Scholarships, Whether Academic or Athletic, Are Conditional

As I was doing research on my article about Tennessee Head football Coach Lane Kiffin and his silly war of words against other SEC coaches, I came across a story about South Carolina Coach Steve Spurrier and how he revoked the scholarships of a few players because of their work ethic and performance on the field.

This took place, I believe, about 3 years ago. When it happened, over 90 high school football coaches in the state of South Carolina protested by signing a petition and calling the revoking of the scholarships "unethical."

When I first heard about it, I was disappointed for those players and was glad that of group of high school coaches would stand up and defend them. None of these players broke the law and, as far as I know, they were in good academic standing with the university. There are many examples of student-athletes getting in trouble with the law and getting a "slap on the wrist." Perhaps running stairs, internal discipline, missing two or three games, but after their first offense, they did not have their scholarships taken away unless they were repeat offenders. you can only give so many chances.

Just today, University of Georgia Head Football Coach Mark Richt suspended a player for testing positive for drugs for the second time. The suspension was 6 games, a severe penalty considering that's half the season and that player will essentially have to start all over to earn playing, which will be used by others during his suspension. However, I did not hear that the player in question is going to have his scholarship revoked.

All that having been said, a scholarship is earned based on perofrmance. There are many students who lose their academic scholarships because they are not able to maintain the grades necessary to keep the scholarship. Should athletic scholarships be any different?
Athletes who earn full scholarships to big time schools are being rewarded much: tuition-free education, free room and board, extra help with tutoring, free books, etc. Whether they will admit it or not, these student-athletes are being "paid to play."

I liken a scholarship like getting hired by an employer to do a job. The employer sees potential in the employee. He believes that the employee has the ability to make money for the company and the employee is compensated accordingly. But if after a while the employee is not producing the desired results, the employee is terminated. The coach sees potential in the player. He feels that the player can make a positive difference for his team and perhaps even be a key role for the team winning a championship.

However, if that player is not performing at a level worthy of the scholarship given to him, and there are other players contributing at a higher level, then it only makes sense that the player's scholarship is either reduced or taken away and given to the player who is contributing more. In fact, at SEC Media Days when this had taken place, Spurrier made this comment regarding the players who lost their scholarships. "We had walk-ons who were contributing more." Spurrier said.

As a former walk-on college athlete myself, I know the hard road walk-ons face. You are not on scholarship, you have almost no hope of playing time unless your team is up or down by 30. You have to work your butt off in practice to show the coach you are worthy of being on the team and that you can contribute on the field during a game. There are several scholarship players ahead of you because they are more talented. A walk-on almost has to work harder than the scholarship player because the scholarship athlete has a cushion. They know they will start or at least play. They know they're better. That's why I'm glad for student athletes who come in as walk-ons but end up getting scholarships. That's exiting.

I wonder what these players were not doing. Were they just going through the motions in practice. Were they not hustling. If that's the case, that's a shame. they didn't appreciate what they had been given. If they didn't give 100%, they cheated themselves. However, these players were recruited and signed by Spurrier's predecessor, Lou Holtz. If they truly were trying as hard as they can to live up to the scholarship awarded to them, then to revoke their scholarships, even if the walk-ons were contributing more, was wrong. Find a way to award the walk-ons scholarships and still keep the players in question on scholarship.

I don't know what happened to those players. they were stranded with no where to go and that's sad. But one message that Steve Spurrier is sending loud and clear. You will earn what you get no matter who you are. That's a good thing. Our society needs more of this philosophy. Spurrier is not the only coach to revoke or reduce a scholarship of a player who is not performing on the field. I know of other coaches at other schools who have done the same. As I mentioned earlier, many academic scholarships are taken away because of failure on the part of the student to maintain the necessary GPA. To have a scholarship is a privilege, not a right, just like a Driver's License, just like a job.