Newspaper Page Text
November 30, 1984/The Maroon Tiger/Page 20A
SPORTS
^ Education or Exploitation ?
By Robert Drummer
Associate Editor (Sports)
The proximity of the National
Collegiate Athletic Association’s
(NCAA) implementation of
proposal 48, a rule placing
academic stipulations on college
athletes, is causing some un
easiness among collegiate
athletic supporters. Rule 48 has
been noted by some as a “dis
criminator” against black stu
dent athletes. This is asserted
mainly because of the standar
dized test score requirements
the NCAA has set forth.
Idealistically, the proposal is
geared to “weed out” those
student athletes who were not
capable to perform academically
on the college level. True
enough, this proposal is dis
criminative, not only towards
blacks but to all student athletes.
The rule appears to take for
granted that all colleges demand
the same minimum test scores,
which is a fallacy. Even though a
student may obtain a combined
SAT score of 700 or score 15 on
the ACT, there is still no
guarantee that the school of his
choice will accept his results,
being that many technical
schools require high scores for
admittance. To suggest a consis
tent, minimum score would
deprive many students from not
only receiving financial
assistance but acceptance in
some schools as well.
As for the required C average
in the 11 designated areas, the
NCAA also penalizes those
students who do not come from
a liberal, educational
background. On the other side
of the coin, those who have
received such an education, do
not necessarily attend liberal
undergraduate institutions, and
their performances in high
school might possibly indicate
inadequate skill levels. This is
unfair, since some students may
be strong in certain areas and
weak in others. At any rate, this
evaluation should be done by
the college, not by the NCAA.
What is actually the main issue
here is money. Most athletic
scholarships, often times cover
ing four-year expenses, are
warranted on the basis of high
school accomplishments in that
particular sport, rather than the
student’s financial need. Many
students are fortunate enough to
possess athletic abilities along
with parents who are financially
capable of sending their kids to
college.
In the juggling of letters form
prospective schools, it is im
perative for students to
thoroughly investigate the
school they most likely will
attend. Asides from the school’s
previous season record, the
student should also be concern
ed with the school’s academic
curriculum, with particular in
terest and attention directed
toward his/her major of centra-
tion. This will alleviate some of
the misconceptions disguised by
attractive brochures and short
visits to the recuriting campus,
where generally, most of the
time is spent in and around
athletic facilities.
Authorities have devised plans
to aid the course of the student
athlete. Here is a suggested
proposal for students who wish
to compete in intercollegiate
sports.
‘College admission and
scholarship requirements should
be the same for athletes as they
are for any other student, depen
ding solely upon the school
which the student chooses to
attend.
‘Student must maintain at
least a 2.0 grade point average
during his/her matriculation
through college. Intheeventofa
student falling below this mark,
the student should be ineligible
to participate in the sport until
he/she raises their g.p.a. back to
the minimum mark.
‘Classification status deter
mined by satisfying the school’s
curriculum standards for promo
tion, instead of by the number of
years the student has spent at the
college.
Perhaps, if these requirements
were enacted, the controversy, if
any, would fall within the
parameters set by the college.
Hopefully, students will then
think more seriously during their
selection of a college,
eliminating the premature com
mitment to a school, which in
fact, might not be committed to
the student.
In regard to safeguards while
in college, students should take
the responsibility for their own
education, which should be the
first priority. This is probably the
most dangerous enemy the
student athlete will encounter,
and he/she must combat this
by differentiating between
his/her athletic potentials and
their academic essentials. As
long as the student athlete does
not allow the deadly virus of
complacency to settle into
his/her system and remember
that their primary objective FOR
COLLEGE is to earn a degree,
then the future of our society is
not threatened by potential
megasports fanatics.
We can ill-afford to waste the
available resources that our
minds have deposited. The
preservation of the STUDENT
athlete is a necessity, although
the emergency of the ATHLETE
student is a dispensability.
Today's situation involving stu
dent athletes makes one wonder
whether these persons are
recipients or a quality education
or victims of extensive exploita
tion. If the American society is
willing to gamble with its
available resources, then let it
first consider these noble words;
“If you think that the price of
education is too high, try ig
norance!”
