The (Kentucky) Empire Strikes Back

Dan Shaughnessy, Boston Globe
People. It’s “you’re’’ a racist. Not “your.’’
Whoops. There I go, being elitist again.

... A local radio guy named Matt Jones, writing on a website, charged me with racism and elitism, and rallied Lexington. ...

For the record, there are four black players on the Cornell roster. And there are three white players on the Kentucky roster.

[Jones] labeled Boston “the most racist major sports town in America.’’ I assume he has data to support this, since he also claims to have gone to Duke Law School (no elitism there).

Katie Thomas, New York Times
Duncan's Swipe at the NCAA
Education Secretary Arne Duncan took another swing at the National Collegiate Athletic Association and top college basketball programs Wednesday, reiterating a call he made in January to ban from postseason play teams that fail to graduate at least 40 percent of their players.

If Duncan’s proposal were to be carried out, 12 teams in the N.C.A.A. men’s tournament would be barred from competing, including Kentucky, a No. 1 seed, which has a graduation rate of 31 percent, according to a study released earlier this week by the Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport at the University of Central Florida. Six institutions (Brigham Young, Marquette, Notre Dame, Utah State, Wake Forest and Wofford) achieved a 100 percent graduation rate.

“If a university can’t have two out of five of their student-athletes graduate, I don’t know why they’re rewarded with postseason play,” Duncan said in a telephone conference call. His remarks were nearly identical to ones he made in a speech in January at the N.C.A.A. convention in Atlanta, where he told a crowd of athletic directors and university presidents that leaders in college sports aren’t doing enough to graduate basketball players.

The study also found a disparity between the graduation rates of black and white players at many institutions. At Kentucky, black players had an 18 percent graduation rate, while white players graduated at a rate of 100 percent. Other institutions with large disparities between black and white players included Clemson (31 percent of black players graduated, versus 100 percent of white players) and Missouri (black players had a 25 percent graduation rate, compared with white players, at 100 percent).

The study used N.C.A.A. graduation statistics over a six-year period for students who entered their freshmen year from 1999 to 2002.

dag14
While I obviously don't have data to support this, I wonder whether it is completely fair to vilify UK basketball based on the results of this study.

WHY don't their players graduate? As an example, if you have 10 players in a recruiting class and 2 transfer because of lack of playing time and 3 leave early for the NBA, that reduces your graduation rate to 50%. If 2 out of the 10 recruits drop out/don't graduate because of poor academic performance, the graduation rate is now 30%. But as this example illustrates, the 30% graduation rate doesn't mean that 7 out of 10 recruits in a class are "failures."

I get it that some programs in many major sports are factories designed to win championships and not educate students, but to rely on the NCAA graduation rate data without exploring other factors is oversimplifying the issue.

Robb

dag14
While I obviously don't have data to support this, I wonder whether it is completely fair to vilify UK basketball based on the results of this study.

WHY don't their players graduate? As an example, if you have 10 players in a recruiting class and 2 transfer because of lack of playing time and 3 leave early for the NBA, that reduces your graduation rate to 50%. If 2 out of the 10 recruits drop out/don't graduate because of poor academic performance, the graduation rate is now 30%. But as this example illustrates, the 30% graduation rate doesn't mean that 7 out of 10 recruits in a class are "failures."

I get it that some programs in many major sports are factories designed to win championships and not educate students, but to rely on the NCAA graduation rate data without exploring other factors is oversimplifying the issue.

I don't have a problem with transfers, but players who leave early for the NBA should definitely be counted against your graduation rate. Why on earth wouldn't they? Those players left without graduating - isn't that what a "graduation rate" is all about?

35. Posted by Tony Wed Mar 24, 2010 12:54 pm EDT
I am a student at Kentucky, and I personally know several of the basketball players. The idea that they are dumb is absurd. The ones that I know are all intelligent. So they don't get good grades; big deal. They work just as hard (or harder) than anyone I know, just not on school.

ugarte

Robb

dag14
While I obviously don't have data to support this, I wonder whether it is completely fair to vilify UK basketball based on the results of this study.

WHY don't their players graduate? As an example, if you have 10 players in a recruiting class and 2 transfer because of lack of playing time and 3 leave early for the NBA, that reduces your graduation rate to 50%. If 2 out of the 10 recruits drop out/don't graduate because of poor academic performance, the graduation rate is now 30%. But as this example illustrates, the 30% graduation rate doesn't mean that 7 out of 10 recruits in a class are "failures."

I get it that some programs in many major sports are factories designed to win championships and not educate students, but to rely on the NCAA graduation rate data without exploring other factors is oversimplifying the issue.

I don't have a problem with transfers, but players who leave early for the NBA should definitely be counted against your graduation rate. Why on earth wouldn't they? Those players left without graduating - isn't that what a "graduation rate" is all about?

