Archive for the ‘High School Sport’ Category

D1 Coaching Contact: Academic Success

Monday, April 7th, 2014

Coaches all too often receive large bonuses when their team is winning, but why not for their team’s academic success?

Education Secretary Arne Duncan believes:

Universities need to tie bonus pay of their coaches and athletics directors more prominently to their college athletes’ academic performance

And so do we!

Key elements to a coach’s contact located in the academic incentive clause include:

  • Implement policies and demonstrate behavior that advances academic success
  • A flat bonus for meeting graduation rates or academic progress rate (APR) scores
  • A team cumulative GPA of 3.0 or higher

Meeting each element would earn the coach a bonus money signmoney signmoney sign

Penalties should also be in place to regulate a decrease in a team’s academic performance.



Let’s not forget UConn’s recent NCAA Tournament suspension for low Academic Progress Rate (APR) scores




Grambling was also hit hard with binding force for low APR scores.

Sanctions should also be in place for a decrease in APR score, which include:

  • Limited practice
  • Shortened season
  • Game forfeiture
  • Scholarship reduction

After a scholarship reduction sanction, the next step is to implement an Academic Enhancement Team to aid student-athletes.

The following link by the Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate Athletics sheds light on the athletic and academic discrepancies in a coach’s contract.

Do you ever wonder which school would win in an NCAA Academic Performance Tournament?

You’re not the first. In fact, Inside Higher Ed has an academic tournament giving the student-athletes and fans bragging rights in the classroom.

ncaa academic winnerThe 2014 winner is Kansas.






Who likes stinky, old bathrooms??? NO ONE!!

Thursday, November 21st, 2013


The Minnesota Vikings are currently working on building a new stadium for their team. From this video you can tell that there are a lot of mixed feelings on if this is really a great idea. One half of the tax payers think it is a stupid idea for them to have to pay for it out of their own pocket, while the other half most of the Viking’s fans, believe it is a good idea. It would be the third top highest funding project in the state of Minnesota.

There will be one day of taxing cigarettes on shelfs and warehouses and another tax on out of state profits in the state of Minnesota. Many of the tax payers completely hate the idea of this. But in all reality the tax payers taking the biggest hit are smokers, which to be honest don’t buy cigarettes that day then.

With a new stadium it can bring in more profit. Many people spend a lot of time and money on sport tourism. Traveling across the country or even world spectating games or even just touring some of the biggest stadium or arenas. I know for a fact that if I was completely loaded with money I would want to travel across country to watch games and visit the biggest stadiums. This plan overall can be very beneficial and boosts local business revenue overall. 

Another video is posted bringing more information about the actual financial part of the funding.

Video 2

New Vikings Stadium

New Vikings Stadium

Old Minnesota Vikings Stadium

Old Minnesota Vikings Stadium

Playing For Keeps…the cost of youth sports participation.

Sunday, October 27th, 2013

 Sondra, a mother of four, is in quite a pickle. She wants her two oldest children to play baseball, but is faced with the tough decision of paying $125 that she really doesn’t have, or, have them miss out on the educational and social benefits offered by sports. With no financial assistance available, it appears that Sondra’s children will have to miss out on participating in baseball due to the heavy financial burden of participation fees.

This situation is not unique to just Sondra, more and more parents are having to make similar decisions all across America.

From the article Participation in youth sports on the decline:

“We’re seeing parents having more of a struggle,” said Josh Pruce, media director for Pop Warner Football, Langhorne, Pa. “Parents may pay for one or two sports, but not three or four sports.” As more families struggle to make ends meet, they may see the registration fees and equipment costs as expendable.”

This article can be accessed at

If more parents are having a tough time paying for youth sports, any increase in price would more than likely result in them withdrawing their children from sports.

The high cost associated with youth sports participation is already limiting access for many families, so if the costs were to continue to increase and further limit or lower participation, would it be ethical to put to use the saying “sports are a privilege, not a right” to justify the increased fees and lower participation rates? Wouldn’t this only further emphasize the statement “only the privileged are privileged”, which is unethical as well?

Some type of alternative has to be available. There has to be some way to make sports cheaper to participate in. Surely there is a way to make scholarships available to low income families.

Fundraising opportunities, as well sponsorships deals with local businesses would surely alleviate a portion of the participation fees. I believe actions like these, as well as exploring other options could make sport more accessable and affordable to all children and their families.

The current trend must change, as I feel that all children should have access to sports, regardless of their family’s financial situation. Sport fosters social growth, as well as promote physical activity, commitment, and accountability, all of which are vital to a child’s success later in life. Youth sports participation should not be limited or controlled by the amount of money families possess. Everyone should have equal access.


