perfidy

The Boston Globe reports that "[a] study released Monday showed that 10 of the schools in this week's round of 16 have failed to graduate even half of their players in recent years."

I'd like to open up discussion about the role of college atheletics in education. Obviously, top-shelf college atheletes are not really "amateurs" by any stretch of the imagination, no matter what the NCAA might claim. I've seen it argued recently (sorry-- no link!) that student atheletes should get credit for their participation in sports, as the time devoted to atheletics takes the place of academics in their education-- this would then make them true 'student atheletes'. I've also seen it argued that NCAA schools should be able to pay their players to compensate for the time that sports monopolizes from their schedule. Many argue that student atheletes deserve extra consideration because winning teams bring loads of money into universities. What do you lot think? Or do you not care?