21st Century College Football - Red Stick Reality

Conference Referee conspiracy

2009-10-19T03:34:00.000-07:00

Now that the BCS Championship Game is worth millions to the conference, it is little wonder that conference referees are working the flags to protect their undefeated teams.

Just review the following games from Oct 17:

Texas v Oklahoma

Florida v Arkansas

Alabama v South Carolina

In each of these games, flagrantly inaccurate penalties were called in favor of the undefeated team, resulting in the undefeated team staying undefeated. All three were pass interference calls, although in the Florida/Arkansas game the referees threw in an additional and mystifying unsportsmanlike conduct call.

In the case of Alabama/South Carolina, the referees assistance was probably unnecessary, but at the time of the call the game was still uncertain.

In the case of Texas/Oklahoma and Florida/Arkansas, I believe it fair to say that the calls changed the outcome of the game.

What does this mean? Well, it probably means that at this point in the season, undefeated teams playing in conference will not loose unless their opponents completely dominate them, making it impossible for the referees to "adjust."

LSU National Champions

2008-08-02T15:54:00.000-07:00

OK, I just exhaled. LSU beat the pants off Ohio State, in a game that looked a lot like the previous BCS National Championship game in which Florida beat Ohio State.

What did the last two college seasons show us? That the SEC schedule is a better preparation for the big bowl games than the Big Ten. The Big Ten still have great football. Remember, Michigan avenged a dreadful season by beating Florida, but Florida looked like a team that was dialing it in, playing in a lesser bowl after a National Championship the previous year. Michigan, on the other hand, looked inspired. And good for them.

But to prove the earlier point, no SEC team has ever lost in a BCS Championship Game, and the SEC has four of the ten championships. No other conference has such a record.

As for LSU, the Tigers look primed to rip the SEC up again this year. The road schedule is tough, in that the Tigers go to Auburn and Florida. Plus, the Tigers play Georgia, who enters the season ranked #1. But overall, the schedule is fairly soft, with no non-conference games against major conference opponents. The soft schedule makes an eight win season almost inevitable.

But Florida, Georgia and Auburn are so good, that there is probably no team in the country that could run that gauntlet with better than a 2-1 record. If LSU can beat Auburn and either Georgia or Florida, expect LSU to win the SEC again this year.

On the other hand, if LSU looses all three, expect them to in the Peach Bowl with 9-3 record, probably against Clemson.

LSU returns what is arguably the best defensive line in the country, and the best offensive line in the SEC. They have inexperienced, but very solid defensive backs and serviceable linebackers. On the offensive side, they have a stable of talented wide receivers and running backs. Given that, why where they picked second in the SEC West?

Because they have NO experienced quarterback. Nobody has seen any of these guys play college football. With the number one backup kicked off the team, LSU will be starting the guy who was #3, #4 or playing in high school last year. Now that wouldn't be a big deal in some schools. But LSU is fielding one of the best teams in the country. Its like giving your 16 year old with a new learners permit the keys to the Ferrari. You sure hope the kid can drive.

If the quarterback can play, watch out. If he can't, buy your tickets for the Peach Bowl early.

HGH - Baseball - College Football

2007-12-14T06:23:00.000-08:00

The Mitchell Report just blew the doors off baseball and steroid use...I guess. Though the players and analysts are still calling their lawyers, the report only gave us what the public has recognized for years. Players will go to great lengths to enhance their performance because the contracts in pro sports are so lucrative.

Consider that THE ROCKET was earning $28,000,000 to pitch for half a season. How many of you will earn that in a year? 10 years? Your lifetime? Would you take a growth hormone for that, plus all the fame and recognition that comes with the enhanced performance? And if you get caught? Maybe a suspension for a month? That's too much incentive to take drugs, and too little incentive to prevent it.

My guess is that all big dollar pro sports and college sports are rampant with drug use. Why wouldn't they be?