"Graduation rate" is supposed to be a proxy for "making students employable." If they are voluntarily leaving college to make six/seven-figure salaries in the NBA, it is ridiculous to penalize the school. I'd be willing to compromise and say that players who aren't drafted or otherwise signed to pro contracts should count against the school.

This is particularly outrageous as the NCAA no longer penalizes schools in graduation-rate reports for players who leave early for the pros, as long as they were in good academic standing.

ugarte

Robb

dag14
While I obviously don't have data to support this, I wonder whether it is completely fair to vilify UK basketball based on the results of this study.

WHY don't their players graduate? As an example, if you have 10 players in a recruiting class and 2 transfer because of lack of playing time and 3 leave early for the NBA, that reduces your graduation rate to 50%. If 2 out of the 10 recruits drop out/don't graduate because of poor academic performance, the graduation rate is now 30%. But as this example illustrates, the 30% graduation rate doesn't mean that 7 out of 10 recruits in a class are "failures."

I get it that some programs in many major sports are factories designed to win championships and not educate students, but to rely on the NCAA graduation rate data without exploring other factors is oversimplifying the issue.

I don't have a problem with transfers, but players who leave early for the NBA should definitely be counted against your graduation rate. Why on earth wouldn't they? Those players left without graduating - isn't that what a "graduation rate" is all about?

"Graduation rate" is supposed to be a proxy for "making students employable." If they are voluntarily leaving college to make six/seven-figure salaries in the NBA, it is ridiculous to penalize the school. I'd be willing to compromise and say that players who aren't drafted or otherwise signed to pro contracts should count against the school.

2
The statistics don't count players who leave early for the pros. The Globe prints a column on the topic every year. This year's column (www.boston.com) says:

This is particularly outrageous as the NCAA no longer penalizes schools in graduation-rate reports for players who leave early for the pros, as long as they were in good academic standing.

Robb
Graduation means you completed the level and quality of work required to indicate that you are a college-educated person.

Trotsky

Robb
Graduation means you completed the level and quality of work required to indicate that you are a college-educated person.

There goes all of Engineering.

dag14
I didn't realize that student-athletes leaving early to turn pro [if in good academic standing at the time] were not part of the NCAA graduation rate mix. That does undercut my argument.

My point was more that what percentage of a recruiting class graduates is less relevant than the quality of the academic experience that a school offers its recruited student-athletes. If athletes are acing bogus courses and hit the real-world with no skills other than those they demonstrate on the ice/field/court, the school should be taken to task. If they are asked to take the same curriculum as other enrolled students but don't do as well academically because of all the various reasons student-athletes are not A+ students, it is hard to blame the institution if it is making a good-faith effort to educate all its students.

upperdeck
The study only counted kids who stayed and didnt graduate.. quiting/leaving/transferring dont count.. can you really stay for 4-6 years andf not graduate unless the school isnt trying or you probably shouldnt have been admitted.

Towerroad
The easiest and most honest solution is to remove the charade of the student/athlete at these elite programs and pay the players what they are worth. At a minimum if a player does not graduate or make it to the pros (the most common outcome in some of the programs mentioned, particularly if you are black) then the player, who was really only there to make money for the program, should get paid.

KeithK
The best thing would be for real minor leagues to crop up for football and basketball. Have a development path for the kids who truly don't care about academics and just want to advance athletically. Easier sad than done, especially since the NC$$ is apparently happy filling this role.

KeithK

Towerroad
The easiest and most honest solution is to remove the charade of the student/athlete at these elite programs and pay the players what they are worth. At a minimum if a player does not graduate or make it to the pros (the most common outcome in some of the programs mentioned, particularly if you are black) then the player, who was really only there to make money for the program, should get paid.

I heard this "solution" a lot of times but even after all the repetition it remains a bad idea. Academic institutions shouldn't be running minor league sports teams as a side venture. It's bad enough that this is de facto true right now in some places. Principles aside, it wouldn't work. If Kentucky had to pay their bball players something akin to their market value as basketball players then the sport wouldn't be the cash cow it is now.

The best thing would be for real minor leagues to crop up for football and basketball. Have a development path for the kids who truly don't care about academics and just want to advance athletically. Easier sad than done, especially since the NC$$ is apparently happy filling this role.

Towerroad

KeithK

Towerroad
The easiest and most honest solution is to remove the charade of the student/athlete at these elite programs and pay the players what they are worth. At a minimum if a player does not graduate or make it to the pros (the most common outcome in some of the programs mentioned, particularly if you are black) then the player, who was really only there to make money for the program, should get paid.

I heard this "solution" a lot of times but even after all the repetition it remains a bad idea. Academic institutions shouldn't be running minor league sports teams as a side venture. It's bad enough that this is de facto true right now in some places. Principles aside, it wouldn't work. If Kentucky had to pay their bball players something akin to their market value as basketball players then the sport wouldn't be the cash cow it is now.

