Daily w Trojan
Volume LXVIII, No. 121
University of Southern California
Los Angeles, California
Monday, May 3, 1976
Athletes in the classroom = is
By Don Nakamoto
A Los Angeles high school administrator told the following story:
“We hud this great football player, very highly recruited. working in our office as a general office and service worker. We first used him in filing but he had so much trouble with his alphabet that we finally had him doing simple odd jobs.”
The athlete went on to play for a major Southwest college football power for the next four years. How the athlete ever made it through four years of college, or was even admitted to college on a scholarship remains a mystery to the administrator. *
The interest in the academic prowess of college athletes has flourished ever since the movies began depicting the campus athlete-hero as a muscle-bound hillbilly. Subsequent real-life stories of scandals involving grade-fixing, altering of entrance exams and pampering by school officials have reinforced that aura of suspicion.
At the university, the story of academics and the athletic department, at least on the superficial level, seems to have two faces.
On the one hand, the university holds 56 national athletic titles, leading to a reputation that the university’s athletes are using college as a step to professional athletics rather than as an educational tool. The Sport ingNews says the university leads the nation in pampering its athletes.
On the other hand, many Trojans have received academic honors. Most notably former quarterback Pat Haden, who was selected as a Rhodes scholar. But other athletes do well academically. For example, the 1976 national championship swim team compiled an overall grade-point average of 3.3, led by a former high school valedictorian. all-American Joe Bottom.
What is the true role of academics in USC athletics? How successful is the academic program? Are coaches really concerned about the academic success of their athletes or only their athletic eligibility? And do illegal activities such as preferential treatment, grade-fixing and bribes take place?
Richard Perry, who was appointed athletic director in November, 1975, elaborated on the mystique surrounding academics and athletes, and also his basic policy towards education in the athletic department.
“I think that it is very easy to put athletes into a generic capsule and say that all athletes are only interested in athletics, or that coaches are only trying to keep their athletes eligible. It’s very dangerous to make such assumptions,” Perry said.
“The fundamental reason for going to college is to get an education. The athlete is a student, then an athlete, in that order,” he said.
E. John Larsen, the faculty adviser for the athletes for the past eight years, said, “I think that almost all of our coaches stress the fact that academics is important and that athletics is secondary.”
Are coaches and administrators really stressing that such things as winning and Rose Bowls are secondary to an education?
Steve Hirsch, who leads the disqualification and probation departments and is also a counselor for many of the athletes, is optimistic about the abilities and attitudes of the present administration.
“I think that Dr. Perry will do a good job, particularly since he came out ofthe faculty. But I doubt if his program will differ very much from the past administration—there just aren’t that many things that can be done differently, and the requirements are still the same,” said Hirsch.
Unfortunately, it is almost impossible to gauge the true success of the USC academic programs of either the past or the present administration.
The Athletic Department does not keep statistics on the grade-point averages of its athletes or the number of athletes who have obtained their degrees. Occasionally, some coaches make independent studies of their team's academic success. The university does, however, keep records of the athletes who have made the professional ranks and the amount of money they are making.
While Perry nas always had an outstanding reputation as an academic-conscious administrator, the person who has impressed many people with his enthusiasm with academics has been the new head football coach, John Robinson.
“Few people know that at the first meeting between Coach Robinson and his players, he discussed mainly academics instead of football,” Larsen said.
Robinson has already introduced innovations into the football team's academic program, such as each assistant coach being responsible for the academic success of his players.
education their goal ?
Other coaches, such as baseball Coach Rod Dedeaux and swim Coach Peter Daland, were commended by athletes for stressing academics before athletics.
This affirmative approach to academics can be compared with the essentially passive policy of the John McKay era.
“I can’t remember Coach McKay ever really stressing education, but he didn’t neglect it,” said Ray Rodriguez, a former linebacker who played under McKay for two years. “I think he had the attitude that we were both old enough and responsible enough to realize that education was valuable.”
“From his viewpoint as coach, football and winning were his main interests, but he never said that football and winning were the only important things. In fact, I can remember him saying things like ‘It’s dumb to waste your education’ or ‘Education is important.’ ”
Mike Williams, a former sprinter on the track team and also a former academic adviser for many ofthe athletes, said that all ofthe coaches want their athletes to do well in the classroom. Unfortunately, in a choice between winning and academics, academics is a distant second choice for some.
“Many athletes.. .come to a major university such as USC to showcase for the pros. Some coaches capitalize on such attitudes by stressing how they can make him into a better potential pro. Education for these athletes is virtually ignored.” said Williams, who conducted a study on black athletes on the major college level.
Williams said that when these athletes do not make it in
the pros, they thinkthattheir education has been wasted.
“These athletes return home with no type of skill and nothing to contribute to their community. All the potential to learn was never tapped through four years of college,” he said.
“Everyone seems to be sincere about their education. I think that they realize that only a small percentage actually make it to the pros,” said Mark Carpenter, a first baseman.
Mario Celotto, a linebacker on the football team, esti-
mated that about half of the football players were interested in academics. Other faculty members and football players concurred with his estimate.
Is it really the coaches’ responsibility to emphasize academics to athtetes who are indifferent towards education?
“Many people would say that it's the professor’s responsibility to motivate the athlete to study,” Williams said. “But actually, when an athlete comes to this school, many times he will adopt the coach as the authority or father figure. The coach has the power to motivate the athlete to do well in academics.
“A coach can motivate a kid to put out 13(y7r on the field, get up at four in the morning to run or lift weights for hours. Yet that same coach cannot use his influence and same subtle pressures to make the athlete read a book or put out more than 30*7r in the classroom.” said Williams.
Perry and Larsen both supported the idea that coaches care about the academic welfare of all of their athletes, although Larsen did hint that some ofthe coaches did not stress academics as much as others.He did not identify those coaches.
“If each member of our faculty had as much interest in each individual student as our coaches do in ourathletes, we would have an incredible academic atmosphere.” Perry said.
An apparent by-product of this priority system was the use of questionable tactics to keep athletes eligible to participate.
“Many of the athletes think that grade manipulating or anything else done to keep them eligible helps them,” Williams said. “In the short run. it probably does help their athletic careers. But. in the long run, when they are back in the real world with their poor academic records, they realize their mistake.”
Williams said that the key to changing or influencing grades was the faculty. He said that during his years as an athlete, from 1971 to 1975. he was aware of a number of cases where certain members ofthe Athletic Department had encouraged faculty, members to change grades or “give second chances” to keep athletes eligible.
Perry said that he was not aware of the fact that any such incidents occurred. He said the following about illegal incidents in relation to his coaching staff: “I’m not saying that all our coaches wear white hats or that those things didn't happen in the past or aren’t possibly happening now, but I do believe that our coaches are concerned about the welfare of our athletes.”
Williams, who is currently a student at the USC Law Center, said that he was not aware of any cases where transcripts had been altered or grades had been directly fixed on any academic records.
“To manipulate grades, you have to go through regular university channels. It’s almost impossible to directly alter transcripts.” he said. “You either get to the faculty or use the retroactive system.”
The retroactive system is designed to allow students to redeem poor grades that resulted from circumstances that they could not control.
“The retroactive system is common for all students, including athletes,” said Bob Smith, the head of the Petitions Department. Smith said that teachers were the link link to influence if a student needed a break in grading But the Student Academic Standards committee has
(continued on page 4)