Academic Corruption In NCAA Basketball

In a recent Sports Illustrated profile, a so-called "credit fixer" for NCAA athletes told his story. The man, who requested to be referred to as Mr. White, detailed a long career that he had made in compromising the integrity of academics for collegiate athletes. White had dreams of being a division 1 coach, and as a community college teacher, he decided that his in was going to be doing favors for other coaches. The favors that White did involved doing everything possible to keep star players eligible in the eyes of the NCAA. White would travel to various major programs and work with those students in order to help them to earn the credits they needed in the shortest amount of time possible. Unfortunately, this often involved him taking advantage of online tests that many universities had implemented. White would give his students some simple work that they could easily handle, then would take the tests for them and fix the grades. It's the perfect scheme, the students think they have completed the necessary work to catch up, while White easily passes the tests, giving the players eligibility and collecting a major paycheck.

White's story may seem unique, but it is clearly becoming clear that it is not. Allegations for organized academic fraud have been attached to major programs such as the University of North Carolina and Syracuse University, both receiving penalties from the NCAA. As more and more schools are revealed to be involved in academic fraud, it seems to be very likely that these types of practices are more common than originally thought. The competitive nature of college sports creates an environment in which corruption is unavoidable. Division 1 sports are more than often one of the major sources of income that their schools have. Schools are desperate to maintain the eligibility of athletes and to keep their sports programs successful, often times compromising their own integrity to do so.

Gay Athletes In Basketball

In November of 2014, Jason Collins officially announced his retirement from the NBA. Collins was the first openly gay athlete in the four major American sports. When Collins came out in April of 2013, he attracted a media frenzy that is not often seen in basketball. Jason Collins had played in the NBA for more than 10 years and his announcement proved that there were gay athletes playing in professional sports. The only reason that we had never heard of them is that they did not feel comfortable coming out. If  Collins' situation is any indication, the league has seen a major change on that front. Collins was almost unanimously praised for his decision and any doubts about him being able to make a roster were crushed when he signed with the Brooklyn Nets. In fact, some argued that his coming out benefited him by bringing so much attention to the aging veteran big man.

In the aftermath of the Jason Collins announcement, Division 1 basketball has also seen its first openly gay player. Derrick Gordon, who started his career at Western Kentucky before transferring to UMass and now Seton Hall, has shed light on gay athletes in collegiate sports. Gordon reported that he experienced homophobia in his must recent transfer. Gordon's experience indicates that the college game may not be totally ready for openly gay players. Gordon felt that several coaches were not interested in him because of his sexuality, which seems like given the circumstances of college basketball. Not only are the players less mature, but so are the fans in the college atmosphere. This would attract more negative attention as opposed to the attention surrounding Collins in the NBA. Regardless, Gordon believes he has found a good fit in Seton Hall, and his success could influence the future of gay athletes in college basketball.

Reaction To League Of Denial

League of Denial, a PBS documentary detailing the NFL's reaction to its concussion crisis, has create a great amount of controversy across the sports world. In the film, the cases of several former NFL players are examined in order to clearly show a correlation between football and brain injuries. The first player detailed is Mike Webster, a former Steeler's All-Pro who played in the NFL for more than 15 years. Webster died in 2002 after his mental state had deteriorated beyond what any person his age should. His brain was examined by Dr. Bennet Omalu, who expected to discover a brain that showed symptoms of Alzheimer's. Instead, Omalu found a normal looking brain that he could diagnose with chronic traumatic encephalopathy or CTE. The documentary revealed that CTE was the common link between NFL players that suffered major brain injuries and struggled later in their lives.

Despite a variety of public opinions, League of Denial was successful in bringing attention to an issue that the NFL has gone out of its way to ignore. It focuses on how playing in the NFL can have detrimental effects on its players and hinder them for the rest of their lives. The fact that players such as Mike Webster and Junior Seau displayed such similar symptoms within their brain is telling. Brain injuries in football are a serious issue that needs to be addressed. Of the four major sports in America, football is the one that is facing this crisis head on. The NBA, while it is presently preoccupied with a variety of issues, does not have to deal with head on collisions for the most part.

Conflict of Interest: The NBA's Drug Testing Policy

In the decade after the end of the steroid era in baseball, drug testing in that sport has reached a new level of efficiency. In an average year, several players are suspended for testing positive to banned substances which are often times difficult to detect. While performance enhancing drugs have had a major effect on baseball, the same has not been the case for the other three major American sports. While it is not totally clear as to why this is, at least a portion of this can be attributed to the fact that these leagues do not have adequate drug testing.  The NBA seems to be the worst offender of this.

Recently, the director of the World Anti-Doping Agency singled out the NBA as having "gaps" in their testing program. This brings attention to what is an often ignored issue in the NBA, the potential use of PEDs by some of the leagues biggest stars. In the age of drug suspensions, the amount that has been handed out by the NBA is dwarfed by the amount MLB has issued. While this could potentially be due to the fact that NBA players simply do not use PEDs at the rate that baseball players do, there seems to be major flaws in the league's drug testing policy. 