The best thing would be for real minor leagues to crop up for football and basketball. Have a development path for the kids who truly don't care about academics and just want to advance athletically. Easier sad than done, especially since the NC$$ is apparently happy filling this role.

"Principles aside, it wouldn't work." I think it would work quite nicely for the athlete. The fact that some of the Universities in question would no longer be able to exploit the athlete who chooses to attend but has little interest in an education is hardly worth consideration.

As an aside a 40% graduation rate is pretty pitiful threshold.

ugarte

Towerroad

KeithK

Towerroad
The easiest and most honest solution is to remove the charade of the student/athlete at these elite programs and pay the players what they are worth. At a minimum if a player does not graduate or make it to the pros (the most common outcome in some of the programs mentioned, particularly if you are black) then the player, who was really only there to make money for the program, should get paid.

I heard this "solution" a lot of times but even after all the repetition it remains a bad idea. Academic institutions shouldn't be running minor league sports teams as a side venture. It's bad enough that this is de facto true right now in some places. Principles aside, it wouldn't work. If Kentucky had to pay their bball players something akin to their market value as basketball players then the sport wouldn't be the cash cow it is now.

The best thing would be for real minor leagues to crop up for football and basketball. Have a development path for the kids who truly don't care about academics and just want to advance athletically. Easier sad than done, especially since the NC$$ is apparently happy filling this role.

"Principles aside, it wouldn't work." I think it would work quite nicely for the athlete. The fact that some of the Universities in question would no longer be able to exploit the athlete who chooses to attend but has little interest in an education is hardly worth consideration.

As an aside a 40% graduation rate is pretty pitiful threshold.

If it doesn't work for the school, it doesn't happen. Your principles have to align at least a little with practicalities if you want to talk about what "should" be done. Exploitation is in the eye of the beholder, anyway. They are "officially" given a free education and unofficially receive BMOC status and, for the best of them, under the table payments that we choose to ignore until it becomes egregious.

min
I don't mean to open a can of worms, but can someone remind me again why Cornell and the other Ivies don't offer athletic scholarships? It can't all be about academics and student standards. Other "smart" schools (Stanford, Cal, Duke, Michigan, you name it) offer them, and I don't believe their academic reputations have suffered one iota (at least in the minds of the general public) as consequence.

To borrow another Star Wars analogy, do athletic scholarships necessarily represent the "dark side"?

Robb

ugarte

Robb

dag14
While I obviously don't have data to support this, I wonder whether it is completely fair to vilify UK basketball based on the results of this study.

WHY don't their players graduate? As an example, if you have 10 players in a recruiting class and 2 transfer because of lack of playing time and 3 leave early for the NBA, that reduces your graduation rate to 50%. If 2 out of the 10 recruits drop out/don't graduate because of poor academic performance, the graduation rate is now 30%. But as this example illustrates, the 30% graduation rate doesn't mean that 7 out of 10 recruits in a class are "failures."

I get it that some programs in many major sports are factories designed to win championships and not educate students, but to rely on the NCAA graduation rate data without exploring other factors is oversimplifying the issue.

I don't have a problem with transfers, but players who leave early for the NBA should definitely be counted against your graduation rate. Why on earth wouldn't they? Those players left without graduating - isn't that what a "graduation rate" is all about?

"Graduation rate" is supposed to be a proxy for "making students employable." If they are voluntarily leaving college to make six/seven-figure salaries in the NBA, it is ridiculous to penalize the school. I'd be willing to compromise and say that players who aren't drafted or otherwise signed to pro contracts should count against the school.

That's not at all what graduation rate means to me. Graduation means you completed the level and quality of work required to indicate that you are a college-educated person. There are plenty of magna cum laude graduates who have trouble finding a job, and loads of dropouts who excel in the working world. Colleges already track job placement rates separately from graduation rates, so there's no reason why either should be a proxy for the other. They each tell a different part of the story, and I think graduation rate is the correct one to use for grading whether the athletic programs are detrimental or helpful to the schools' academic missions.

KeithK

ugarte

Towerroad

KeithK

Towerroad
The easiest and most honest solution is to remove the charade of the student/athlete at these elite programs and pay the players what they are worth. At a minimum if a player does not graduate or make it to the pros (the most common outcome in some of the programs mentioned, particularly if you are black) then the player, who was really only there to make money for the program, should get paid.

I heard this "solution" a lot of times but even after all the repetition it remains a bad idea. Academic institutions shouldn't be running minor league sports teams as a side venture. It's bad enough that this is de facto true right now in some places. Principles aside, it wouldn't work. If Kentucky had to pay their bball players something akin to their market value as basketball players then the sport wouldn't be the cash cow it is now.