LSU v The Ohio State University

2007-12-07T05:55:00.000-08:00

Due to BCS Madness, The Ohio State University moon-walked into the championship game against LSU, who performed an erotic leapfrog over Georgia, Virginia Tech and Kansas.

Why LSU and The Ohio State University...

This proves two things. First, the poll during the year is mostly arbitrary, but when the final poll came out, the average result indicated some level of reason. Teams who did not lose generally moved up (The Ohio State University). Teams that did not win a conference title were surpassed by teams the did (Kansas and Georgia).

But at this point, that should have left Virginia Tech in the title game. This is were voters stepped in and said, "Even though we voted Tech a place above LSU last week, we just can't rank a Tech team with the same record as LSU, higher than LSU because: LSU plays in a much tougher conference, won that conference, and beat Tech 48-7.

Does that get the BCS off the hook? No. The BCS is no better than the old system. It just pretends to be better. But the argument that there was no rationale behind the final voting is also false.

Why the BCS Sucks

2007-11-27T15:10:00.001-08:00

Well, LSU snuck past Ole Miss, lost on OT to Arkansas (boy does Miles wish that college football allowed for ties after two OT losses), and now faces a tough Tennessee. I can't see LSU beating Tennessee in Atlanta, but who knows.

Still, the miserable part is that the winner is likely to face Hawaii. That is right, Hawaii. Not only is the BCS boring, but it tends to produce bad matchups. A West Virginia verses Missouri game is interesting for the novelty of it, but the rest of the bowl games look dreadful.

LSU #1

2007-11-15T06:06:00.001-08:00

It's November and LSU is ranked #1. They do not look substantially better than numbers 2-5, but they have won more tough games than anyone else, which rightly counts for something.

I don't know how likely it is that LSU can win their next three: Ole Miss, Arkansas and the SEC Championship Game. The SEC Championship game is always tough.

Duke Lacrosse Again?

2007-05-31T13:50:00.000-07:00

Would the Duke Lacrosse team please return to the obscure reaches of second tier sports they occupied before their party involving strippers and criminal charges launched them into the spotlight. They seem to have taken a page out of the Brittany and Paris' handbook that says, "In order to gain or sustain public attention you must demonstrate your lack of moral compass."

Now the lads at on the Duke Lacrosse team who were forced by Duke to miss last season have been granted an additional year of eligibility by the NCAA. The request was made by Duke University on behalf of the players. I find the request and granting of the year of eligibility absurd.

Duke University decided to end the season, not the NCAA. So why is the NCAA involved? The NCAA should have responded by saying, we didn't end your season, so we have no power to grant the players another year of eligibility. Had you wanted your players to play that season, you should not have cancelled the season.

The players on the Duke Lacrosse team do not want to be accountable for their actions: having a party with strippers that brought criminal charges, shame on the university and caused the university to cancel the season.

Duke University doesn't want to be accountable for having decided, perhaps before the question of the criminal charges was settled, to cancel the team's season.

So the NCAA gets to play God and absolve the players and university of their poor decisions. In the end, the NCAA will regret their decision, as more universities ask the NCAA to abolve them of their liabilities. Because next time, if the NCAA decides not to absolve the players or school, they will be legally liable for that decision.

J-Marc goes pro

2007-04-25T07:10:00.000-07:00

The Oakland Raiders and their #1 pick in the draft are all the talk these days. The obvious contenders are LSU's 6'6", 270 pound QB, who happens to have an artillery piece for an arm, and the big, fast WR from Georgia Tech. That fact that the Raiders have a big, fast receiver, and don't have anyone to throw that big fast receiver the ball, makes the LSU QB the more obvious choice for them at #1. Still, no matter how big and strong J-Marc is, few QB's are instant successes in the NFL, and most draft gurus think that the Raiders prefer to find a veteran QB, like Culpepper, and then draft the big, fast receiver from Georgia Tech.

