[net-gold] Sport and Society 7-25-12 Punishment
- From: "David P. Dillard" <jwne@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Net-Gold -- Educator Gold <Educator-Gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Educator Gold <Educator-Gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, net-gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Net-Gold <Net-Gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, NetGold <netgold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Net-Gold <net-gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, K-12ADMINLIFE <K12ADMIN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, K12AdminLIFE <K12AdminLIFE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, MediaMentor <mediamentor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, NetGold <netgold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Net-Platinum <net-platinum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sean Grigsby <myarchives1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Net-Gold <NetGold_general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Temple Gold Discussion Group <TEMPLE-GOLD@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Temple University Net-Gold Archive <net-gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Health Lists -- Health Diet Fitness Recreation Sports Tourism <healthrecsport@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Health Diet Fitness Recreation Sports <healthrecsport@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, HEALTH-RECREATION-SPORTS-TOURISM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 15:37:57 -0400 (EDT)
.
.
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 11:40:40 -0400
From: richard crepeau <crepeau1@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Sport and Society 7-25-12 Punishment
SPORT AND SOCIETY FOR ARETE
JULY 25, 2012
.
.
After the Freeh Report was issued there was an outcry demanding that the
NCAA do something to punish Penn State University. Many called for the
death penalty. Others complained about the failure of the NCAA to act
immediately. Then on Monday morning when the NCAA President, Mark Emmert,
announced the judgment and punishment of Penn State the outcry was that
the NCAA acted too quickly. It was a rush to judgment by Emmert and his
colleagues. What happened to due process?
.
For the most part these contradictory objections came from different
people and different constituencies, although not in every case. Both
objections have legitimacy and are worth serious consideration when trying
to gauge the punishments meted out on Monday.
.
I am not willing or able to try to pass judgment on the NCAA from either
direction. What troubles me is not the lack of the death penalty or what
might be considered the severity of the punishment.
.
What bothers me most is that the discussion has centered on the
ramifications of the punishment for Penn State football.
.
Will Penn State players transfer? Will the reduction of football
scholarships (such a troublesome term) severely impact the quality of
play? Will the NCAA action make Penn State a non-factor on the national
stage? How long will it take before Penn State can regain its national
prominence in college football?
.
These are all the wrong questions concerning the wrong subject.
.
The real area of concern should not be what the NCAA action will do to
Penn State’s national football profile. The area of concern, as spelled
out in the Freeh Report and asit was addressed on Monday by the NCAA, is
what both Freeh and the NCAA referred to as the “Athletic Culture.”
I
.
Will this punishment and the requirements put on the Penn State
administrators do anything to change the athletic culture in Happy Valley,
or anywhere else? Is there anything in Monday’s action by the NCAA that
goes to this concern, the real heart of the matter? Is there any
indication in the reactions of Penn State students, alumni, or trustees
that indicate they comprehend the most important meaning of this entire
scandal?
.
Unless you have been on a college campus and seen the power of
intercollegiate athletics close up, it is difficult to fully grasp what is
meant by the “Athletic Culture” or the “Football Culture.” It is in fact a
powerful force at times akin to the sweep of a hurricane or the full blast
of a tornado. It is also a force that is set apart from the ordinary
functions of the campus having little relationship to matters outside the
athletic domain.
.
The cult of personality surrounding the celebrity coach is reminiscent of
those mindless mobs devoted to dictators across the globe. It is a world
of slogans and praise chants. The public is familiar with the obvious
examples of the celebrity coach such as Urban Meyer, Bobby Bowden, or Nick
Saban, or those from an earlier age such as Woody Hayes or Lou Holtz. What
is not so well known is the power of the lesser known celebrity coaches at
small and mid-level schools. They have a winning record or offer a promise
to lead an athletic program to the promised land of national rankings. In
their own small world they cast a spell similar to that of the Meyer’s and
Saban’s.
.
What they all have in common is a lack of accountability within the
university, and their immunity from the normal rules of the campus. Where
there is an “Athletic Culture” celebrity coaches and athletic directors
are more powerful that the university president, and more powerful than
anyone else in university administration. If they are questioned they
either ignore the question or they silence the questioner.
.
The power of the celebrity coach is felt not just at the top of the campus
structure, but it moves downward through the faculty and the staff.
Everyone comes to understand that it is not a good idea to raise questions
and issues relating to the athletic program or the celebrity coaches, no
matter how wide or narrow the circle of celebrity might be.
.
Maybe the most telling example of this within the Freeh Report concerns
the janitor who saw Sandusky administering oral sex to a young boy in the
locker room at Penn State. The same day another janitor saw Sandusky
showering with a young boy. The two janitors discussed what they had seen
with one another but told no one because they knew, or at least thought,
“We can’t report this, because we’ll get fired.” They knew they could not
challenge or penetrate the “Athletic Culture.”
.
.
On countless campuses across the country this same atmosphere prevails,
and it is not confined to major transgressions like those perpetrated by
Jerry Sandusky. How many assaults, sexual or otherwise are reported on
campus and never reach public awareness? How many athletes picked up for
DUI or public disorder never get beyond the arresting officer? How many
coaches whose conduct on or off campus leave everything to be desired, are
never called to account for their actions? How much physical abuse can be
visited on an athlete by a coach before it rises to the level of concern?
.
In my forty years on a campus that has moved from a small and highly
successful athletic program at Division II, to a mediocre level at
Division I, I have seen many small and some more serious transgressions
escape punishment or public scrutiny. I have seen faculty members try to
offer some sort of oversight to intercollegiate athletic programs, only to
be shunted aside, and dismissed as someone who is anti-intercollegiate
athletics or a fuzzy headed intellectual softie.
.
Those
In the “Athletic Culture” there is no room for serious oversight,
questions, or criticism of the conduct of the athletic program, at least
until something goes terribly wrong and criminal cases and law suits
follow.
.
Will this change? I doubt it.
.
The reaction by press and public which is more concerned with Penn State’s
won-loss record and the rebuilding of the football program, than any
serious examination of the “Athletic Culture,” offers early evidence that
my pessimism is not simply a product of my cynicism.
.
.
On Sport and Society this is Dick Crepeau reminding you that you don’t
have to be a good sport to be a bad loser.
.
.
Copyright 2012 by Richard C. Crepeau
Other related posts:
- » [net-gold] Sport and Society 7-25-12 Punishment - David P. Dillard
