Texas A&M’s move to SEC evidence of NCAA’s lost mission
NCAA's Mark Emmert talks a good game, but mission of college athletics continues to implode.
A few days after NCAA president Mark Emmert reached for his talking points and attempted to assure the masses (suckers) that university presidents were “focused on what really counts, and that’s sustaining the collegiate model,” we must ask two questions:
What is that model and when did it mutate? Because all wonderful sound bites about integrity, academic standards and returning to the mission of college athletics notwithstanding, somebody just ran to the ATM again.
Texas A&M reportedly intends to leave the possibly crumbling Big 12 for the ivory towers of the SEC, with an announcement coming as soon as Monday, after banks open.
It’s understandable why A&M would want to escape Texas’ shadow in the Big 12 and come to the SEC, where member schools split a record $220 million in a revenue-sharing plan this fiscal year. I’m not quite as sure why the SEC wants A&M, because other than getting its toes into the state of Texas — assuming College Station counts — this is like a high-end mall expanding to add a Walgreens.
The bigger issue, however, is the continuing conflicting messages being disseminated by the hypocritical suits that run college athletics. They say it’s about academics, but they sign off on 12-game regular seasons, late-night kickoffs and “special edition” school-night games because, well, the checks cash. They say they’re about the big picture, but really they’re about only the picture that they’re in.
Tradition is gone. Perspective is gone. Any sense of tradition, doing what’s right or maintaining some semblance of the fabric of what has made college athletics so great and unique has been obliterated by the potential of the next TV deal.
There is no common good in college football, any more than there is in boxing. There are only independent contractors — college presidents, athletic directors, conference commissioners, bowl pooh-bahs — scrambling to fill their own pockets. Squint, and they all look like Don King.
University of California-Riverside chancellor Tim White, one of the NCAA’s chosen mouthpieces at last week’s presidents’ “retreat” in Indianapolis, referenced “the ecosystem of university life.”
It kind of makes sense. They’re just redefining “going green.”
White touched on “integrity” and “academic reform” and concluded, “We want to make sure that the entire ship is doing well, that the students are not being taken advantage of inappropriately, recognizing they’re student-athletes, not athlete-students.”
And then he jumped onto his unicorn and rode away through a field of towering yellow and purple flowers toward a rainbow.
Texas A&M’s move would be a significant domino to fall. That’s ironic considering the Aggies won their lone national championship in football in 1939 and have two bowl wins in the past 20 years (those in the Alamo and Galleryfurniture.com Bowls). Florida State, Clemson, Missouri, Oklahoma and Virginia Tech all are swirling in the SEC expansion rumor mill.
We’re on a path toward an Orwellian landscape. Three college football superstates: Oceania, Eastasia and Eurasia (with Notre Dame as an independent).
College administrators say they embrace the ideal of the student-athlete. If that were true, they wouldn’t base every decision on the potential for a new indoor practice facility.
The gap between the ruling class and the commoners is wider than ever. How does it go over in the rest of the Big 12 when Texas and ESPN partner to form the Longhorn Network?
The NCAA dumps on kids for selling a jersey or an autograph or taking cash from an agent. But they won’t give the quarterback a share of his jersey sales in the campus bookstore?
Presidents talk tough about raising academic standards for bowl and NCAA tournament teams. To borrow from Penn State president Graham Spanier, “We are unanimous that we need to bring a higher level of integrity to the conduct of intercollegiate athletics.” But every move they make screams, “We’re here for the money! Which way to the next Fiesta Bowl golf junket?”
The SEC has refrained from commenting on expansion plans. But they see what expansion did for the Big Ten’s and Pac-12’s TV deals. They’ll welcome anybody that can help fill the coffers. It’s not about nurturing, improving and improving college athletics. It’s an arms race. The collegiate model isn’t being sustained. It has been detonated.
By Jeff Schultz
♦
Follow me on Twitter @JeffSchultzAJC; friend me at Facebook.com/JeffSchultzAJC
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
478 comments Add your comment
WHY A&M?
August 13th, 2011
9:55 pm
Crackers refers to the wagon drivers who cracked their whips at the mules, or whatever animal was pulling the wagons. Didn’t they teach you any history when you were in elementary school?
blazerdawg
August 13th, 2011
9:56 pm
Classic – someone who goes by “Tarheel” ridiculing “Cracker”.
Browncoat
August 13th, 2011
9:57 pm
Mike Slive, Georgia Tech has beaten Auburn Mississippi St, Vandy and Georgia over the last few years. They would be a middle of the pack SEC team. Ane the ACC is not losing Clemson, Va Tech and Fla State. Maybe one, but that is doubtful. Those schools have no reason to go to the SEC, and only Va Tech adds anything moneywise to the SEC.
