For this Civic Issues Blog, I have chosen to focus on the rhetoric of the term “student-athlete.” As an often memed term, especially on sites like Twitter, the idea of a student-athlete is often boiled down to one certain stereotype. I think when society pictures a student-athlete, they see an extremely well-rounded individual, who is athletic as well as academically capable; and perhaps, a person who has it all. A person who is on top of their game at all times. A person who claims that “the grind never stops.” There are about 400,000 student-athletes who participated in athletic games this past year. For many collegiate athletes, the title defines them in every aspect of their life. Whether it be their athletic life, academic life, or social life, the term follows them everywhere. As someone who is not a student-athlete, I thought it would be interesting to do research on what the life of a student-athlete really entails.

It is a running joke among college campuses that much of a regular student’s tuition goes towards the elaborate backpacks and training gear the athletes receive and wear around campus. I must say, the jackets they receive at Penn State are really nice, but I am 100% aware that my tuition does not pay for their clothing. Still, it is fun to gawk at the nice gear they receive. I know that the athletes put countless hours of work into their sport, and they are among the best in their class. Thus, they probably deserve those really nice Winter jackets. I have friends from high school who chose to continue their prospective sports into college, and some even at the division one level. I have noticed that they also receive gear from their athletic department, but I often wonder how they balance it all, rather than the type of gear they are getting. I know college life is hard enough for a NARP like myself, so I wonder how they do it all. (FYI: The term that the athletes, or at least the people I know, often use to refer to regular students like myself is a “NARP”, or “Non-athletic regular person.”)

The truth?

The struggle is real for student-athletes. According to one student at Loyola Marymount University, a student-athlete’s life is consumed by school and sports. They are required to meet a certain GPA requirement to maintain eligibility, and if they fall below it they must attend study hall on top of their regular sports practices and study hours. In addition to this, most student-athletes can have little to no social life. Most of their time is consumed by classes, homework, practices and games.

Another scary truth?

Only one in twenty-five student-athletes will go pro. And even if they do, there is no guarantee that the athlete will attain fame or be successful as a professional athlete. A striking statistic reports that 60% of student-athletes report identifying more with the term “athlete” rather than “student.” This is unfortunate due to the fact that a lot of the current student-athletes will never go pro, and therefore be behind their NARP peers in terms of job opportunities, education and experience in the work-field. A lot of coaches also do not follow the twenty hour per week practice limit, taking precious time away from their athlete’s studies, especially those who may be struggling in their academics.

The bottom line: student-athletes are really stressed out

Student-athletes report being more stressed than their non-athlete peers, and in most cases, rightfully so. They often feel high-stress levels in regards to schoolwork, extracurricular activities, practices, games, and sleep. Some student-athletes often feel other outside pressures, including needing to get a part-time job in order to pay for the things their athletic scholarship may not cover.

Personally, I have a lot of respect for the student-athletes. I played sports all throughout high school, and often felt stressed out at that level, so I cannot imagine what it must be like for them. I can only hope that it gets better for these athletes as time goes by, and that they are able to be successful in whatever their path may be.

The Struggle Is Real: How Being a Student-Athlete Is More Than Just Fun and Games

https://www.bestcollegesonline.com/blog/14-surprising-facts-about-being-a-college-athlete/

For this Civic Issues Blog, I have chosen to focus on how college sports reflect a broader cultural attitude towards sports in the US. As many of you know, America is a sports-centered culture. No other country has a day dedicated to salsa and a four hour football game with an elaborate halftime show, but the US does. The sports industry in the United States generated $69 billion in 2012, which is 50% larger than Europe, Africa and the Middle East combined. The entire global industry was worth $141 billion, and the US amounted half of that.

As Americans, we often plan our whole week around sports. Whether that be a kid’s soccer game or your favorite professional team, most Americans find that sports play some kind of a role in their daily lives. Sports are played year round in the United States, and it seems as though there is a sport out there for everyone. Infrastructure of sports fields and courts can also be seen throughout all communities in the US, big or small.

It can be argued that the US excels in athletics. This can be seen throughout the Olympic Games in history, and even within the education system. The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), is the governing body of college athletics in the United States. As I have discussed previously, collegiate basketball and football enterprises are gold-mines. The fifteen largest stadiums in the US are primarily football stadiums, and about half of that number have a capacity of over 100,000. To put this in perspective, Europe has no stadiums that exceed 100,000 in capacity, professional or not.

That’s how crazy we are about sports.

However, in some cultures, sports are seen as a distraction to academics, and athletes are often labeled as “dumb.” Although some Americans believe this to be true also, athletics can actually be beneficial to an athlete’s development, both academic and personal. In fact, the United States is known for its ability to strategically develop athletes from the ages 18 to 22 in collegiate athletics. This poses the athletes to become some of the best, most well-rounded individuals on the world stage. In the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia, there were 110 former NCAA athletes and 21 current athletes across 10 sports and 13 countries.

