Taking “Busted Brackets” to a Whole ‘Nother Level

As a sports fan, March is one of the most exciting and frenetic times of the year!  With March Madness winding down though, I must admit that my brackets were busted LONG before the Final Four Teams were established (although one of my teams is still in the running, and I have them listed to win the whole shebang).  Still, I will venture to guess that the majority of basketball fans are just like me in looking at their brackets and longing for what woulda, coulda and shoulda been.

You see, with the average college basketball fan’s lack of strategy in creating a winning bracket, coupled with those few Cinderella Party Crashers who come out of nowhere and steamroll top-seeded teams, it always seems next to impossible to ever win that coveted office jackpot, right?  But what if I told you that while I am sympathetic to your bracket plight, I think that another potential bracket busting mechanism should be in place come NCAA Tournament time next year?  Please, don’t throw me the side-eye until you’ve heard me out.

There is currently a proposal in the works designed by Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, to prohibit men’s college basketball teams from engaging in postseason play if they fail to graduate at least 40% of their players.  And just like some of you (I can actually hear your murmurs and complaints), this idea certainly did not go over smoothly with the NCAA and the hundreds of coaches and staff currently in the throws of March Madness, and for obvious reasons.  Think about it if you will; if this proposal were to be accepted this year, nearly a dozen men’s teams would be ineligible to play in the NCAA tournament, including the recently defeated No. 1 seed Kentucky powerhouse that I am sure everyone (me included) had in their bracket line-up to go to the big show, which only graduates 31% of its players.  Other tournament participants that would be barred based on graduation rates if this proposal were enacted this year would’ve included:

Maryland = 8%

California = 20%

Arkansas-Pine Bluff = 29%

Washington = 29%

Tennessee = 30%

Baylor = 36%

Missouri = 36%

New Mexico State = 36%

Clemson = 37%

Georgia Tech = 38%

Louisville =38%

These findings are based on a Diversity and Ethics in Sports study out of the University of Central Florida. 

Of the remaining tournament contenders however, the Duke Blue Devils fair the best, graduating 92% of the men in their basketball program.  And because of their rate, and the majority of men’s programs that are above the proposed minimum graduating rate, Arne Duncan remains optimistic that it is a good standard by which to assess colleges and universities.

“Frankly, that’s a low bar, and not many teams would be ineligible,” Duncan, who played college basketball at Harvard, said. “Over time, we should set a higher bar. But it’s a minimum, a bright line, which every program should meet to vie for postseason honors.”

The minimum rate was not the only focus of Duncan’s concern though.  He was quick to point out the troubling disparities between graduation rates for black and white basketball players who attended these colleges and universities.  The annual Diversity and Ethics in Sports study found that 45 teams graduated 70 percent or more of their white players, but only 20 teams graduated at least 70 percent of their black players. The two teams with the most deplorable graduating rates – Maryland and California, graduated none of their black players who started school from 1999 through 2002 (EPIC FAIL). 

I know that as fans we tend not to focus too heavily on players’ academic accomplishments in comparison to their athletic prowess on the court, but to ignore these staggering numbers is like telling these young men that it is acceptable to be used physically to generate millions of dollars in proceeds for their schools and athletic programs, while allowing their own education to become and remain an afterthought.

Now before I’m accused of aiming all the blame at colleges and the NCAA, let me point out that NCAA spokesman Bob Williams says that the NCAA sports governing body does share Duncan’s concern about low graduation rates of some tournament teams.  Because of this concern, they have for the past six years, used a formula called the Academic Progress Rate that measures factors such as athletes’ academic eligibility, progress toward graduation and staying in school. According to Williams, a school faces sanctions and even scholarship losses if it fails to achieve a certain score for two consecutive years.

Is that truly enough though?  I will be the first to admit that I’ve known more than a few collegiate athletes who probably would not have gotten into school, had they not had some sort of athletic ability and been awarded a scholarship for said talent.  But to commit several years of athletic service to a program, while a school allows an athlete to do the bar minimum (in class) to stay eligible in the first place is simply beyond my comprehension.  No, I am not saying that we should deny a young man who could be an asset to a university’s athletic program the opportunity to attend college simply because he is not academically prepared for secondary education.  What I AM saying however is that there ought to be some reciprocity in the relationship; a little more give and less take. 

Of those scholarship athletes that I knew both before and during college, I can recall in almost all of their cases, the stories of how various coaches had come to visit their homes to sell the glitz, glamour and recognition associated with being a star athlete without once committing to getting any of these guys prepared to walk down the aisles in a cap and gown in four years (And as it stands now, three of them have degrees, and only one has made it into “the league”).

I mean really, If a young man is going to commit several years of eligibility to growing and enhancing a team, there has to be some better preparation in getting him educated with the understanding that a college degree is an invaluable asset to have as he continues his life, be it as a potential NBA prospect later in life, or outside of the realm of sports altogether.

 Now don’t get me wrong, I am not naïve enough to believe that the NCAA or colleges and universities around this country could ever strongly encourage all of their athletes to not only graduate from college, but to spend their entire four (or more) years careers there in the first place.  Especially not when they have the John Wall’s of the world playing for them with talent in spades, and so many people buzzing about how easily entering the draft after freshman year would be, thereby making them overnight NBA sensations.  What I do believe however, is that a 40% graduation rate is not too much to ask of schools that use these young men to enhance their own enrollment, recruitment and overall collegiate illustriousness.

Like I said before, I am all about this proposal coming to fruition, although the likelihood that it actually would is slim.  By law, the federal government cannot mandate a minimum graduation rate of collegiate athletes.  That remains a decision of the NCAA; a decision that I am sure will remain as is. Personally however, I think that it is high time that athletes are encouraged to be more than simply bigger, stronger and faster.  We need to strive for these kids to be astute, cultured and scholarly as well.   That is truly how one creates a well rounded student-athlete. 

But hey, I suppose until we find more coaches who care as much about winning on the court as off (obliterating side-eye to the Terrapins coaching staff) or until the parents/potential recruits learn to leverage their skills and talents to truly benefit themselves both athletically and academically, you all won’t have to worry about the graduation factor jacking-up your brackets any time soon!