I was surprised to read about Charles T. Clotfelter’s take on
his perception of big-time college sports. Clotfelter is a professor of public
policy, economics, and law at Duke University. He even has a book that just
came out about big-time sports in American universities. Clotfelter argues that
big-time athletic sports are now one of the core functions of several hundred
prominent American universities, and these universities should embrace the
benefits of commercialized college sports. Clotfelter suggests that rather than
ignore the magnitude of intercollegiate sports, professors at these institutions
should acknowledge them.
To satisfy some curiosity I read the first few pages of his
book online. In his book, he describes two different worlds of American higher
education that coexist. One is the familiar one, which is colleges and
universities are created for the diffusion of knowledge. The other is the world
of big-time college sports. To make his point, he provides a virtual tour of
the world-renowned Center for Nano- and Molecular Science and Technology and of
the Darrell K. Royal-Texas Memorial Stadium, both of which belong to the
University of Texas at Austin. The first exemplifies the academic purpose of
American universities and the latter exemplifies big-time college sports.
Hence, these are the two worlds that coexist.
I was astonished to read about the amenities of the stadium
and the treatment of the players. The stadium seats 100,000 people and games
are usually sold out. There are towers at the ends of the stadium that are actual
suites equipped with theater-style seating, televisions, kitchenette, and bars
and are leased for $88,000 a year. The team rides to practice everyday in
chartered buses and their locker-room contains five flat-screen TVs. The
coach’s salary is four times that of the university president and he has his
own weekly television show broadcasted on 14 local stations and one regional
network every week during the football season.
According to Clotfelter, the core function is birthed from
evidence of how the institution’s environment is affected by big-time sports. Universities
with big-time sports enterprises function around the schedule of the football games.
Football games can shut down entire campuses and important meetings will not be
held if there is a game to watch. Athlete recruits even have their own admissions
criteria totally separate from general applicants. One last wild example is the
University of Alabama postponed their spring semester start date because the
football team was playing in a bowl game in California. I could easily provide
more examples, but I think I’ve made my point, let’s move on to Clotfelter’s
benefits.
There are three “benefits” he maintains. First, is the
aspect of a social benefit. Americans cherish sports and view them as the “university’s
most significant activity.” (what the f@#*?) He concludes to this by the amount
of Americans who attend games and who watch them on television. The numbers are
enormous which means high commercial value. The revenues from commercials are
crucial because universities need the finances to keep their teams competitive
(coaches salaries). Clotfelter points out how Americans care deeply of their
college teams. To watch one’s favorite hometown college football team can lead
to life happiness. Second, is big-time college sports can teach civic values
such as interracial cooperation and meritocracy. Since coaches and players
treat each other as equals, interracial teams have served as models for the
rest of the U.S. in regards to diversity and equality. What I would like to know is what happens
with these relationships after football season? In regards to meritocracy, how
great it is to know that you have been promoted because of your athletic
ability. Which is a good thing, but as a college student and athlete, wouldn’t
it be equally important to achieve merit on one’s academics, too? And last, is
the benefit to the academic enterprise. Big-time sports programs can raise the
amount of contributions and applicants to the institution.
If a professor’s job is to seek truth and speak truth,
Clotfelter feels that professors should stop ignoring the fact that big-time
college sports are a function of the university just as much as the art museum.
It is what it is so tell it like it is. Um…I disagree. Without a doubt,
big-time college sports are as American as apple pie, however, I think it would
be in everyone’s best interest to regulate the payroll of athletic departments
because at the same academic departments have to cope with cut-backs and downsizing.
It’s hard for me to fathom the scope of big-time athletics
because I do not live in a city that has a nationally known football or
basketball program. Perhaps if I did, this article would make sense to me…wait,
I still don’t think it would. Yet, in some ways I’m glad my university is not
part of the big 10 sports league because then we might share the same
perspective as Clotfelter. A fun fact--I have read that when students are
selecting a college/university, athletics are less important factors than
others.
Around here (UNC), it’s exciting when our teams have winning
seasons or even achieve a championship. Win or lose, academics, research,
scholarship, and creating ties with the community are aspects that are at the
forefront of UNC’s mission. Hopefully that will never change.
No comments:
Post a Comment