Presently, Human Growth Hormone (HGH) is banned in the NBA, but the league does not test players for it. While, testing may come in the near future, the league does nothing to prevent abuse of perhaps the most prominent PED. Regardless of any difficulty that the league would face getting approval for testing from the player's union, as of right now the leagues owners don't seem to be in a rush to implement it. In theory, targeting the NBA's best players could prove to be a major conflict of interest. For instance, in the scenario that a player like Lebron James were to test positive, the league as a whole would face major ramifications. The profit that one player like James provides is exponential. The NBA would forever lose the marketability of one of their biggest stars. In this context, it is easy to see why drug testing is not the first priority in professional basketball.

Fixing Youth Basketball

The current state of youth basketball is not exactly ideal. In modern youth leagues, the focus has turned from developing the skills of players to being focused on competition and profit. Major AAU programs have been exploiting talented players and leaving them unprepared for when they move on to College and the NBA. There doesn't seem to be a clear solution on the horizon, but there are several simple things that can be done to improve the situation.

To start, basketball camps have to be looked at as a legitimate alternative to competitive leagues. Major camps have disappeared recently due to the rise of AAU teams playing in the summers. While, playing for an AAU team can expose talented players to scouts and coaches that could recruit them , they don't necessarily provide an improvement in the player themselves. In the 1980's and 1990's, basketball camps were the first option for young players. Players such as Christian Laettner, John Stockton, and Jim Jackson are all former NBA players that attribute their skill development to spending their summers at skill camps. The problem for young players now is that there is a distinct lack of skill camps, which forces them to turn to exhausting competition based leagues. This is something that would have to change for the benefit of the sport.

Another major issue that youth basketball faces is the NBA draft. The current age minimum for the draft is 19, which means that a player would only have to take one year in between their high school and NBA careers. This creates a culture in which premier prospects are rushed through their high school and college careers. When youth programs and high school teams realize a prospects talent, they rush to recruit that player. The question becomes does a private high school really want a top ten prospect in their program to develop them, or do they want them to simply promote themselves and win? 

The State of AAU Basketball

Recently, NBA superstar Kobe Bryant made comments criticizing AAU basketball in the United States, going as far as to say that players in Europe are developed much more effectively. Bryant's words were eye-opening to many, but also were met with criticism themselves. Regardless of how his talk is perceived, it brought attention to what is becoming a major issue in youth basketball, the effectiveness of AAU basketball.

Bryant's main point was concerning the way that players are trained in Europe. European youth sports are almost entirely focused on the development of young players. For example, a practice with a team of 13 year-olds might solely involve 2 hours of dribbling drills. It is rare that teams will scrimmage in practice and they play far less games then American youth teams play. The philosophy is that that two hours of dribbling practice will without a doubt improve the skills of a young player. This system stands in a stark contrast to that of the United States.

In American youth sports in general, and specifically in AAU basketball, the leagues are based around the competition of young players. Coaches are very short-sighted, using players in a way that will benefit their team more so than the players themselves. Bryant's point holds some value when you look at the lack of skilled players coming out of the United States. European prospects are without a doubt more skilled when they come to the United States regardless of how much more naturally talented american prospects are. Bryant knows from experience, growing up in Europe as his father's professional career was winding down. For now, don't expect similar criticism of American youth sports to resonate immediately. In the future however, the win-first, money making culture of AAU and other such organizations will take a serious toll on the sport itself.

Needed Reforms In The NCAA

As the conversation about the ethics of the NCAA continues to gain steam, the staying-power of the organizations current model of exploitation and maximum profit seems unstable. After the recent 30 minute special on HBO's Last Week Tonight with John Oliver, the NCAA is perhaps under more pressure to change its way than ever before.

One of the main arguments against giving collegiate athletes fair compensation is the supposed complexity of what a salary system might look like. How would teams recruit players if salaries were involved, how would smaller schools survive, and would every player get compensation are all questions that are asked when analyzing a plan to pay players.

While in reality, these questions may be quite easy to answer in a salary-based payment plan, the first step that the NCAA should take is shortening its ridiculous rulebook of restrictions. Currently, the NCAA has utter and complete control of its athletes. This relationship is unique to the NCAA in the entirety of the United State's capitalistic economy. Athletes are forced to comply with the NCAA's extensive list of overbearing rules or else they face harsh penalties. Well, the most convenient set of rules for both the NCAA and the Universities which operate under it are those that prevent athletes from profiting off of their own marketability. In other words, there are strict NCAA rules that are meant to keep athletes from making money off of merchandise sales, autographs, or even the sale of their own property. NCAA football players such as Terrelle Pryor and Johnny Manziel have both come under fire for profiting off of jersey sales and autograph signings respectively. Each player, while generating millions of dollars for their schools, was kept from making any type ofcompensation.

Image taken from www.goducks.coom

The most simple first-step that the NCAA should take is allowing players to sell their own name. The name that currently the NCAA takes possession of when a player agrees to attend a four-year university. This would take care of most of the problems that are created by a lack of compensation with a free market approach. Players that are truly generating millions of dollars of revenue for their schools will be able to benefit from their own jersey sales and charge for their own autograph.