>Posted on 14 Apr 1995 at 11:25:06 by David Bender
>
>Scholarship students leaving without graduating
>
>Athletes are not the only people who receive financial assistance and leave
>without graduating.  It happens amongst the general student population all the
>time, and yet we do not ask for their scholarship money back.
 
Comment:
True, except that members of the general student population seldom get
the fat awards known as athletic scholarships, and when they do (e.g., a
special science scholarship), the grant is tied to academic performance.
 
 
>But when it comes down to the bottom line (i.e., money), the school makes out
>like a bandit whether or not the athlete graduates. In  the short run, while
>Holzinger is at BG, more people will go to the games to see him play generating
>more ticket revenues.  In the long run, the whole school benefits - because the
>award winning Holzinger went to BG, more people will have heard of BG, and the
>more press the school gets, the more likely enrollment will increase . . . .
 
Comment:
Right, which is why I believe that athletic "scholarships" are jobs, rather
than scholarships proper. Athletic "scholarships" pay student-athletes
to perform a clearly defined job for the university providing the
"award."
 
Universities should be allowed either to pay their athletes without any
NC$$-imposed restrictions (this is how the free market operates) or have
awards based on financial need (i.e., treat student-athletes like the
average non-athlete). Limits placed on athletic "scholarships" (which
really are wages for services rendered) appear to me to be restrictions
on free trade.
 
Let's call a grant a grant, and a salary a salary.
 
As old subscribers to this list know, I believe that need-based grants
are more in keeping with the spirit of intercollegiate athletics.
 
Luiz F. Valente