The gurus are probably correct, but J-Marc will impress scouts with his 80 yard arm. Still, I believe that only a team with a quality QB should draft a 1st round QB. QB's rarely produce early in their careers. For instant team improvement, teams should draft RB's, DE's, LB's, and TE's in the early rounds.

The Saints really need a Corner Back, Linebacker and Wide Receiver. This years draft has plenty of good WR's, so don't be surprised to see the Saints grab a WR in round one. The need for cornerback is greater, but the talent there is not as deep. Still, expect to see the Saints grab a CB in the second or third round. They may trade up for a shot at one of the top CB's, like Aaron Ross from Texas, but I expect them to stay put and hope Ross or one of the hot shot WR's is still available. They could use a LB like Patrick Willis, but don't expect him to be around. The other LB's that project for the first round are a bit on the small side, and I can't see the Saints jumping around for a shot at them. Still, if Timmons is still available, the Saints might take a shot at him.

NFL Draft

2007-04-16T11:01:00.000-07:00

The most important day in college football occurs on the first week of December: the conference championship games. These are the only legitimate championships is Division I-AA college football are the conference championships, which are the only championships established on the field rather than by ballot.

The second most important day in college football is the NFL draft. This is the day when the best NFL scouts tell us who the best college players really are. The teams with the most number of high picks are generally the best teams, and this status really helps in recruiting.

Duke Rapists?

2007-04-12T11:04:00.000-07:00

Well, the Duke boys are off, so to speak. Apparently they are considering lawsuits now. The lacrosse players are angry that the nation seems to have forgotten the presumption of innocence. But the Duke boys seem to have forgotten that they did not go to jail. They have been free for the entire year of the investigation. That freedom is based on the presumption of innocence.

That their lacrosse season was canceled is of great concern to them, but canceling a lacrosse season does not presume guilt. Lacrosse schedules are not rights guaranteed under the constitution, contrary to what the sporting media and sporting fans may think. The university canceled the season as damage control. University sports teams represent the university. When the players do charity work or win national championships, we boast that they reflect well on the university. When they hire strippers to their parties and get accused of rape, the boasting gets a bit trickier.

Congress and the NCAA

2007-02-02T12:56:00.000-08:00

Congress is hosting a hearing of NCAA sports - football primarily. The problem is that the BCS is making too much revenue, and there is some question as to whether or not these football programs ought to maintain their non-profit status. Saban's ludicrus salary didn't help matters.

After the hearings, the congressmen will grumble, but none wants to go into the next election cycle as the one that killed college football. So nothing will happen. Still, those that grumble will be correct. Calling college football a non-profit enterprise is silly. They have multi-million dollar budgets, and they produce no great service. They are part of the entertainment industry.

Some will complain that the student/athletes should get a slice of the revenue. They are the ones doing the work, afterall. I am all for paying the student/athletes. We pay the coaches, why not the student/athletes. But when we do that, can we please also get rid of the student part of student/athlete while we are at it. If the athletes want to attend classes, let them pay tuition and attend. But students and athletes would be better served if we just separated these two activities.

Super Bowl

2007-02-02T12:49:00.000-08:00

Of course, DR Jack must provide a Super Bowl prediction. So here it is. The game will be lousy, with lots of turnovers and errors. The commercials will fail to inspire, even though they will be expensive. Expect lots of beer commercials and perhaps a few from the ailing American automanufacturing companies - mostly truck commercials. The half-time show will put most folks to sleep, except those hoping desperately to see a wardrobe malfunction. But don't count on that.

In 150 years, when the Super Bowl is played in Denver every year because global warming will have flooded places like Miami, Los Angeles and New Orleans, and the temperature in Denver during February will be a happy 72, we will look back at the 2007 Super Bowl and say, "That was the beginning of the end for pro football, we just didn't know it yet." Why? Because the advertising revenue isn't keeping up with player and coaches salaries, the spectators at the game are not fans, but are simply there to see the spectacle, and the game never lives up to the hype.

