The month of March is known as one of the most fun in sports. For decades, Americans have gathered around their TVs to watch one of the biggest spectacles in sports: March Madness. The 68 team single elimination battle to the death is an amalgamation of upsets, buzzer beaters, and cinderella teams. However, behind this amazing tournament lies one of the most oppressive groups in sports: the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The NCAA is a “nonprofit” organization that presides over pretty much all college sports. Through the years, their reputation has quickly declined due to various academic and athletic scandals. However, I venture to say it actually shares many similarities with a dystopia.
For starters, dystopias often have a utopian ideology. The NCAA stresses how important amateurism is in preserving the sanctity of college sports. But, similar to the Handmaid’s tale pushing religion as a justification for their oppressive ideology, the NCAA uses amateurism as a similar idealistic principle. The NCAA uses the notion that athletes should be playing for the “love of the game” and “as students first” to make millions of dollars off conference TV deals, ticket prices, and marketing their players and their abilities. However, the universities are only able to provide scholarships to their players. For many sports (golf, tennis, swimming, gymnastics, etc), this trade is more than fair. However, for the sports who bring in revenue (football, men’s and women’s basketball, and volleyball), this trade is entirely unfair to the athletes that are essentially being exploited for their labor.
Further, the NCAA has rules that sound ominously similar to authoritarian rules in an actual dystopia. There are entire offices in each athletic department devoted to making sure student athletes don’t take free bagels without first clearing it through the NCAA. In fact, the NCAA is notorious for penalizing teams for minute infractions (such as providing extra food in buffet lines) while systematically ignoring major infractions by well known teams (such as the UNC academic scandal a few years back). Further, the NCAA is notorious for essentially being a “black box” when it comes to various rules they have. For example, NCAA football and basketball players who wish to transfer have to sit out a year. However, players can petition for waivers to play immediately under various grounds. Their petition is viewed by a committee, and the school then gets an answer. Nobody knows who is in the committee, or what rubric the committee uses to evaluate the petitions. All we ever see is the results. Further, there is almost no reasoning behind their decisions. Ahmad Starks--an Illinois basketball player in 2016-- transferred from Oregon State to Illinois to be closer to an ailing family member. His request to play was denied. This year, a disgruntled quarterback (Tate Martell) who alienated all his teammates at Ohio State requested to transfer to play football at Miami (FL). His waiver was granted. There is no rhyme or reason for this.
When you boil it down to it, if I told you a group was exploiting labor for the benefit of the group, imposing a litany of petty and strict rules, and dishes out formal decisions under a cloak of secrecy, you would think it sounds like an authoritarian government. The NCAA operates under this exact system.
--Duane
You make a lot of good points and make a surprisingly convincing argument that NCAA is similar to an authoritarian government. The one thing i'm not sure about is your suggestion that they're rules are inconsistent, since by virtue of their decisions being somewhat of a black box, theres no way to say that Starks didn't break some rule that Martell followed.
ReplyDeleteGreat post Duane! As someone who knows absolutely nothing about basketball, this was very interesting to read. I wonder how many other national and international sports organizations operate in a similar way. I know that there is a very interesting monopoly created by FIFA that you might enjoy exploring if you like this kind of stuff.
ReplyDeleteYou are absolutely right DJ. Along with these two examples there are several other examples of this happening in just the transfer rules in which there is no rhyme or reason. Another example of this is the controversial nature of Redshirts. There are some people to whom they are granted, and many to whom they are not granted with no rhyme or reason. Could this simply be a case of laziness by the committee?
ReplyDeleteGood point. The NCAA does preach assuming a "holier than thou" position using their ideology of amateurism. On top of the examples you stated, it is as if the NCAA is against any of its athletes making any type of money for themselves aside from scholarships. I understand that they are trying to prevent players from striking rich using their fame accrued through their play, like Zion at Duke for example, however, they also deny players to continue making money who have already made something of themselves. There was a player a while back who was not allowed to play because he already had a successful youtube channel he made money off of before starting his collegiate career. I think that is unfair and the NCAA should be investigated for such unjust rulings. They should not be allowed to micromanage the lives of all their players to such a degree.
ReplyDeleteAll of your points are interesting for sure. You talked about some instances where the NCAA might come off as oppressive and even petty. I will say, however, that if you asked any of those players to leave, they wouldn't. Their love for the game of basketball is too great. Also, I bet if you asked many of the players operating under the NCAA they would feel totally content with their collegiate basketball experience. I think that some of the restrictive actions of the NCAA could be well justified if you really took the time to analyze them one by one. I just don't think that any of their policies would come out of whim. Like the transfer policy, it makes sense that some players might have to sit a year while others might play immediately. There are most likely circumstantial differences that account for that outcome. I just don't think that the NCAA is really that much of a dystopia or else people would've done something about it.
ReplyDeleteThis is a really interesting post! I agree that the decisions that the NCAA makes seem arbitrary at times and could definitely come across as unfair. In that regard it could definitely be seen as dystopian. As Albert said, the player's love of what they are doing keeps them where they are, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it isn't dystopian. Especially as it is the primary if not the only route to the NBA, the NFL, or some such orginization, the NCAA is in a unique position of power over college athletes, one which it seems to abuse. In that sense it could definitely be seen as a dystopian government using its power over the careers and futures of college athletes, its power over what they love to do, to control them. That being said, it isn't really doing anything evil, and the athletes seem to mostly enjoy their time, so it isn't totally dystopian.
ReplyDeleteI have not paid too much attention to collegiate sports until I read your post. You make an interesting argument for how NCAA can be construed as displaying authoritarian tendencies and oppressing the players. While it does appear to be a dystopia at first glance, I agree with Albert and Sammy that majority of the time the players seem to enjoying their tenure, and in that sense it does not resemble a true dystopia.
ReplyDeleteI have no knowledge on collegiate sports, in fact I have no knowledge regarding regular pro sports. If the way you describe the NCAA is true, then I can see how you would view it as a dystopia. It is a greedy organization taking advantage of students love of a game in order to gain revenue. I do not know if there are any other leagues, but if not, then students would be forced to play in this league to represent their schools in their favorite game. It has a lot of similarities to a dystopia, however one difference I can think of is that with enough outside interference it can be changed.
ReplyDeleteI've always believed that NCAA athletes should be paid because it isn't fair that the NCAA makes billions in revenue while student athletes are not allowed the freedoms of a pro-basketball players. I really liked how you compared the NCAA to an authoritarian state because of their lack of transparency and their ridiculous rules that they don't regularly enforce. However, I do agree with Kevin that the NCAA isn't a dystopia because the fans have the power to call for changes to be made.
ReplyDeleteThe point that you make about the labor of the athletes being exploited is very interesting. I imagine its not easy competing at the highest levels of college sports, and maintaining good grades. I definitely think that the players should be compensated more fairly for how much revenue they bring in. I would have never thought of the NCAA as a dystopia before this, very interesting.
ReplyDelete