Taking the taxpayers out of college sports

Silvio Laccetti

is a social science professor at Stevens Institute of Technology

Academics or athletics? That is the question for state universities.

Athletes are exploited, admission standards corrupted, and taxpayer resources diverted. The NCAA recently gave colleges the OK to contact prospects in grammar school!

The most recent comprehensive investigation of "State U" athletics and academics was published in December by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Using data from 54 top college athletic programs, as reported by the NCAA, the newspaper found that: "Nationwide, football players average 220 and basketball players 227 points lower on the SAT than do their classmates."

The University of Oklahoma and the University of Florida, the contestants in this year's college football national championship game, ranked 42d and 50th out of the 54 in football players' SAT scores.

This is the big-college equivalent of pay-to-play: To be competitive, they have to accept the most marginal students.

In Pennsylvania, neither the University of Pittsburgh nor Pennsylvania State University - both publicly supported - provided any data for the newspaper report, as they are not subject to Pennsylvania's open-records law.

But the schools' graduation rates are available, and they also show a substantial disparity between scholarship athletes in the big sports and the rest of the student body. The most recent available graduation rate for all students is 84 percent at Penn State and 71 percent at Pitt. For scholarship football players at those schools, the numbers drop to 75 percent at Penn State and 54 percent at Pitt. The corresponding figures for scholarship basketball players are 54 percent and 58 percent, respectively.

Among the 54 top programs, the highest average SAT score among football players was Georgia Tech's, 1028; the highest basketball average belonged to Iowa State, with 1087. Oklahoma State and Louisville tied for lowest football SATs, at 878; and Texas ranked last in basketball, with 797.

Can admission standards for these athletes get any lower?

Rutgers may well be the poster child for universities' problems with big-time athletics. The school committed to a top-20 football program for the 21st century, but in the rush to athletic glory, many irregularities and problems arose. A questionable stadium expansion may require more taxpayer funds; a "secret" compensation package for the coach caused a furor when revealed; and, to save money, six Olympic sports were eliminated.

So what's to be done? State U should consider privatizing big-time college sports programs.

Don't expect a detailed business plan in this space. But the goal should be to detach big-time athletics from public colleges. State U football and basketball can be operated by independent private corporations, which would give the universities a cut of the profits.

Created through private capitalization, these new companies could be funded by a coalition of private boosters, alumni, and regional businesses. They would be managed as any other business is. Corporate stock could be issued and traded.

Privatization does not have to be disruptive. Leagues can remain the same; so can names and game sites. Most personnel will remain the same, too, with checks on excessive compensation.

Athletes would participate on these teams for three years, during the ages of 18 to 20, as paid employees, not students. The best athletes would rise from these college teams to the professional system. And those who don't make the professional grade can start their college education to prepare for other careers.

Several major advantages would result. State U would make a profit from its contracts with the new company. It would no longer pour scarce resources into athletics instead of academics. And the problem of exploited or unqualified student athletes would disappear.

Football and basketball would continue to be sports at State U proper, but they would be modeled on American Division 3 or European university sports. There would still be all the competition, good fun, development of life skills, and a degree of fan interest.

Putting education ahead of big-time athletics would surely cause the sparks to fly. Old historical patterns die hard. Entrenched interests retrench. But after the sparks fly, universities can focus on a different contest: keeping America competitive in the world.