Consequently, with the broad college sports culture in the American way of life, mass amounts of alcohol consumption prior to sports games has become a staple of the American college student’s “experiences.” This act, as I’m sure we are all aware, is called tailgating. Some say tailgating is pointless, and a waste of alcohol and good food. Others argue that it is a form of community building. What we do know, is that tailgating is an important part of the social scene at many universities. This is especially true for schools with competitive football teams. For many students, it is all about the experience, and factors like this can ultimately influence a student’s decision to attend the school.

The college sports culture of tailgating has even infiltrated the professional sports world, mainly the NFL. Die-hard fans will spend all day tailgating, grilling and chatting in order to hype themselves up for their favorite team’s big game.

Let’s think about that. Americans devote an entire day to drinking and eating in order to prepare for a sports game.I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with this culture. I am a die-hard Philadelphia Eagles fan myself, and I know Philly fans love to tailgate. I do think, however, it is important to recognize our values and culture and how we got to where we are today.

http://www.sportingnews.com/us/other-sports/news/how-the-us-became-a-sporting-culture/1vgv4kxl2459w1l6dvrbhev2er

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/10/04/tailgating-study-culture-history/1608741/

For my third Civic Issues Blog, I have chosen to focus on the often discussed and disputed issue of college athletes receiving compensation or stipend in addition to scholarships. While athletic scholarships can take the large burden of paying for college off of the shoulders of the student, it is often argued that scholarships do not put food on the table. Many student-athletes come from low-income and middle-income families who rely on scholarships to put their children through college and ensure an education.

Another argument comes from the idea that college athletics are almost like a full-time job. Between the weight room, classes, film studies and practices, these students spend majority of their time (especially during the season) living, breathing, sleeping and thinking about their sport. In addition to the hectic life their athletic schedule poses, some students have to work jobs late at night just to have a little extra spending money for things not covered by the university. For example, extra money to see a movie or buy clothing not affiliated with the university.

The point is that a college scholarship does not equal money in the pocket (Huffington Post).

Even with any kind of scholarship, most college athletes are considered what we call broke. The top NCAA executives make close to $1 million a year, and the average coach makes around $100,000 a year; and what do the athletes make? Nothing. The coaches will receive bonuses for their teams making the playoffs, winning championships and breaking school records. What will the athletes receive? Nothing. The athletes are what ultimately bring in the money. So shouldn’t they be the ones receiving the compensation?

Unfortunately it is just not the case.

The NCAA also makes an absurd amount of money off of college athletics. Recently, the NCAA and CBS signed a $10.8 billion television agreement over ten years.

The NCAA is considered a non-profit organization. Let that sink in.

The athletic department also makes a sizable profit off of the achievements of their athletic teams. The department might be mentioned once after a championship run, but the team itself will be in the paper for the entire year.

The team will receive nothing in compensation.

The flip side, of course, is that not all teams make the same amount of profit, so it would be hard to pay each athlete the same. While I understand that, the money that the university makes from television agreements and licensing deals could be easily allocated towards their athletes.

Another argument is that these athletes are worth millions, so start paying them like it (Forbes). Universities expect a certain amount of professionalism from their athletes, however, they do not pay them like professional athletes. For example, Stanford’s star tailback and 2017 Heisman Trophy runner-up Bryce Love missed the Pac-12 media day in order to go to the extra classes he signed up for. Love, a human biology major, decided to take extra classes to graduate early. His absence at the pro-day was frowned upon, and he was criticized for his lack of professionalism as a star athlete. But he is, in fact, a student-athlete, and a prestigious university like Stanford should be applauding his efforts to go to class.

The truth is, athletes like Bryce Love bring in millions to their universities.

And coaches like Nick Saban are great, but the reason he gets paid millions of dollars is because of his ability to recruit athletes to play football at his university for almost free (Forbes).

Hopefully in the years to come there will be a solution to come out of all this debate. But until then, we can only hope that these student-athletes are able to juggle it all.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/artcarden/2018/07/26/college-athletes-are-worth-millions-they-should-be-paid-like-it/#504a09a2452e

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/tyson-hartnett/college-athletes-should-be-paid_b_4133847.html

For my Civic Issues Blog this week, I have chosen to focus on the amount of money college sports generate for their university, which sport generates the most money, and how the money is used by the university. As I stated in my previous blog post, the topic of my paradigm shift paper was football as a big business. In that paper I focused a portion of it on the big business of college football and how it works. I will be using aspects of that paper, seeing as though football on college campuses is often the most recognizable thing associated with a university. To start off, I would like to provide the statistics for our very own university. As stated by Business Insider in 2016, Penn State generated a three year average of $66 million in football revenue. After football was men’s basketball, which generated an average $10.7 million over three years. Coming in third was women’s basketball, which had a much smaller average of $0.9 million over three years. On a list with twenty-four other schools, Penn State came in tenth place. All of the schools on the list had football as the top revenue generator among the sports teams on their campus. Football is easily the most easily recognized sports when it comes to collegiate athletics. For example, In 2016 at the University of Texas, which was the school that generated the most money from athletics ($182 million), 70% of that revenue comes from football. The gap between football and the other sports is absolutely astonishing. The average school generates $31.9 million in football revenue each year, while the next 35 sports generate $31.7 million combined. In 2018, Texas A&M dethroned Texas for the top spot of revenue generators. But the question is, where does the money go?In some cases, the revenue goes towards building better facilities. For example, the Clemson Tigers recently opened a brand-new $55 million facility exclusively for their football players. Of course, their team did win the National Championship twice in the past three years, but this is often where the issue arises.