Peach Fuzz
August 13th, 2011
9:59 pm
I don’t believe Butch Davis was mentioned in the NCAa LOA. I believe Harrick was found to be guilty by the NCAA, buy I really don’t know for sure. In any event, I don’t think eitherUNC or UGA admin and coaches need to, or would condone cheating.
blazerdawg
August 13th, 2011
10:04 pm
Agree with you on that PF.
Back on topic, I do not belive that the SEC is going to raid the ACC of any school, unless either FSU or Va Tech comes to the SEC and requests to be in due to some grievance. I think Mark Bradley was correct when he wrote that Oklahoma is coming in. OU could care less about taking OK State with them and they will be left with a very mediocre conference payout without TA&M and Texas’s share of the money gone.
Peach Fuzz
August 13th, 2011
10:06 pm
Whya&m, nope, they teach physics, not revisionist history, in elementary schools in NC.
Ramblin Man
August 13th, 2011
10:31 pm
I am confused about one thing in all this talk and that is what does Clemson really offer? One national championship and thier last ACC championship was like 20 years ago. GT owns the all time record and is ties with them since joining the ACC 14 all I think. Point being Clemson is not a power house team and often falls way below expectations and yet some say GT has no place in the SEC yet Clemson does. The logic fails me. I just can’t see three teams leaving and the only team I see gaining anything by leaving is VT. This would open a market for the SEC and boost VTs recruitment. If the superconfrences really occur the ACC will raid the big east and continue with running basketball and every npw and again having a football team rise to the occasion.
WHY A&M?
August 13th, 2011
10:36 pm
PF, I don’t believe they teach physics in any elementary school in the country—general science is NOT physics. And since when is the accepted definition of a Georgia cracker revisionist history? It would appear to me that you have no education at all.
Browncoat
August 13th, 2011
10:37 pm
Ramblin, all this about Va Tech, Clemson and Fla State comes from an article which reported that an unnamed SEC official stated that those three teams were “close” to joining the SEC along with A&M. Logically, it doesn’t make much sense (other than VT, and it is hard to believe they woould leave after lobbying so hard to get in the ACC).
WHY A&M?
August 13th, 2011
10:38 pm
Ramblin Man, as far as Tech not belonging in the SEC, and yet Clemson does, that’s just pure antagonistic bias on the part of those making that claim.
Browncoat
August 13th, 2011
10:38 pm
Peach Fuzz is an obvious troll, please do not feed him.
WHY A&M?
August 13th, 2011
10:39 pm
“An unnamed SEC official” is about as meaningful as an “anonymous source.” And neither generally know what the hell they are talking about.
WHY A&M?
August 13th, 2011
10:40 pm
Browncoat, it’s pretty pathetic to be a troll from NC, isn’t it?
Browncoat
August 13th, 2011
10:44 pm
Yeah, it’s some cretin trying to stir up the pudding on a Saturday night. He’s kind of like that slow child that everyone would just smile at and say “Bless his heart”.
WHY A&M?
August 13th, 2011
10:45 pm
LOL @ Browncoat
Hillbilly D
August 13th, 2011
10:45 pm
A few days after NCAA president Mark Emmert reached for his talking points and attempted to assure the masses (suckers) that university presidents were “focused on what really counts, and that’s sustaining the collegiate model,”
What they’re focused on is money. Surprise, surprise.
Tdawg
August 13th, 2011
10:54 pm
Don’t like the idea of A&M in the SEC at all. Olkahoma and Missouri maybe. In the east Tech and Clemson makes the most sense to me. Clemson is a natural rival for Georgia and South Carolina. Tech because they are a former SEC school and did alright for themselves. We are extended as far north as we need to go. Olkahoma and Missouri just make more sense. Don’t blame A&M or any other team in the Big whatever it is for wanting out. The big advantage that was given to Texas was a slap in the face to the rest of the conference. Maybe Texas and Notre Dame should start their own conference. They could call it the “Big Head Conference”.
Dr. Phil
August 13th, 2011
10:55 pm
In the past 30 years, the college president/ educator has been replaced by the president/politician/fundraiser. Pirates like Gee and Adams not only run universities, they run the NCAA and the conferences. Until leaders with integrity take control of our universities, education will continue to take a backseat to greed.
WHY A&M?
August 13th, 2011
10:56 pm
Tdawg, I like that. Very funny !!!
