permit them to graduate. That is supposed to be the trade off - put in the work on the practice field in exchange for a college education.

Rick Telander wrote a book addressing many of these issues 20 plus years ago - The One Hundred Yard Lie. As I recall his conclusion was simple - do away with all athletic scholarships and special admits for athletes.

---

So Telander's solution to the problem of 10 out of 100 athletes not getting the educational resources they should be getting is to not give any of the 100 an opportunity at all?

It was a bad post on my part. My personal thought was if you are going to give marginal students a scholarship to play sports, you must give those same students who are willing the necessary help to succeed academically.


At that point my mind wandered to a book I read over 20 years ago and have not read since. This could be wrong but the way I remember it Telander went through a variety of ills and myths plaguing the sport and decided no athletic scholarships. My interpretation of the idea, is we take the same scholarships and award them to poorer but bright students who can excel in the classroom as opposed to poorer but perhaps not as bright students who can throw or catch a football. I assume all types of scholarships are reflected in a budget - use them soley for those who need and merit them academically not on athletes.

Would people bend, twist and break the rules ? Yes. Would quality of play suffer ? Yes. Could you still fill a stadium to see Cal play Furd ? I think so.