I can't help but to think that a major paradigm shift is in its infancy...
In a period of just over a month, we've seen crippling sanctions against, historically, one of the most prestigious football programs in the country, an investigation that could - at its worst - result in vacating two of the last eight NCAA tourney championships, and a consensus top-100 recruit's basketball career is likely over.
I'm not so naive to think that what schools and athletes are trying to pull today is substantially different than what they were trying to pull 10 years ago. But is it naive to think that 10 years ago, Penn State would have received a slap on the wrist, investigators at UNC would have simply looked the other way, and Tony Farmer would have received a suspended sentence for kidnapping, felonious assault, robbery, and intimidating a victim?
Understanding that newspaper editors don't speak for the entire student body, recall the attitude of the Marquette Tribune editorial last year on the basketball team. While it may have been a minority view, it is a minority view that not only exists on just about every collegiate campus nationwide, but a minority that is also growing.
Are people finally getting fed up with the entitlement that society has been giving to student-athletes and collegiate football/basketball powerhouses? Or is it a coincidence that three major instances of "cracking down" on these entities & individuals over the past 10-20 years just happened to occur weeks apart from each other?
Not to superbar this...but as to the Tribune article and the growing minority views on campuses, I think it stems a lot from the "99%" style of thinking. That is to say, a lot of those people are angry because others are receiving entitlements they do not have access to. Never mind that they don't bring in millions of dollars for the school (both in actual revenue and free advertising) or that they rang up $100K in student loan debt to get a degree in finger painting, other people are getting things they want and that's not "fair".
As to the other issues, your answer is the internet. 10-20 years ago you could keep things a lot quieter than you can today. Now everyone has a way for their voice to be heard, so when smoke starts accumulating, there are guys like Deadspin, TMZ, etc. gathering around with gasoline and an audience hoping to get lucky and start a big fire.
Quote from: Bocephys on August 22, 2012, 10:29:13 AM
Not to superbar this...but as to the Tribune article and the growing minority views on campuses, I think it stems a lot from the "99%" style of thinking. That is to say, a lot of those people are angry because others are receiving entitlements they do not have access to. Never mind that they don't bring in millions of dollars for the school (both in actual revenue and free advertising) or that they rang up $100K in student loan debt to get a degree in finger painting, other people are getting things they want and that's not "fair".
On one hand, I agree with you on the silliness with arguing that it's not "fair."
On the other, I can understand the frustration of an individual student thinking that they are being represented by a bunch of people who don't have to pay for school because they play basketball well. Many of whom might not be able to get enrolled in the first place if they didn't play the sport. And of course they get living and study arrangements that the regular student-body doesn't get....which isolates them even more.
Honestly, when you think about it, it is a very odd allocation of resources.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 22, 2012, 10:39:51 AM
On one hand, I agree with you on the silliness with arguing that it's not "fair."
On the other, I can understand the frustration of an individual student thinking that they are being represented by a bunch of people who don't have to pay for school because they play basketball well. Many of whom might not be able to get enrolled in the first place if they didn't play the sport. And of course they get living and study arrangements that the regular student-body doesn't get....which isolates them even more.
Honestly, when you think about it, it is a very odd allocation of resources.
Allocating resources to areas that are (directly and indirectly) revenue sources doesn't seem odd to me.
Well, I mean the whole aspect that athletics is a major revenue source for an institution of higher education.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 22, 2012, 11:27:19 AM
Well, I mean the whole aspect that athletics is a major revenue source for an institution of higher education.
Valid point, but look at schools like an MIT or Harvard who obviously don't have a major athletics presence. You could argue that the reason they don't see that kind of uproar is because they have already segregated themselves from people with different socioeconomic backgrounds. So the real issue is that people think more highly of themselves than they think of the athletes for whatever reason, but are upset no one is bending over backwards to make them happy, and that angers them. Kids at Harvard or MIT know that basically everyone they encounter is operating at a similar level, but also came from a similar background, so there is less opportunity for elitism if everyone is "elite".