Lowering the GPA, give it a chance-Johannes Sander

Friday, October 25th, 2013

Question: Do you think this ultimately hurts or helps student athletes? Explain your reasoning.

Through the statements of Rockford educators that during the 10 years the 2.0 rules was in place, higher graduation rates or better test scores did not occurred, indicates that there needs to be a change. In contrast high schools in this certain area experienced “smaller teams, a dwindling morale and students afraid to take hard classes for fear of losing eligibility”, (Lavigna) . It is important that these changes are being made based on analyzes of Rockford’s environment, with that I mean that it is necessary to have a close look on the poverty rates and crime rates.  “Rockford, like many of the cities whose districts have abandoned GPA rules, struggles with high crime and high unemployment. About 23 percent of the population in Rockford is below the poverty level, compared to a national average of 14 percent. And it was once labeled one of the top 10 most dangerous cities in America for its rate of violent crimes.” (Lavigna). As stated in the “Bad grades, some schools ok with it” article lots of students are not even going to school if they cannot participate in athletics, so there needs to be a way to attract these certain students to come to school and this way is to lower the GPA so they can participate in athletics. “As an educator, it’s 100 percent wrong … If we say kids can’t attain [a GPA] because of the environment they’re coming from, then we’re failing those kids,” Roger Blake, California Interscholastic Federation.  I cannot really support and agree with this argument. The first goal for the Rockford educators should be to make the students come to school, and make them feel comfortable. The school should be a safe place for these students. The Rockford high school deals mainly with students who are from a low-economic neighborhood. These students are still young teenagers who have to deal with crimes, brutality, physical or psychological abuse. Therefore in my opinion the statement “Don’t use the excuse, ‘We’re from a low-economic neighborhood,” Roger Blake, is inappropriate. Of course excuses are often times not working to fix things, but these students did not chose to be in a position like that. Often times they do not even have social support from their parents and are completely on their own with an age of 17 or younger. We cannot really aspect from these students to say that they are responsible for their situation; they are still in a developing process and not in an adult stage at all. Therefore I think it is right that the Rockford high school tries to help these kids in order to make it easier for them to meet GPA requirements. I also think we cannot talk about unfairness here. Nobody wants to change with students who are from dangerous neighborhoods and who have social issues. Those responsible for the lowering of the GPA are using the common good approach, which means that they believe this action benefits the community as a whole. Through the new GPA requirements student-athletes are getting a chance of succeeding again, and motivation to go to school.  If we have these students in the class room, educators are getting the chance of improving their academic side, and also talk with them about their social problems. Remember these student-athletes are still really young and need more support than others. Of course in certain ways everyone is responsible for their actions but I think if educators get the chance to influence these student-athletes in a positive way, then we also increase their academic side.

All in all I think it is the right thing to lower the GPA for these certain student-athletes, so their motivation increase to go to school and not being involved in criminal activities. Education is the access to a better life, economically and personally wise. If a lower GPA requirement helps to bring students from this certain area to school and improves their academic skills, then the Rockford high school made the right change.

These two graphs indicate again the social problems of Rockford’s community. It shows an increase in violent crimes and moreover Rockford’s crimes are by far higher than the national average. Therefore it should be school goal to lower these numbers through education and through giving these certain students or student-athletes motivation to attend classes. A higher GPA would cause that students-athletes cannot participate in athletics and thereby choose to stay at home or on the streets. In my opinion this wouldn’t help to decrease this numbers at all.

“STUDENT” Athlete VS. Student Athlete: How the GPA minimum drop affects the student side of student athlete.

Friday, October 25th, 2013

We believe that in the long run the lowering of the GPA really hurting the students athletes. By lowering the GPA it allows student athletes to be rewarded by participation in athletics for doing less work in the classroom. However there is some good that comes from the lowering of the GPA, for example it allows kids with troubled life’s to participate in sport and possibly help them change their life. We believe that even if it does help the kid on bad tracks turn their lives around, what will happen after high school? If student athletes are barley maintaining a minimum GPA of a 1.5 the odds that they will succeed in college or even get into college are very low.

Abel and myself both agree that if we really want the student athletes to succeed then a higher GPA minimum should be required. Sure you could say it is hard to get a higher once it is low but it is something that needs to be instilled throughout school systems. By lowering the GPA minimum it tells student athletes that it is ok to put sports ahead of school. When really it should be the other way around because the percentage of student athletes that go on to play professional is low. So if they aren’t one of those few that make it professional they should have school to fall back on. This is why we think that the lowering of the minimum GPA is hurting the overall status of the student part, of student athlete.