UGA '01
August 13th, 2011
10:58 pm
I’d personally like to see UGA in the same conference as Tech and Clemson. Tired of being aligned with some of these joke SEC schools. Things in Athens have changed a lot in the past 20 years (since HOPE), in my opinion…all for the good. And to the guy who called me crazy for saying that Vandy, Florida and UGA have more in common with the ACC schools, read the link below…its not my opinion. But it is based on data from the “gold standard” on the subject. According to their rankings, here’s how UGA would fit in the ACC in order…Duke, UVA, Wake, UNC, BC, GT, Miami, UGA, then MD, Clemson, VA Tech, and so on : http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities
Peach Fuzz
August 13th, 2011
11:00 pm
Forgive me, You’re right. Just having some fun on Sat nite. PS, I luv Ga., mother’s fr Ga., and I luv to visit. I luv my Ga. Cousin like a brother.
miner
August 13th, 2011
11:01 pm
all you know it alls, sports agents, ajc sportswriters and uga dog poops…guess who was the bills leading rusher tonight? Spiller? nope
try Nesbitt who averaged 10 yards per carry
WHY A&M?
August 13th, 2011
11:07 pm
wow, miner, seriously? that’s awesome
Dawg 1
August 13th, 2011
11:08 pm
Jeff – could article. But the 1984 reference, while clever went right over many of your reader’s head. Saban – being a prime example. Best he could do was take another shot at the Dawgs, which is sad in itself.
Texas/Oklahoma/Florida State and Clemson – makes a lot more sense; but that’s assuming you could get all to agree.
sports
August 13th, 2011
11:08 pm
Great move for Texas A&M and for the SEC, now if they could just find a conference to send the Auburn Correctional Institute to. Florida State would be good addition also.
Data MaxxIne
August 13th, 2011
11:08 pm
The ACC would never allow a super-sleazy cheating team like UGA to come in. Never.
Hey Saban
August 13th, 2011
11:08 pm
Gonna eat your words when things turn? Maybe you need to beat Auburn before running your mouth.
UGABugKiller
August 13th, 2011
11:15 pm
Wow, Ted, you really could not be more wrong, ignorant, and uninformed than if you TRIED to be wrong, ignorant, and uninformed.
Title IX has NOTHING to do with money or budgets. If the school has enough money, like Stanford, they can have as many sports as they want. If they have a tighter budget, they must adhere to the legal ramifications of Title IX, thus, cutting men’s programs to ensure certain things:
Title IX has EVERYTHING to do with the equality of opportunity (scholarships) and equality of treatment.
Schools do not have to ensure that their AA’s use as much money for women’s sports as men, just that they give the SAME amount of scholarships to women as they do men, and treat those women the same.
In essence, Title IX is the reason why many men’s sports have been cut, because for most schools, football and men’s basketball are the ONLY sports that make money, and their profits go to pay for EVERY OTHER SPORT.
So, for basketball, track, swimming, and baseball, there are female equivalents, so the scholarships cancel each other out.
Football hands out 85 scholarships. Title IX, which is FEDERAL LAW, demands that those 85 scholarships are meted out to women’s sports. There is sport women play or participate in that comes within a fraction of 85 scholarships.
So enter gymnastics, equestrian sports, soccer, field hockey, etc, etc. Traditional mens’ programs, especially the ones that are the biggest drain on the athletic budget, like wrestling, which is a money-loser with a large travel budget, gets cut first.
Cal-Berkely cut their baseball team down to a club team this past year because they couldn’t afford to pay for them in their sports budget, but they are NOT allowed to have more men’s scholarships than they do women’s, so the Cal baseball team, not the softball team got cut, even though baseball brings in more money. And how fair is that? Schools CAN have more women on scholarship than men, but they CAN’T have more men on scholarship than women. So, what we have is legislated “fairness” leading to real-world unfairness. As it almost always usually does.
So, idiot, it’s NOT about “out of control” football budgets. Without football, NONE of the other sports would exist.
But, football is a double-edged sword in that because it has such a large number of scholarships, it creates the situation to have all of these extra women’s sports to ensure Title IX is followed.
UGA '01
August 13th, 2011
11:15 pm
Data…you are kidding yourself if you think the ACC wouldn’t be drooling at the opportunity to have UGA or UF. Now if you’re just flying off the cuff on a Saturday night and drinking some brews, that’s a whole different story.
Remarkable
August 13th, 2011
11:30 pm
SEC go courting Virginia Tech. If they won’t dance, go ask Louisville. No one else makes sense.
