Rhoden: No Mention of Race

So we're giving medals now for columnists who do not play the race card in one given piece of copy? Wow, I know some columnists who would really get weighed down by all the hardware.

 

Damn those Yankees and their institutional barriers keeping Donna Lopiano from playing center field for them.

 

Those sports are added most frequently because they're cheap. Basketball and track were already present at many schools, and thus not added in as great a frequency.

If anyone is ghettoizing black athletes into certain sports, it's not the colleges, but the high schools. I don't think you can require college programs to take on people who have never played lacrosse or golf to satisfy Bill Rhoden.

 

Wise up. Rhoden in his column plays the race card by not playing it. Which is the dominant racial component among BCS programs?

 

If they want to pay the football and basketball players a piece of the money pie, in addition to their tax free scholarship, (which can amount to $25-45K a year) wonderful.
I think that they should have to meet the same academic standards as any other group of students.

 

Rhoden: Coaches make big money.
Read: White coaches make big money. You'll note, for the record, there was no mention of the millions being paid Ty Willingham. Course, only four of 119 I-A coaches are black, but that's another issue.
Rhoden: Athletes deserve a piece of the pie.
Read: Black athletes deserve a piece of the pie. Do you really think Rhoden cares if Laurinitis has money to go out on a date? Given his persistent beating of this particular drum, I seriously doubt it.

Also, it glosses over the fact that the players are allowed -- and often get -- up to $500 worth of bowl swag. Xboxes, iPods, clothes and all manner of other stuff were handed over to them when they checked in at the official bowl hotels. Pales in comparison to the bonuses the coaches got for getting to the bowls, but $500 isn't chump change, either.

 

Just to add to the Rhoden-bashing regarding rowing, lacrosse and soccer growing faster than basketball, there's a very good reason: It's all about numbers.

Title IX requires equal scholarship dollars for both men and women -- so to counteract the large rosters of scholarship males, schools use rowing programs (which often have up to 30 or 40 women) and lacrosse and soccer (also with relatively expansive rosters) to even things out. Basketball is still 12 women on a roster, and there's not much way around it. Sports that can offer spots to more women makes Big State U look more in line with Title IX standards. Nothing to do with race.

Without much actual evidence, too, I would imagine more schools ALREADY had women's basketball than had other lesser known sports. Therefore basketball would inherently be growing at a slower rate, so the statistics are really meaningless anyway.