Colts 21 Bears 13

LSU in the Sugar

2006-12-09T18:32:00.000-08:00

Well, it is January 31 and time for predictions. Granted, my college predictions in 2006 were almost perfectly wrong. I expected the SEC and Big 10 to be too good to allow their teams to advance to the BCS. I expected a Big 12, Big East or Pac 10 team to sneak through undefeated. I couldn't have been more wrong. But that wont stop me from making more prediction.

In the Summer I predicted that LSU or Auburn would win the SEC West. This was no great risk, as most folks thought the same. But Arkansas played some inspired football and earned their way to Atlanta. A late loss at home to LSU indicated that the SEC West (and likely the SEC East) suffered from a stiff dose of parity. LSU's brutal road schedule was too much for them to handle, especially at the beginning of the year when their offense was still struggling to find its game. I had the distinct feeling that that the LSU team that beat Arkansas in Arkansas was better in November than the Auburn team that lost at home to Georgia. Both LSU and Florida seemed to get stronger as the year when on, but LSU faced Florida in Florida, and that decided the fate of both teams.

If LSU beats Notre Dame in the Sugar Bowl, expect LSU to be everyone's favorite to win the SEC WEST next year. But LSU and Michigan face tough mental tests. Both teams had their hopes pinned to different bowl appearances, and both teams feel like they are facing a weaker opponent. Furthermore, both LSU and Michigan have a history of playing poorly in just such circumstances. Michigan has a fine history of getting whipped by an inferior PAC 10 team in the Rose Bowl, and LSU has always been a team with a fragile psyche. Though LSU and Michigan should dominate, watch out for the double upset here: Notre Dame and USC winning big over better opponents. The folks in Vegas have already made USC the favorite. Picking Notre Dame is a bit trickier because LSU is essentially playing at home.

For Michigan it will be all about their defense. USC has tons of speed and if they start moving the ball early against Michigan, Michigan will panic. Michigan has plenty of offense, but it is on the defensive side that things get hairy for them. On the other hand, USC's defense is fast and could give Michigan's offense just enough trouble...

For LSU, it is all about turnovers. If they can avoid fumbles and interceptions, they will cut through the Notre Dame defense like a knife. But just a few mistakes will be all it takes to send Notre Dame the message that if they play tough they can win. You know the Irish will not ignore such a message.

Ohio State faces the same danger Michigan faces. Florida will be fast, and funky, doing god-knows what at QB. Freshly sucking on the tit of the Heisman, and reading about how they are the best team that every lived, and finding themselves in weather that seems a lot like southern California, don't be surprised if they pull a classic Big 10 roll-over and fall apart.

The disaster scenario for the BCS is Ohio State crushing Florida, and Michigan crushing USC. Then everyone will cry foul and ask why didn't we get the Michigan/Ohio State rematch. I predict that Florida and USC will win, but if they don't the cries for a playoff system or yet another re-vamping of the BCS will be heard across the nation.

Elsewhere, Oklahoma entertains Boise State, Wisconsin faces Arkansas, Nebraska faces Auburn, and Georgia Tech faces West Virginia. I expect West Virginia to pull out the victory, as does everyone else. Georgia Tech has no offense, and is starting a new QB.

Expect Wisconsin to handle Arkansas. Once Arkansas found their running game, they starting causing a lot of trouble for good teams like Tennessee, Auburn and South Carolina. But LSU and Florida gave us the blue-print for beating them. Wisconsin will watch the tape, and Arkansas is too one-dimensional to do anything about it. The Arkansas backs will get their yards, but they wont get enough to win.

The Nebraska verses Auburn game is a tough call. Auburn is probably the better team, but Auburn failed to bring their best in November. If Auburn shows up, this game will get ugly. But too, Auburn could dial it in and embarass themselves.

Lastly, can the Boise Boys beat the Sooners? I think they can and will. Boise State hasn't played well against the big boys in the past, especially on the road. Does anyone remember what Georgia did to them last year? Ouch. No doubt this could happen again. But Navy showed everyone yesterday that the little guys can hang with the big boys, and I expect Boise State to take this lesson to heart and play hard and for four quarters.

