← Previous Post: | Next Post:


“[H]e did not offer any specific thoughts about Duncan’s call Wednesday for schools not on track to graduate at least half of their basketball players to be barred from competing in the NCAA men’s and women’s basketball tournaments.”

Don’t focus on Arne Duncan’s bold ideas for turning sports whorehouses like Syracuse and San Diego State into shining universities on a hill. Focus on the responses of the NCAA.

I’m not going to sully my screen with the actual content of the NCAA’s response to this latest idea. I’m not even going to type the name of the head of the NCAA. There are (to paraphrase Martha’s George) limits. A blog can put up with only so much without it descends a rung or two on the old evolutionary ladder…

But I invite you to go here and read this man’s words for yourself.

Margaret Soltan, March 18, 2011 2:35AM
Posted in: sport

Trackback URL for this post:

8 Responses to ““[H]e did not offer any specific thoughts about Duncan’s call Wednesday for schools not on track to graduate at least half of their basketball players to be barred from competing in the NCAA men’s and women’s basketball tournaments.””

  1. Bernard Carroll Says:

    The NCAA President’s words (out of deference to UD’s sensibility I refrain from saying his name) give new meaning to the term mealy mouthed. I was reminded of the oversight body for continuing medical education (ACCME) and its toothless response to corrupt impresarios.

  2. margaret soltan Says:

    Thank you, Bernard, for keeping his name off my blog. When he was a corporate-board-riding university president, I recorded his name. But enough is enough.

  3. Daniel S. Goldberg Says:

    Excellent. I was smiling to myself this morning in thinking about UD’s annual installment regarding male menses. I understand you are traveling, UD, but please do continue if you can.

  4. Bill Gleason Says:

    Why so hard on He Whose Name Will Not Be Mentioned? Just about every president of a so-called big time NCAA program deserves blame in this matter.

    This will only stop when/if these gutless presidents put in a Judge Landis type to do what they are too cowardly to do themselves.

    I do understand UD’s total disgust for HWNWNBM as his performance at his previous place of employment makes this development unsurprising.

  5. AYY Says:

    Actually I’m bothered by Duncan’s statement. A governmental official shouldn’t be telling the NCAA who should and should not be in their tournaments. Besides, graduation rates don’t tell us much about whether the athlete should be in school or whether he is being educated by the school, and people don’t graduate for any of a number of reasons, some of which are no fault of the school. There has to be a better indicator that graduation rates.

  6. GTWMA Says:

    AYY, the NCAA, as a tax exempt organization, receives a huge benefit from that status, which requires them to act in ways that create community, not private, benefit.

    Furthermore, the universities that are member organizations of the NCAA are also often tax exempt organizations, as well as receive billions of dollars supporting their institutions through federal programs (75% of student aid comes through federal dollars, for example).

    The idea that government shouldn’t be speaking out and making sure these organizations toe the line is loony.

    Graduate rates are by no means perfect, but you start somewhere and then you work to improve. And even imperfect measures convey information. When you see a team graduate 8 percent of its players, you know something’s wrong. Using an imperfect measure can help motivate the institutions to come to the table and work toward a better measure.

  7. AYY Says:

    Fiddlesticks. Tax exempt status is a function of what’s in the internal revenue code. All the NCAA or its members need to do is to comply with the requirements of the code, not with the philosophical views of any particular government official.
    If the member organizations receive billions of dollars through federal programs they must comply with the requirements of those programs.
    Government wasn’t speaking out. Government is our elected representatives, not some political appointee. If government wants to speak out it can easily do so by passing a law.
    As for “something” being wrong with an 8 per cent graduation rate, that’s not an answer. If you can’t identify that the something is within the proper scope of Duncan’s authority, then you havent’ shown that he should be speaking out.

  8. GTWMA Says:

    Must have missed the day when the executive branch was written out of the government. Sorry.

Comment on this Entry

Latest UD posts at IHE