Should Athletes Major In Sports?

[GP1]

Article

I think this is a well reasoned article. Why should some Athlete-Students have to pretend about their reasoning for being in college?

The point I think this author does not touch on, as probably the readership of the Chronicle of Higher Education already understands, is the discussion of what a science is? A science is a body of knowledge about a particular issue. Engineering is a science. Electrical Engineer is a discipline within Engineering so it becomes a part of the Engineering College where they study those sciences and understand that body of knowledge. Theology is also a science, or body of knowledge, about religion. It may not use many calculators, but a science none the less.

Why couldn't football or basketball be a science? Both have probably millions of hours of their sport recorded for review and study. When someone writes a dissertation, the main purpose of that document is to provide an understanding of something new in that science. Does anyone think a person like Paul Brown didn't introduce ideas and concepts that changed an existing body of knowledge? On many levels, aren't coaches sitting around in their offices for countless hours watching video and trying to gather a better understanding in order to explain it to a player scientists on some level?

[LZIp]

Really? Didnt bother reading the article, but all I have to say is hell no.

What was that commercial..."ninety-something percent of college athletes go professional in something other than sports".

Nowhere near everybody is good enough to go pro. It is a major injustice to them to have them major in "sports". Much like students getting art degrees or something.

Athletes choose to come to school for an education. If they dont, they can go to some knock off league before they are eligible to go pro.

[ZachTheZip]

There are plenty of sports-related majors out there already. Sports management, excercize science, and a bunch of others.

[g-mann17]

Article

I think this is a well reasoned article. Why should some Athlete-Students have to pretend about their reasoning for being in college?

The point I think this author does not touch on, as probably the readership of the Chronicle of Higher Education already understands, is the discussion of what a science is? A science is a body of knowledge about a particular issue. Engineering is a science. Electrical Engineer is a discipline within Engineering so it becomes a part of the Engineering College where they study those sciences and understand that body of knowledge. Theology is also a science, or body of knowledge, about religion. It may not use many calculators, but a science none the less.

Why couldn't football or basketball be a science? Both have probably millions of hours of their sport recorded for review and study. When someone writes a dissertation, the main purpose of that document is to provide an understanding of something new in that science. Does anyone think a person like Paul Brown didn't introduce ideas and concepts that changed an existing body of knowledge? On many levels, aren't coaches sitting around in their offices for countless hours watching video and trying to gather a better understanding in order to explain it to a player scientists on some level?

Missed in GP1's point is this...a glaring lack of non-caucasian collegiate coaches. Why couldn't an athlete choose to get a bachelors in football science and then get their masters in sports administration. It's not that awful of an idea. The University still requires a well rounded education.

Lets be honest, a football science degree would allow for people to have a much brighter career path then an English degree.

[johnnyzip84]

It’s an interesting proposal. Thanks for posting.

I’m not saying I’m ready to buy this concept, but I’m not so fast to dismiss it either.

I’m not sure the fact that very few college athletes make it as professional athletes is a very strong argument. After all, what percentage of students who major in psychology/communications/history wind up doing anything related to psychology/communications/history?

I would nominate another possible path for student-athletes who have no intention of ever turning professional as a player. A “coaching option” might be a reasonably useful choice for some.

[zen]

I didn't read the article (I Know I should before I post) but I actually think they should have the option to major in sports (so long as it's not mandated and they can get a different degree if they want one).

Let's face it, you can get degrees in history, philosophy, theology, and and loads of other things that institutions of higher learning offer simply because people want to learn them and want to show that they have a broad, higher level of knowledge in that area... so why then can't athletes also receive a degree that shows they have attained a broad higher level of knowledge in athletics and performance?

If a philosophy major can take an entire course on the history and classic authors of existentialism (Kierkegard, Kant, Hegel,etc), then why can't an athletics major take entire course on the history and ancient athletics and competition (greek olympics, gladiatore games, ancient strategy, etc)?

How do you make the value judgement that one of these is more important than the other? Neither one of these has a practical tangible benefit to society that something like engineering or medicine would. Hell, since sports are a billion dollar industry, one could argue that it has a more practical aspect of society.

Obviously a four year degree in athletics and competition is still going to have it's liberal arts curriculum to do that whole "well rounded preparation for life and professional careers" junk... so WTF. Why is this so taboo? Is it perhaps because people are resentful of the fact that professional athletes make more money than they do? hrmm...... If someone wants to waste 120 grand of their parents money to get a philosophy degree, we don't care. But if someone gets a free ride scholarship to play sports, we cross our arms and pout, and we make demands of them to mask our envy.

[GP1]

If a philosophy major can take an entire course on the history and classic authors of existentialism (Kierkegard, Kant, Hegel,etc), then why can't an athletics major take entire course on the history and ancient athletics and competition (greek olympics, gladiatore games, ancient strategy, etc)?

How about a PhD dissertation on the Paul Brown coaching tree and his influence on the game? Coaching tree found near the middle of the information.

[Bill Morgan]

I didn't read the article (I Know I should before I post) but I actually think they should have the option to major in sports (so long as it's not mandated and they can get a different degree if they want one).

Let's face it, you can get degrees in history, philosophy, theology, and and loads of other things that institutions of higher learning offer simply because people want to learn them and want to show that they have a broad, higher level of knowledge in that area... so why then can't athletes also receive a degree that shows they have attained a broad higher level of knowledge in athletics and performance?

If a philosophy major can take an entire course on the history and classic authors of existentialism (Kierkegard, Kant, Hegel,etc), then why can't an athletics major take entire course on the history and ancient athletics and competition (greek olympics, gladiatore games, ancient strategy, etc)?

How do you make the value judgement that one of these is more important than the other? Neither one of these has a practical tangible benefit to society that something like engineering or medicine would. Hell, since sports are a billion dollar industry, one could argue that it has a more practical aspect of society.

Obviously a four year degree in athletics and competition is still going to have it's liberal arts curriculum to do that whole "well rounded preparation for life and professional careers" junk... so WTF. Why is this so taboo? Is it perhaps because people are resentful of the fact that professional athletes make more money than they do? hrmm...... If someone wants to waste 120 grand of their parents money to get a philosophy degree, we don't care. But if someone gets a free ride scholarship to play sports, we cross our arms and pout, and we make demands of them to mask our envy.

[Bill Morgan]

I have been a supporter of this concept for years. I once worked at a radio station, where the owner's daughter got a degree in Art History. Really ? Art history...... what kind of a job do you suppose she got with that ? You got it !!! She got a job in a career field that was totally unrelated.

Nothing wrong with art or history, but at the same time MANY in the academic world clearly look down their collective noses at the world o' sports. As somebody mentioned in an earlier post, it's not like expanding the number of sports-related majors would cause a major academic landslide at UA..... students in those majors would still be required to take the same basic core classes that others at the university in different majors take as well.

Would you have a small number of student-athletes who would try to take advantage of that potential opportunity ? Yep....... but you have students now, both athletes and not, who are always trying to get away w/ something. For better or worse, that's how some some of humanity is.

Go Zips !!!