It’s a little hard to find underneath the bright banners advertising football conference schedules, field hockey scores, and special video clips from recent games in a half-dozen different sports, but at the bottom of NCAA.com is a small menu entitled “About the NCAA,” which takes you to NCAA.org and answers “Who We Are” with a list of core values.
There, you will learn that college sports are “an avocation,” and a “respectful culture” and the NCAA itself believes in and is committed to the “supporting role that intercollegiate athletics plays in the higher education mission.” Considering how much easier it is on the site to find a favorite team’s licensed memorabilia or the appropriate cable package for your chosen conference than any mention of academics, the lead and supporting roles in this educational mission seem to have been switched.
It’s a reality thrown into sharp relief by the events of the past week. On Saturday, the University of Missouri football team refused to participate in team activities, including practices and games until Tim Wolfe, the university president, stepped down.
In many of the news stories reporting on this, the main focus was less the bizarre notion that a mere 60-odd students could force the president’s resignation, but the fact that the University of Missouri could lose $1 million if they did not appear to play Brigham Young this weekend. The focus on the money treats the issue as though it were a contract dispute, akin to the 2012-2013 NHL lockout.
There’s clearly a move to treat college athletes not as part of the “higher education mission,” but as semi-pros, in training for the big draft. Something similar happened in August, when the National Labor Relations Board was asked to decide if players on Northwestern University’s football team could unionize. The NLRB punted, claiming that making a decision would “not serve to promote stability in labor relations.”
The non-decision missed the larger point. Who are they unionizing against? Student athletes are, first and foremost, students, enrolled in universities and colleges and registered for classes in pursuit of a degree. For those fortunate enough to receive scholarships, their education—worth tens of thousands of dollars—is heavily subsidized by the schools they play for. At a school like the University of Missouri, a player also receives advanced coaching and training, and, potentially, a shot at playing professionally. In exchange, the school gains financially from ticket sales, broadcast rights, and licensed memorabilia.
Students are not paid to play, in the sense that none of them receive a salary from their school. This doesn’t mean that they are abused by the system. They are students, not employees, and as students, they don’t need to play. If sports take too much time away from academics, these students can quit the team.
The events in Missouri demonstrate that many of the athletes and schools who participate in the NCAA need to take a closer look at the second letter of the acronym. At the end of the day, the football players are still in college.
