|
|
     
|
Should coaches be held responsible for student-athlete academic performance? - Sep 25, 2008 | 10:55:47
posted by: Howard Smith
It is normal to see coaches get fired when their teams struggle on the playing field. But have you ever heard of a coach getting terminated because of student-athletes not performing well in the classroom? Well, Mississippi State might be starting a new trend. The school has revised the contracts of its football, men's basketball and baseball coaches to allow for termination if their team's Academic Progress Rate (APR) is too low. On the flip side, however, these coaches can potentially receive six figure bonuses if their student-athletes excel in the classroom. More than five years into the NCAA's academic reform program, it is obvious that athletics departments are getting the message that academics are a crucial issue. Some schools are finally realizing that if they don't take APR seriously, then it can have a real impact on postseason eligibility and scholarships. But should it be the responsibility of the coaches to ensure their student-athletes perform well in the classroom? Frankly, both sides of the debate have compelling arguments. Those in favor of coaches sharing in the responsibility for academic success cite the fact that coaches are recruiting the student-athletes. Performance in the classroom should be just as important of a factor as how they compete in their sport. So what happens when a coach is successful in competition but fails in the classroom? Can you imagine the uproar that would occur if a coach wins a national championship but is then fired because the team wasn't up to par academically? This would be a potential nightmare for any athletics director or university president. In reality, how much control does a coach really have in the academic success of the student-athletes? The coach can try to recruit solid students and can give them standards they must follow in the classroom. But at the end of the day, many people argue the responsibility falls on the shoulders of the student-athletes themselves. If a school is going to hold coaches accountable for the academics of their student-athletes, then shouldn't athletics directors and university presidents hold some responsibility as well? Walt Harrison, Hartford's president and chairman of the NCAA Division I Committee on Academic Performance, shared his thoughts with the Birmingham News: "If a coach has an APR, maybe a president ought to have an APR. I think it's kind of an interesting way to track a coach's performance, but a coach is probably not solely responsible for academic success." Where do you stand on this issue? Should coaches be held responsible for the academic success or failures of their student-athletes? 
CommentsI understand the desire people have to make coaches responsible for the academic success of their student-athletes - the root of the problem is often coaches recruiting student-athletes who simply can't succeed at the institution. However, I think it's really hard to assign the majority of the blame to coaches, when really, the student-athletes, academic advisors, tutors and athletics directors have a role in academic success as well. And how would you handle a situation in which a coach comes into a team with a low APR? When does he or she have "ownership" of the academic performance. There's just too many variables to make this a home run. "Should coaches be held responsible for student-athlete academic performance? " - Sure. Right after the professors are held accountable for the athletic performance. c'mon mike...the coaches have to have some responsbility for the academic side...agree with mimi that it's a tough call though...maybe you should give new coaches a 2 or 3 year window to get his own people in place, but agree this would be tough to standardize How about completely separating the coaches' consequences for academic and athletic performance? Keep the tradition of hiring/firing coaches based on athletic success/failure, but on the other hand, the coaches' should receive a pay raise or (*gasp*) a pay cut based on classroom performance. The institution is responsible for admitting students who can do the work at their institution. If they want to admit students who are not prepared for their particular institution, then don't blame a coach when the student can't compete in the classroom. The coach is trying to find the best athletes for his or her team and the institution is evaluating the students academic viability...so it is on them. The institution can not have it both ways! please re-phrase that question. Should coaches choose low academic students to began with? Should coaches make time and provision for students to study? Should coaches over look the smart kids who worked so hard, are good quality students and athletes because they are the correct age. Should they worry about choosing a kid who has never failed or who had to go to a prep school in order to prepare a little more for college and didn't graduate from highschool on time. No one should be responsible for someone else's grades. Only the student can maintain his own grades. However, if they are not looking for those smart kids to raise up their academic standards then go ahead and continue looking for old 20 year old freshman who can beat up on a true 18 year old freshman. Are we serious about academics, or Give basic, 40-minute college-level quizzes If we don't get serious about making these guys I think this is one of the best things to happen to college sports in a long time. College sports enthusiasts have forgotten that the sports only exists because of the school, and the school only exists because of the need for people to be educated. Therefore, it is in every universities best interest to enforce stricter regulations on athletes and coaches, reminding them that academics come first and sports second. What happens ten years from now when a former college football player, who didn't get into the NFL, is holding people at gunpoint, selling drugs, etc. because he never got an education? No matter what bad decision players make in the future they will always reflect back on the university. Pushing coaches and athletes to focus more on academics is better for universities in the long run, protecting the universities image. Also, how many times does a player come to a university to play football and is excelling on the field but is failing all his classes? No matter how many records he broke or yards he ran the player looses his scholarship due to his poor grades. The school doesn't just loose a poor student, the team looses a good player. Enforcing APR regulations on coaches will maintain that good players are kept on the team. How embarrassing is it to loose good players to something like grades? Yes, most of the responsibility is on the athlete to make sure that he/she is going to class doing their assignments. However, coaches need to realize that they are responsible not only for their players athletic performance but also for their academic performance. Coaches mandate practices, training, team meetings, and travel that cut into valuable study time. Coaches should be somewhat responsible for athletes academic performance. Post a Comment |
  
It means that two very good teams with very good coaches made it to the final game.
- Marie
   
|