Remarkable
August 13th, 2011
11:46 pm
The SEC West needs Texas A&M because they don’t have Vanderbilt. They need a whipping boy and this will suit them just fine. Oklahoma would be a better team but has little to do with the south and nothing to do with the east. Just call us the Big Money Conference. We don’t need A&M.
Dogham
August 14th, 2011
12:08 am
Don’t be surprised if the SEC does expand and goes after Mizzou for the St Louis Market (Kansas City actuallly follows Kansas and K-State) the B1G Ten doesn’t take offense into what they believe is their next coveted ground and goes for the Juggular in a move to bring AAU member Georgia Tech into the B1G Ten expanding their TV access/recruiting right into the heart of the SEC. They of course would also want to add Notre Dame, Syracuse (New York market) and Maryland (Baltimore and Washington TV markets). If Notre Dame doesn’t follow then Rutgers would probably be looked at as an alternative.
WHY A&M?
August 14th, 2011
12:11 am
Dogham, something to that effect was rumored last year when the expansion talk was going on. Could be interesting
WHY A&M?
August 14th, 2011
12:15 am
Not saying that it would happen, but if the Big Ten did go for Tech and pull in the Atlanta market, I don’t think the SEC would be a happy bunch of campers
Dogham
August 14th, 2011
12:17 am
Exactly….If you’re gonna go….go B1G.
WHY A&M?
August 14th, 2011
12:19 am
I agree, Dogham. Imagine what it would be like in Atlanta if UM or OSU were in town to play Tech.
WHY A&M?
August 14th, 2011
12:23 am
Would bring in big bucks to Atlanta too, since nobody from up there is going to be driving back home after the game
Dogham
August 14th, 2011
12:27 am
Maybe then Ga Tech gets a little more respect and doesn’t always have to play second fiddle to UGA in town. It’s a win-win for everyone and the only thing better than that according to Michael Scott is the win-win-win.
Dogham
August 14th, 2011
12:30 am
Nebraska was on to something when they called out Texas last year and then decided to leave to the B1G Ten due to Texas calling the shots for the conference and the commissioner bowing to their every whim. Glad to see another school draw a line in the sand against the Longhorns.
WHY A&M?
August 14th, 2011
12:31 am
Definitely would be a win-win situation, or maybe a win-win-lose situation, with the SEC losing a big part of the Atlanta market.
WHY A&M?
August 14th, 2011
12:31 am
Don’t think right now Tech could compete with UM or OSU, but the allure of playing in the Big Ten would definitely help recruiting.
BYRDDAWG
August 14th, 2011
12:35 am
Yep…..Tech would get a sellout twice that season!!!!!!
WHY A&M?
August 14th, 2011
12:35 am
I think after 2 or 3 years, every game at Grant Field would sell out
Dogham
August 14th, 2011
12:36 am
Maybe not initially in Football, but i wouldn’t think it would take too long especially after more recruits take notice they can play in the B1G Ten rather than the ACC. The Basketball program has been good at GaTech throughout the years and i think they compete immediately. Bottom line is Ga Tech would die to have the new money stream, the B1G Ten would die to be in Atlanta and both would be attracted to each other due to the academics. So maybe we are now at a win-win-win-lose.
Dogham
August 14th, 2011
12:38 am
Yep…..Tech would get a sellout twice that season!!!!!!
If Nebraksa comes to Ga Tech that would make 3 as they would travel with enough fans to sell it out themselves.
WHY A&M?
August 14th, 2011
12:40 am
Would also open up the possibility of a return to the Rose Bowl. Of course, these are all pipe dreams, but what the heyyy. lol
Pago Pago DAWG
August 14th, 2011
12:40 am
Let’s invite U of Hawaii, to pick up that tv market!!! Oh, be a nice road game also.
BYRDDAWG
August 14th, 2011
12:41 am
True but tech does not travel well! Their ACC Champ game had the lowest attendance off ANY ACC champ game……
Dogham
August 14th, 2011
12:42 am
Alabama and USC have scheduled Hawaii when on probation to give the kids a trip away from home. I’m sure UGA will be in that boat soon enough.
WHY A&M?
August 14th, 2011
12:46 am
BYRDDAWG, Tech used to travel VERY WELL. And the 1990 Citrus Bowl game proved that with a good team and a good chance to do something big, they come out of the woodwork. I seriously don’t think it would take long for both home and away attendance to rise astronomically. And actually, I think that would be the case if Tech went back to the SEC too. There’s just something about the ACC in football that doesn’t inspire fan interest.