Should collegiate football players be receiving more perks and benefits because their sport generates the most public interest and the most revenue? Should revenue be allocated to other sport facilities and other student athletes? Many argue that just because football players generate the most amount of money, it does not mean that they should be treated any differently than the other student athletes on campus. However, others argue the exact opposite. Others just have a general curiosity about revenue in college athletics: Where does all the money go?

In the case of the University of Michigan, many of the money profited from football goes to support other student athletes. To be exact, roughly 800 athletes. A lot of the money does go to about two dozen other sports teams. Although that revenue is not being used to build these teams $55 million facilities, some of the money is allocated towards these other teams. A lot of the debate surrounding revenue comes about with the general public awareness of college football. It is the most recognizable, most watched, and most sought after in terms of tickets. The average college football ticket is often altered to meet the public interest in the matchup, making college football a business tactic for many universities. People may argue that universities should not treat their athletes and their athletics as a business, seeing as though the main focus of these universities should be academics. The Issue will always be there when it comes to college football, and it will only get worse as more generations attend college and the public interest increases with the technology.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmith/2018/09/11/college-footballs-most-valuable-teams/#22c95e036c64

https://www.businessinsider.com/college-sports-football-revenue-2017-10

https://smartycents.com/articles/college-football-revenue/

https://www.businessinsider.com/photos-clemsons-football-facility-2017-10

https://www.businessinsider.com/schools-most-revenue-college-sports-2016-10

For my Civic Issues Blog, I have chosen to focus on college sports on campus. This topic sparked my interest due to the topic of my paradigm shift paper, which was football as a big business. I think that this topic will be interesting to analyze and become more informed about.

Often times, a university is associated heavily with its athletic programs rather than its academic offerings, with the exceptions to this association obviously being Ivy League schools and the so-called “baby ivies”. I know personally when I was looking at colleges, I wanted a school that was considered a big “football school.” Thus, I applied to schools down south, which are notorious for being football powerhouses, but not always at the top of the list for academics. I ultimately chose a school that has a nice balance of both, hence why I am writing this blog. The issue comes into play when universities are associated with their athletics, and how this affects current students and prospective applicants. There are definitely benefits and consequences with this association. For example, after the Villanova men’s basketball team won the National Championship in 2016, the number of applicants increased by 22 percent from the previous year. The reason behind this? Exposure (US News).When a university wins a National Championship, especially one that is heavily televised, interest from the general public increases. In a one month period, Villanova received more than 50,000 media mentions (US News). This is especially eye-opening to prospective students. It’s easy for a high-school student to say, “wow they just won a national championship, I want to go there”, and franky, many do. This phenomenon is called “the Flutie effect”. In a 1984 game against the University of Miami, Boston College quarterback Doug Flutie threw a hail mary pass that was miraculously caught for a game-winning touchdown. The even better catch? The number of applicants to Boston College increased 30 percent in two years (Forbes).

However, this effect can have disadvantages. The school often has to lower its tuition by 3.8 percent, and increase the quality of its education by hiring professors that are paid 5 percent more than their peers in their field. The reasoning behind this comes from the findings that students with higher SAT scores preferred a university with better academic quality, so the university must raise its expectations for their applicants. The students with lower SAT scores preferred athletic power-houses over academic ones, meaning that the intelligence of the incoming class of applicants could be less than what the university is used to (Forbes).

The success in athletics is almost like a kind of brand representation for these universities. Success generates general public awareness, which is extremely beneficial in the sports-heavy American culture. However, it is not entirely correct to say that colleges invest money into athletic programs for the rise in applicants. Enter Chung argues that it is probably the tertiary reason (Forbes). A primary reason to invest money in athletics would be to boost diversity and morale, two of the NCAA’s core missions. Another reason would be that athletics bring in an enormous amount of money for universities. It is estimated that sporting events generated $2 billion in revenue and $1 billion in profit in 2010.

But how far is too far when it comes to brand representation? The universities need to have a healthy balance of academics and athletics. Although athletic achievements are worthy of public praise, it is really the academics that the college is centered around.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/hbsworkingknowledge/2013/04/29/the-flutie-effect-how-athletic-success-boosts-college-applications/#625428996e96

https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2017-03-14/college-basketball-championship-bonus-more-applications

Welcome to Sites At Penn State. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!