-
5. Deviance, Corruption, and Scandals in College Sports
- Johns Hopkins University Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
C h a p t e r f i v e Deviance, corruption, and scandals in college sports Revelations about illegal payments, cheating, exploitation of student-athletes, fixing , the crimes of athletes and coaches, and other transgressions in college sports have damaged the reputations of the deviant individuals and universities. Damaged reputations and NCAA penalties may have hurt these people and institutions for a while, but the star athletes and star coaches involved in these scandals usually have gone on with their careers without suffering any permanent blemishes or harm. The big-time universities caught up in these scandals also typically have bounced back from these embarrassments without losing their fan or financial base, except for the lost championship revenue or recruitment opportunities for the year or two they served their NCAA probation. There is a well-established pattern at the highest level of college sport. Teams break the rules to get a competitive advantage, get caught after a while but not very often, pay the penalties for a year or two, then resume competing as if nothing happened. The cycle of cheating may resume as well. This deviance is normal in college sports. According to an analysis by Inside Higher Ed, nearly half (53) of the 120 universities at the top FBS level committed major rule violations between 2001 and 2010.1 The result was fairly consistent with the previous two decades, but the number of institutions committing serious academic violations almost doubled from 8 to 15 between the 1990s and the 2000s.2 Many of the violations concerned improper recruitment practices and excessive financial benefits for recruited or competing athletes. The academic violations included misrepresentation of academic credentials and the submission of papers essentially written by others, including academic support staff in some cases. The list of violators is significant not only because of the number of institutions on it but also because many of the institutions are academically well respected.3 The public seems to be aware of the deviance in college sports, and even selfdescribed sports fans appear somewhat cynical about it. In a national Marist poll 96 The Athletic Trap conducted in March 2012, 56 percent of college football fans and 57 percent of college basketball fans said they believed that it was “a common practice” for college sports programs to break the rules in recruiting and training college athletes.4 The date of the poll is significant because it followed a couple of years with a spate of highly publicized scandals in college sports, including the Ohio State and Penn State scandals. It is not clear how much these scandals dulled the enthusiasm of college sports fans. Deviance in college sports is treated by the press and the NCAA as especially unethical or immoral when the actions are serious and repeated, when the intentions of those responsible are viewed as malevolent, when institutional or academic integrity is substantially undermined, when crimes are committed, or when people are hurt. In these cases, the terms corruption and scandal are often used. Yet even when the NCAA has shut down incorrigible programs with the “death penalty” or applied other severe sanctions, the schools and their reputations have eventually recovered. The Penn State sex abuse scandal seems different from normal deviance in college sports, though, as we discuss later in the chapter. Although deviance in big-time college sports has different forms, all share a common root—the influence of the intercollegiate golden triangle. The IGT offers the possibility of big payoffs in money and prestige. The biggest rewards go to the biggest winners and the most respected brands at the top level of big-time college sports. It is very expensive to win consistently, build a school’s brand, and get these rewards. There are other costs, too, when schools want to win too much or become too protective of their brand and too willing to do whatever it takes to become or remain successful. This can be a path to perdition. Presidents caught in the athletic trap may believe that they have an obligation to facilitate the success of their big-time football or basketball program. This can mean providing enough financial resources, hiring top coaches and athletic directors , making academic exceptions to admit outstanding athletes, or kowtowing to big athletic donors. It can also mean looking the other way when rules are broken or participating in cover-ups to protect the reputation of the athletic program and institution . When presidents and trustees want to win...