Predictions and excuses are like...

2006-12-09T17:52:00.000-08:00

Those of you who read my 2006 college football season predictions are laughing pretty hard right now. I couldn't have been more wrong. I argued that the BCS formula played into the hands of weaker conferences, leaving the strong conferences out in the BCS Championship snow. Hence, I thought that the Big 10 and SEC would struggle to send teams to the championship game this year.

Obvously I was wrong...but...Florida needed help from the Gods to get in, because despite having the toughest schedule in football, they had too many "ugly" wins. Hence, the voters were inclined to take USC, Notre Dame, or even Michigan over the Gators. But USC and Notre Dame ended with two losses, and the notion of a team finishing second in its conference leap-frogger a conference champ with the same number of losses was too much for voters to stomach. The tough schedule almost cost Florida a trip to Arizona.

Strength of schedule has never amounted to much in the BCS. Recall an undefeated Auburn, in the toughest conference in football got left at the alter by the BCS two years ago.

Meanwhile, Ohio State's Big 10 schedule was easier than it looked, because they didn't have to play Wisconsin, and after the top 3 teams, the Big 10 was softer than expected. Also, Ohio State had the advantage of playing Texas when Texas was ranked #2. That gave the Buckeyes the look of champions way back in September. People remembered that Rose Bowl, not knowing that Texas would turn out to be an average team, finishing the season falling to K-State and Texas A&M.

USC should not have finished with 2 losses to inferior teams. Louisville should have beaten Rutgers. My hat's off to Rutgers, UCLA and Oregon State, all of whom played like heros. But had USC or Louisville beaten just one of those teams, Florida would have been outside looking in.

Still, the two best football conference are represented in the Championship, so I will eat crow until 2007.

2006 College Football Season

2006-12-07T14:08:00.000-08:00

Well, the college football season is almost over, and two things stand out. First, the BCS is still stupid. Second, university presidents have officially sold their souls to college football. When Oklahoma lost to Oregon on a bad call, the president of Oklahoma demanded that the NCAA officially nullify the result. Imagine this: The president of Oklahoma’s premier state institution of higher learning demanding that the student athletes at Oregon be denied their victory because of a bad call by an official. I hardly know where to begin, other than to say that if one of Oklahoma’s players made such a demand I would call it childish. That the president should get involved at all is odd. That he should make such a demand borders on the absurd and probably marks the end of the university system in the USA as we previously understood it.

College football has outgrown colleges and universities. Chances are, Oklahoma’s football coach is the highest paid employee at the University of Oklahoma. He and his coaching staff are probably paid more than the math or theater department. Remind me again of the university’s priorities? Would the Oklahoma president have gone on national TV to dress down a local theater company that preferred an Oklahoma State student for the role of Juliet to a University of Oklahoma student?

When Florida meets Ohio State in the BCS National Championship Game, we ought rightly wonder, if those university presidents were forced to choose between the football program and the History department, which would they choose? I know. I am an idiot. Nobody thinks they would choose History.

What's wrong with college sports?

2006-08-27T19:34:00.000-07:00

Now and again people ask me, what is wrong with college sports. The answer can be summed up in the phrase, "If you're a winner in football, you'll be a winner in life." The hidden message, if you are a loser in football, you'll be a loser in life...

But to be more specific, the problem with college sports is that they are built on a series of lies, and those lies haunt the endeavor.

Lie number one: College sports bring in money to the university. Only about 30 programs nation wide actually operate in the black. The rest draw money from the general revenues to support their sports programs. That means money that would have gone for chemistry labs goes for basketballs.