Lowering GPA standards: Until you get paid millions of dollars to play a sport you better be reading a book

Friday, October 25th, 2013

Many athletes these days are starting to lose the pride of the term STUDENT athlete. When I hear the term student athlete I think of someone who works just as hard on the field/court as they do in the classroom. Some high schools are beginning to lower the standard for athletes when it comes to the GPA required to compete, going from a 2.5 GPA to a 1.7 GPA. Having lowered the GPA it is okay if an athlete who has 6 classes to have 4 C’s and 2 D’s, that is passing! In these high schools I believe administrators are attempting to keep some athletes off the streets and trying to prevent them from getting into trouble such as joining gangs, selling or doing drugs.

As much as administrators are trying to keep these athletes out of these situations, it does not help them succeed in life because once they graduate high school, will they have a GPA high enough to attend college? If an athlete cannot pass and/or struggles with the subjects Math, English or Science all being the core subjects of standardizing testing and of the ACT/SAT, how can they get a high school diploma? Even more so if an athlete wants to play at a collegiate level will they be able to get their GPA high enough to be accepted into an institution? Will they be able to maintain a GPA high enough to be eligible for playing time?  Al Woods author of “Warning: Student Athletes, Bad Grades Will Make You Invisible to College Coaches!” writes:

“I would guarantee you that one of the first questions a college coach will ask anyone about a particular student athlete is: “What are their grades like?”If the answer to that question is not a good answer, then you can best believe that’s the end of that discussion about that student athlete.” -Woods, Al

Therefore, administrators are not setting up these student athletes to be successful later on in life after high school. And until these athletes can prepare for their studies on a daily basis as they would if they were to play in the state championship game, they are going to have a hard time being victorious.

GPA Is Not the Root of the Problem

Friday, October 25th, 2013

Building well rounded student athletes requires a certain level of commitment from the team, and an equal effort from the coaching/administration staff. Having high school athletes meet a minimum grade point average has been a common method used throughout the nation for awhile now and has proven to be an excellent motivator. However there is the issue of students who are great competitors on the field, but not in the classroom. To challenge this dilemma the school administration of some schools, similar to the ones in the video, are lowering the GPA requirements drastically in order to keep more players eligible.

Essentially the idea behind this reduction in expectations is that players who have struggled in class before will have a little less stress when it comes to making the academic cut. Theoretically they will be more inclined to strive towards success on their report cards. Unfortunately, student athletes that had no problem meeting the old requirements before the change now have two new options. Continue to cruise through their studies and excel in sports, or to let their old self standards plummet. This could potentially encourage students subconsciously that they can now worry less on school and lean towards more self-destructive hobbies.

As for the students who’s GPAs were borderline before, now feel that their mentors have little confidence in them. This could paint the image in the students that they need “training wheels,” so to speak, when it comes to their grades. This change in educational requirement does not fix the problem. Perhaps schools should spend more time figuring out where the errors in communication between student and teacher reside, rather than stressing over the football teams record. School administrations should consider more “big picture” concepts when attempting to create solutions to these types of issues in academia.

What role does sport play in High School? Lowering GPA worth it?

Thursday, October 24th, 2013
I believe that lowering the GPA minimum is ultimately hurting the athletes. Coaches and teachers need to encourage student-athletes to work hard in the classroom in order to participate in sports. The priority should first be academics and then sports. Therefore, they should not be messing with the academics side of school just to be able to allow students to participate in sports.

Eliminating GPA requirements at some high schools has angered some people, including students, who believe that playing sports is a right to be earned.

And that is how sports should be viewed: rights to be earned. Teachers and tutors are available for students who need help improving their grades in order to participate in sports. The students need to work harder in school, not be given a lower standard to meet for sports. It also hurts the students because how are colleges going to let them in if they have a 1.6 GPA from high school? High school needs to prepare them for college, and by lowering the GPA standard for sports, it does not accomplish that. There was another article I found that stated:

“Our main charge is to provide a quality education and prepare them for life after high school,” said Smithfield High Principal Rebecca Mercer. “We believe that academics should come first.”

High school students need to realize that there is life after high school and that high school is not all about playing sports, but also about getting an education. High school sports should be looked at as an opportunity and privilege, if the students participate. I believe that with the lowering the minimum GPA that it is sending a wrong image to the high school students about how important sports really are to a high school over the academics side.