« Alumni Game News | Main | Somewhat off-topic: New Photo Blog »

Thursday - January 26, 2006

New Start Date - more thoughts

Brian, at Big Ten Hardball, asks in the comments of his post:

"Are college sports about college or athletics?"

I started to answer in the comments but realized I was getting awfully long-winded so decided I'd post over here and let him know I'd continued the discussion elsewhere. And, so, I repeat his question:

"Are college sports about college or athletics?"

That's something the NCAA really needs to come to terms with. Many of the NCAA rules just don't make any sense. Schools should just go ahead and give stipends to athletes the way they do to graduate students -- especially in the revenue-generating sports. That would certainly get rid of a lot of the problems they currently have with all of the under-the-table stuff that goes on.

One of the professors in my department was very upset about the way Coach Brown and others here at UT have reacted to the fact that Vince Young decided to go pro. They seem to be supporting his decision. The professor thought they should be encouraging him to stay in school and get his degree. But, is that what college is about? Getting a degree? Or is it about getting a student ready for the next phase of his life? Can he be ready without a degree? It certainly seems that there's not much more UT can do to get Vince ready. Vince is an education major. Does anyone really think that if he doesn't make it in the NFL, he's going to turn around and become an elementary school teacher? No. He wants to be an NFL quarterback. Another year playing at UT probably would mean he'd be a better player by the time he got to the NFL. But, would he be better enough to risk staying? What if he got hurt before he cashed that big signing bonus check? So, is it about college or athletics?

Anyway, back to the subject at hand (the baseball start date). I agree that the current baseball season isn't fair to the northern schools. Oregon State fielded a very good team last year, despite their location on the map. And, Nebraska (sorry to be bringing them into the conversation after the Alamo Bowl and all but...) seems to do a good job year after year with their baseball team. Granted, Nebraska isn't as far north as Michigan but they deal with bitterly cold winters and spend a lot of time on the road early in the year. The fact is, different schools concentrate on different sports. Baseball seems to be more of a priority for Nebraska than it is for Michigan. We don't have ice hockey here at UT. There are probably people who think it's completely unfair that Michigan fields a team and UT doesn't. But, if it was a priority, UT would build a facility or forge a partnership with the Ice Bats to use theirs. If baseball were more of a priority for Michigan, maybe they'd build a dome or spend more on their indoor facilities. It doesn't seem to make financial sense to do that, though. And, it doesn't make sense (financial or otherwise, for that matter) for UT to field an ice hockey team. UT did spend a lot of money creating an indoor practice field for the football team...so that they have somewhere to practice where they can get away from the heat when it's just too hot to play here in Austin. Michigan could do something like that for the baseball team if they wanted to even the playing field a bit. So to speak. But, the incentive doesn't seem to be there.

Clearly, there are no easy solutions. I think the solution the NCAA came up with for the baseball start date is acceptable, though. Frankly, I don't enjoy sitting in the stands at Disch-Falk in early February with the wind whipping around on 40-degree days. Yeah, there's no snow. But, it's cold. And, you feel it deep down in your bones by the time a 3-hour game is over. I really don't want to see them reduce the number of games, though. So, I hope the NCAA stops here on this issue.

UPDATE (Jan. 28, 8:40 AM): Brian posted a thoughtful follow-up post on his blog.

Posted by Joanna at 5:53 PM