Lie number two: College sports provide educational opportunities for students who would not otherwise have a chance to go to college. This is just absurd. First, most of the serious college athletes (football and basketball) who have a real chance of going pro don't graduate. Just check the graduation rates for most of the Division I-AA schools. But what about the lesser sports and Division II and Division II schools? Well, those student athletes may not have been at the particular school they are attending because of sports, but most would be enrolled somewhere without the incentive of sports. Furthermore, the argument is unjust if true. The idea that bad students ought to be allowed to attend good schools because they are fast, or can tackle well, rather than giving those spots to brighter, more academically eager students is immoral. That would be like awarding the National Championship in College football to the team with the best Math GRE Scores.

Lie number three: College sports are a healthy diversion for college students. Apart from the semi-pro college teams that are simply opperating non-profit minor league teams, the majority of college athletes play simply for the fun of it. But here is the rub. Even though they play for fun, the schools hire expensive coaches (which takes money from academic programs) who themselves have hopes of reaching Division I-AA schools themselves. So they push their teams with practices similar to those endured by the "football" schools. But, whereas in those "football" schools, the student/athletes have the possibility of a professional career, the athletes in the lesser schools are being pushed hard just for fun. This hard pushing can often include 5-6 hours of training a day. This takes time away from studies, but more importantly, it takes a toll on the student's bodies. Scores of students at Division II and Division III schools suffer serious injuries in training and during athletic events. Tore ACLs, ICL, bad backs, etc. And all for the fun of the game. By the time these students are 40, they will be showing their committment to their school with bad knees and a bent back.

While sports are perfectly good exercise, too much training greatly increases the chance of serious injury. If these college sports were really just for fun, they would be administered the way intermural sports, student players, student coaches, and built around student schedules.

LSU National Champs

2006-08-08T20:44:00.000-07:00

OK, probably not. But if they get the QB situation settled, teach the receivers how to catch, find three guys who can play linebacker, and remind the offensive line to block on first down, then they have as good a chance as anyone out there.

The media loves Auburn to win the SEC, and the SEC West Champion will probably be the winner of the LSU/Auburn game in that third week of the season. It doesn't hurt Auburn's chances that the game is in Auburn this year. That series generally favors the home team (unlike the LSU/Alabama series).

West Virginia will be in the BCS if for no other reason than the Big East is still soft but has an automatic bid. The BCS Championship formula awards good teams in weak conferences. So expect the national title game to host teams from the Big East, Pac 10 or Big 12. The ACC, SEC and Big 10 are too tough to make it likely that any of its participants will finish the season undefeated.

World Cup Predictions

2006-07-31T10:50:00.000-07:00

If you look at my World Cup Predictions, you will note that I picked Italy, Germany, France and Holland to be in the final four. I missed Holland for Portugal. It isn't magic, just an awareness of the tendency of the South Americans to fold when playing in Europe.

I thought Germany would win, given home field advantage. Based on the Germany/Italy semi-final, I think Germany the second best squad. Obviously Italy was the best. Still, hats off to the French for a valiant effort.

Next up, my SEC football predictions.

Brazil - Argentina - Germany - Spain

2006-06-21T06:39:00.000-07:00

So far, the South American powerhouses Brazil and Argentina have looked good. Germany and Spain too have been strong throughout.

France, England, Italy and the Czech Republic have all struggled to find their form.

England has fought off injury to finish a first in their Group, but can't get the win over Sweden that they desire.

France can't find the goal, and with Trez (#2 scoring in the Italian League) on the bench most of the time, one wonders if a change is coming for this last crucial group match against Togo.

Italy is playing their typical inconsistent soccer. Who knows who will show up to play the equally confused Czechs.

World Cup Inbreeding

2006-06-05T11:48:00.000-07:00

After viewing the rosters of most of the teams, one thing stands out. The Italian team is composed entirely of players from the Italian Serie A league. Not a single player on the team competes in Spain, England, Germany, France, Holland...

Mind you, Germany, England and Spain also get the majority of their players from within their national leagues. So the difference may not be significant.

Still, one wonders what this means. The fear for Italy is that it means the current crop of Italian players do not play their best outside the borders of their fair nation. And as the World Cup is being held in Germany, that would not bode well for a team with high expectations.

