you’re going to get within a hundrednyards of the drug-crazed animals somencolleges put on the football field. Butnbasketball’s no better. When a starnplayer at a cow college near here wasnarrested (for theft: he wasn’t allowed tonplay for a while), a reporter got hold ofnhis SAT scores: they totaled 470, on anscale from 400 to 1600. Three of him,nin other words, might add up to onenMIT freshman (which raises the questionnof whether three MIT freshmenncould handle him on the court, butnnever mind). This “student-athlete”nwas in fact illiterate, but that didn’tnmatter to the schools that recruitednhim. Duke has gotten uppity since ThenNew York Times called it a “hotnschool,” but it was one of them; SportsnIllustrated published a passionate mashnnote from their coach to this talentednjuvenile delinquent.nSome colleges, including mine,npoint to graduation rates for athletesnthat equal or exceed those for run-ofthe-millnstudents without access to tutors,nmandatory study halls, and reliablenguidance to easy courses andnfaculty groupies. But that’s a twoedgednsword. If young folks withoutnmuch in the way of scholastic aptitudencan hold down what amount to fulltimenjobs and still get through, maybenthe curriculum is too easy.nMoreover, lack of intellect is not thenonly problem. It is apparently difficultnto win ball games consistently thesendays without at least a few specimensnof low-grade human material, youngnmen who tear up parking tickets, beatnpeople up in bars, steal bicycles (thesenare all actual cases from my school) —nand who expect, correctly as a rule, tonget away with only slaps on the wrist, ifnthat.nConsider Mr. Jeff Burger, startingnquarterback for Auburn in 1987. In anlittle over two months Burger wasnsuspended once for plagiarism, oncenfor accepting a free plane ride from anbooster (to go dove-hunting), and oncenfor taking money from an assistantncoach (to post bail on a concealedweaponncharge). Each time he wasnunsuspended on appeal in time for thennext game. Auburn’s vice president forn”academic affairs” let him off on thenplagiarism charge; the ever-obligingnNCAA winked at the others.nNow, I should say that most collegenathletes I know are self-respecting and/nor Cod-fearing young men and women.nAnd it may even be that thugs,nliars, petty thieves, vandals, and unwednfathers are no more common amongnfootball and basketball players thannamong late-adolescent Americannmales in general. But, frankly, I don’tnbelieve that. The adulation and specialntreatment — not to mention thensteroids — meted out to big-hme collegenathletes don’t exactly build character.nConsider the football player (also atnthe nearby cow college) who wasncharged with rape: part of his defensenwas that a star like him wasn’t used tongirls who said no, and he didn’t thinknthis one really meant it. This characternactually went to jail, but he was recentlynfreed when the court ordered a newntrial and his victim declined to gonthrough the ordeal of testifying again.nI could go on and on. MemphisnState, Oklahoma, Maryland, Georgia,nKentucky, SMU — I get them confused.nNot long ago some Arkansasnalumni lobbied to pull their state universitynout of the Southwest Conference,npointing out that it was one ofnonly three schools in the conferencennot in trouble with the NCAA. CoachnBroyles reportedly vetoed that move.nPresidents come and go — sometimesnfor countenancing abuses, sometimesnfor opposing them—but athlehc departmentsnseem to go on forever. AtnClemson a few years ago the presidentngave the trustees an ultimatum to theneffect that it was either him or thenathletic director, whereupon he wasnwished the best of luck in his new job,nwhatever that might turn out to be.nI can’t be smug about that. A halfcenturynago, my own university’s saintednpresident (a man remembered innthese parts as a sort of male EleanornRoosevelt) proposed to do away withnathletic scholarships. When it wasnmade plain to him that he was going tonbe president of a university with bigtimenathletics or he wasn’t going to benpresident at all, he had a change ofnheart. One consequence, if you wantnto look at it that way, is that 50 yearsnlater—two years ago — we fired ournfootball coach; or, rather, he wasnallowed to resign with an $800,000nsettlement to make up for the years onnhis contract that, we were told, he hadnfreely chosen not to work. (I know itndoesn’t make sense, but that’s hownthey said it happened.) There had beennnnan “erosion of confidence” amongnsome “elements of the community”:nthis is what a modern university administratornsays when members of a boosternclub are unhappy.nNow, I’ve served on the committeenthat considers the admission of studentsnwith “special talents,” and itncertainly seems that our team shouldnhave won more games than it did. Inwon’t get into specifics; let’s just saynthat we have some very large studentsnwith IQ’s about par for 18 holes. If ourncoach couldn’t win with that material,nmaybe there was something wrongnwith his coaching. I don’t feel sorry fornhim —for $800,000 I’d leave, too —nbut I am sorry he lost his job, because itnmakes it too plain for comfort what thenconditions of his employment were.nIt’s hard to mouth the old platitudesnabout why we have an athletic programnwhen losing coaches are let go withoutnreference to how much characternthey’ve built.nEnough. I’m starting to rant. Foamingnat the mouth is the next stage.nCan anything be done? Probablynnot. The NCAA continues to tinkernwith its pathetic regulations, trying tonpalliate what even a few coaches andncollege presidents have come to recognizenis a smelly situation. But rulenchanges won’t help; to steal a similenfrom Albert Jay Nock, assimilatingnsemiprofessional athletics is for a collegenor university like building a perpetualnmotion machine: some do betternthan others, but the undertaking isnimpossible in the first place.nIdeally, professional football andnbasketball would have farm clubs, likenthe baseball leagues. If it were up to thenathletes, I’m sure they would. There’snno reason novice professionalsnshouldn’t be paid for their labors, andnno reason they should have to strugglenwith Western Civ as a precondition fornplying their craft. But of course there’snalso no reason for the NFL and NBAnto have their own minor leagues sonlong as colleges are willing to providenthem.nThe Ivy League with its characteristic,nsuperb arrogance has chosen inneffect not to play that game. Its attitudenseems to be: let the Dukes, the NorthnCarolinas, the Texases, Nebraskas,nMichigans, and UCLA’s — all the academicnno-hopers of the worid, thenintellectual Siberias — let them trainnOCTOBER 1989/45n