‘Editor’s Note: This concludes
my three-part series concen
trating on the education
or exploitation of our black,
college athletes. If in its reading,
someone was positively effected
by its content, then the effort put
forth in composing these articles
was not in vain. It is my . ncere
hope that its composition has
raised someone's consciousness.
SVWWWVWVWWWWWWWWWWWWWVWWWWWWWWV
Happy Basketball Season
Roster
NO.
NAME
POS
HGT
WCT
CLS
ACE
MAJOR
HS
HME TWN
4
Hazel, Fleeks
G
6’3
170
So.
18
Computer Science
High Point
Hyattsville, Md
10
Wiley, Reginald
G
6’3
180
Fr
18
Finance
Washington
Houston, Tx
12
Lee, Marcus
G
6’3
180
19
Physical Ed.
Seminole Jc
Jax, FI
14
Johnson, Miller
G
6’1
170
So
18
Chemistry
Westwood
Atlanta, Ga
20
Burks, Richard*
G
6’3
186
Jr
22
Finance
Laurenburge (NC)
Brooklyn, NY
22
Ingram, Victor
F/G
6’5
190
Fr
18
Accounting
Dillard
Ft. Lauderdale, FL
24
Morgan, Steven
G
6’3
185
Fr
18
Computer Science
Kenwood
Chicago, IL
30
Glover, Ernest
L/C
67
185
Jr
19
Business Admin.
Jackson
Jax, FL
32
Bailey, Rahn
F
6'4
200
Jr
20
Biology
Herbert
Beaumont, TX
34
Thompson, Tarey
F
6'6
180
So
19
Engineering
Julian
Chicago, IL
40
White, Marcus
F/C
6’5
180
Fr
19
Business
Benson
Portland, OR
42
Hallburton, Brian
F/C
6’6
195
Sr
22
PsychoJogy
Murphy
Culver City, CA
44
Driger, Terence
F
6’4
170
Fr
19
Computer Science
Dublin
Dublin, GA
50
Russell, Brian
F
6'4
205
Fr
19
Marketing
Desales
Chicago, IL
52
Morris, Darren
F/C
6’6
197
So
19
Mathematics
Jones
Orlando, FL
Schedule
JANUARY 1984
Sat. 5
Mon. 7
NOVEMBER 1984
Thur, Fri, & Sat.
22,23,24
Thur. 29
Southwest Georgia Tournament
Fisk University
Albany, GA
Atlanta, GA
Fri. 11
Wed. 16
Sat. 19
Mon. 21
Thur. 24
DECEMBER 1984
Sat. 1
Wed. 5
Sat. 8
Sat. 15
Sat. 18
Albany State College*
Clark College (There)*
Benedict College*
Edward Waters College
Saint Leo College
Atlanta, GA
Atlanta, GA
Columbia, S.C.
Jacksonville, FL
Saint Leo, FL
Sat. 26
Wed. 30
FEBRUARY 1984.
Sat. 2
Wed. 6
Sat. 9
*SIAC GAMES
ALL HOME GAMES WILL PLAYED AT
ARCHER HALL GYM
TIME: 8:00 p.m.
Tue. 12
Fri. 15
Mon. 18
Thur. 21
Savannah State College*
Tuskegee Institute*
Edward Waters College
Morris Brown College (There)*
Fort Valley State College*
Benedict College*
Alabama A&M University*
Lane College
Clark College*
TBA
Fort Valley State College*
Tuskegee Institute*
Albany State College*
Alabama A&M University*
Morris Brown College*
Savannah State College*
Arthur ). McAfee, Jr.
Director of Athletics/Coach
(404) 681-2800 Ext. 348
James Nix - Assistant Coach
Joseph Wingfield - Trainer
Ted Sparks, Jr. - Statistician
‘CAPTAIN
Savannah, GA
Tuskegee, AL
Atlanta, GA
Atlanta, GA
Atlanta, GA
Atlanta, GA
Normal, AL
Jackson, TN
Atlanta, GA
Fort Valley, GA
Atlanta, GA
Albany, GA
Atlanta, GA
Atlanta, GA
Atlanta, GA