The best thing would be for real minor leagues to crop up for football and basketball. Have a development path for the kids who truly don't care about academics and just want to advance athletically. Easier sad than done, especially since the NC$$ is apparently happy filling this role.

"Principles aside, it wouldn't work." I think it would work quite nicely for the athlete. The fact that some of the Universities in question would no longer be able to exploit the athlete who chooses to attend but has little interest in an education is hardly worth consideration.

As an aside a 40% graduation rate is pretty pitiful threshold.

If it doesn't work for the school, it doesn't happen. Your principles have to align at least a little with practicalities if you want to talk about what "should" be done. Exploitation is in the eye of the beholder, anyway. They are "officially" given a free education and unofficially receive BMOC status and, for the best of them, under the table payments that we choose to ignore until it becomes egregious.

The athletes are certainly "exploited" according to the first definition on m-w.com "To make productive use of". As for the second, "to make use of meanly or unfairly for one's own advantage", that's subjective as ugarte says.

nshapiro

Robb

ugarte

Robb

dag14
While I obviously don't have data to support this, I wonder whether it is completely fair to vilify UK basketball based on the results of this study.

WHY don't their players graduate? As an example, if you have 10 players in a recruiting class and 2 transfer because of lack of playing time and 3 leave early for the NBA, that reduces your graduation rate to 50%. If 2 out of the 10 recruits drop out/don't graduate because of poor academic performance, the graduation rate is now 30%. But as this example illustrates, the 30% graduation rate doesn't mean that 7 out of 10 recruits in a class are "failures."

I get it that some programs in many major sports are factories designed to win championships and not educate students, but to rely on the NCAA graduation rate data without exploring other factors is oversimplifying the issue.

I don't have a problem with transfers, but players who leave early for the NBA should definitely be counted against your graduation rate. Why on earth wouldn't they? Those players left without graduating - isn't that what a "graduation rate" is all about?

"Graduation rate" is supposed to be a proxy for "making students employable." If they are voluntarily leaving college to make six/seven-figure salaries in the NBA, it is ridiculous to penalize the school. I'd be willing to compromise and say that players who aren't drafted or otherwise signed to pro contracts should count against the school.

That's not at all what graduation rate means to me. Graduation means you completed the level and quality of work required to indicate that you are a college-educated person. There are plenty of magna cum laude graduates who have trouble finding a job, and loads of dropouts who excel in the working world. Colleges already track job placement rates separately from graduation rates, so there's no reason why either should be a proxy for the other. They each tell a different part of the story, and I think graduation rate is the correct one to use for grading whether the athletic programs are detrimental or helpful to the schools' academic missions.

So how would you classify a brilliant student who leaves Cornell after her junior year because she was admitted to Vet School? A dropout?

KeithK

nshapiro

Robb

ugarte

Robb

dag14
While I obviously don't have data to support this, I wonder whether it is completely fair to vilify UK basketball based on the results of this study.

WHY don't their players graduate? As an example, if you have 10 players in a recruiting class and 2 transfer because of lack of playing time and 3 leave early for the NBA, that reduces your graduation rate to 50%. If 2 out of the 10 recruits drop out/don't graduate because of poor academic performance, the graduation rate is now 30%. But as this example illustrates, the 30% graduation rate doesn't mean that 7 out of 10 recruits in a class are "failures."

I get it that some programs in many major sports are factories designed to win championships and not educate students, but to rely on the NCAA graduation rate data without exploring other factors is oversimplifying the issue.

I don't have a problem with transfers, but players who leave early for the NBA should definitely be counted against your graduation rate. Why on earth wouldn't they? Those players left without graduating - isn't that what a "graduation rate" is all about?

"Graduation rate" is supposed to be a proxy for "making students employable." If they are voluntarily leaving college to make six/seven-figure salaries in the NBA, it is ridiculous to penalize the school. I'd be willing to compromise and say that players who aren't drafted or otherwise signed to pro contracts should count against the school.

That's not at all what graduation rate means to me. Graduation means you completed the level and quality of work required to indicate that you are a college-educated person. There are plenty of magna cum laude graduates who have trouble finding a job, and loads of dropouts who excel in the working world. Colleges already track job placement rates separately from graduation rates, so there's no reason why either should be a proxy for the other. They each tell a different part of the story, and I think graduation rate is the correct one to use for grading whether the athletic programs are detrimental or helpful to the schools' academic missions.

So how would you classify a brilliant student who leaves Cornell after her junior year because she was admitted to Vet School? A dropout?

Yes, that student would be a dropout if she didn't actually complete her degree. Not sure how she got into Vet School without a degree though (grad school without a bachelors is not unheard of but it is rare AFAIK). Regardless, this is probably a sufficiently unlikely occurrence that it wouldn't skew the stats in any significant way.

Completion of a baccalaureate degree prior to matriculation is not required.