On the otherhand, perhaps it only means that the Serie A league is so competitive, that Italian players have no reason to go abroad for the best club soccer has to offer.

We shall see.

World Cup

2006-05-21T22:17:00.000-07:00

OK, it isn't college sports, its pro sports. But college athletes are essentially professionals now anyway, so the line is one I am willing to step over.

So who is going to win the World Cup in 2006.

USA - no chance. I will be cheering for them, but they are unlikely to win a game and wont escape from their group.

England - nope. With all their strikers hobbled, they will be toothless. Expect a noble effort and start thinking 2010.

Brazil - unlikely. Sure, they have the talent, but only once has a South American team ever won the cup when the tournament was held in Europe. OK, that team was Brazil...still.

France - maybe. If Henry and Trez get going, France is always dangerous. But the midfield will not be what it was in 1998.

Holland - maybe. Like Brazil, they have the talent, and they are close to home.

Italy - a fair bet. Plenty of goal scoring potential, and traditionally good defense, though perhaps not what it was. Still, should Italy keep most of its players out of prizon, they will be tough.

Germany - the favorite. They are at home, and Close can still score. Their midfield is very strong, goal tending excellent (when the keeper isn't red carded) and they always offer a well organized defense.

What of Spain, Argentina, Africa, Asia or Eastern Europe? Yeah, yeah. If you want to put your money there go ahead, but don't blame me. If I was a betting man (which I am) I would look to the central European powers in this order: Germany, Italy, France, Holland. OK, put Brazil in there too. God knows they have more talent than all four of those teams combined.

Duke Lacrosse?

2006-05-19T09:54:00.000-07:00

The scandal at Duke University is only the tip of the iceberg. The problem is not rich, privledged white boys gone wild. That problem has always and will always exist. The problem is college sports.

At what point in history did the institutions of higher learning, those institutions whose first order of business is to serve and protect civilization, tie their fortunes to the 18-22 year old athletes?

Contrary to the myth, college sports produce very little in the way of revenue. Research indicates that only a few (about 25-30) elite football schools operate athletic departments that operate in the black. For the majority of colleges and universities, athletics is net financial loss. So why are virtually all American colleges and universities so hell bent building and maintaining their athletic programs.

Unfortunately, the answer is still money. But it isn’t the direct revenue stream that you have been led to believe.

The general populace, which funds higher education through regular citizens taxes, tuition, direct gifts and garments bearing the college logos, has never had much interest in education, or the service and protection of civilization. Most citizens get bored with discussions of genetics, mathematical theory, literary theory, particle physics, and art history. But the citizenry loves sport. In particular, they like football, but many can be enticed to watch the other sports as well. Even most Duke University graduates don’t know about the two new literature professors Duke just hired, but they know who the basketball coach is, and they know that Duke’s lacrosse team is ranked in the top 5. That is, until the team embarrassed itself with a series of extra curricular activities so boorish that team members are finally facing court dates.

By maintaining a sporting presence, the universities essentially justify their existence to the general populace. Colleges have joined the entertainment industry. And this industry justifies their existence to the people who support them. Few citizens of Georgia would care that the University of Georgia was planning to eliminate its philosophy department. But there would be thousands of letters to the state congress, the governor and the president of the university, if it were planning to eliminate its football program.

The result, our colleges give athletes a lot of rope academically and socially. Universities dramatically lower academic standards for athletes, because the athletes are the connection between the university and the populace. For the same reason, the university is likely to overlook misbehavior, until that misbehavior creates enough bad publicity to offset the positive publicity created by the athletic program.

It is often argued that the college athletes don’t behave any worse than the average student and certainly this is true. But the average student doesn’t matter because the average student isn’t part of the college entertainment industry that funds the institution.

So long as colleges and universities are tied to the populace in this fashion, great institutions like Duke University will be susceptible to the misbehavior of a handful drunk lacrosse players.