San Antonio — Many women’s basketball players say their collegiate experience has left much to be desired.
The athletes’ feelings about how they were recruited, which college they ultimately landed at, and the ethics of their coaches were included in a broad-based 2010 NCAA survey of nearly 20,000 college athletes across all sports and divisions.
The findings include some dispiriting news for those involved in women’s basketball. Many women’s basketball players singled out college coaches as a source of their dissatisfaction: More than a third of the Division I players surveyed said they had been contacted too often during the recruiting process, and just 39 percent—the lowest percentage across all sports—of players in that division said they “strongly agreed” that they could trust their coach.
In Division II women’s basketball, only a third of the athletes surveyed said they “strongly agreed” that their head coach defined success “not just by winning, but by winning fairly.”
The survey also included information on the students’ time commitment to athletics. NCAA rules allow athletes to spend 20 hours each week on their sport, but by including “voluntary” activities as well as official practices and games, the weekly tallies in many sports far exceeded that limit.
Football players in Division I-A, as they did in a previous survey, from 2006, still lead the pack: Those athletes reported spending more than 43 hours each week on athletics. Division I baseball and basketball players also devoted significant time to their sport, with 42 and 39 hours, respectively. (In Division III, by comparison, athletes reported spending at least 30 hours each week on their sport when in season.)
Many women’s basketball players were not pleased with the amount of time—nearly 38 hours in Division I—spent on their sport, particularly when it came to being with coaches. More than a third said they would have preferred spending less time with their head coach (only 7 percent said they would have wanted more time). Across all three divisions, women’s basketball players said they would have preferred spending less time on athletics.
15 Responses to College Athletes Identify Trouble Spots in Women’s Basketball
11272784 - January 14, 2011 at 4:33 pm
One of these days the NCAA will admit they’re employees and pay them. I hope.
bstevens - January 14, 2011 at 5:33 pm
I wonder if the women basketball students are more serious about their studies than student-athletes in the other sports. Is that why they are the most dissatisfied with the amount of time they are asked to spend on basketball? Is there any correlation with grades or graduation rates?
prof1977 - January 14, 2011 at 7:50 pm
What a sad reflection on our student/athletes. They are getting full scholarships (often at schools that cost #30-45,000 per year
plus room and board)and they think 39 hours a week (I assume that includes games)is to much. And this is to play a sport they probably love. Wait until they get a real job, in the real world. Most will make less money (at least,thos attending the high end schools)and not be overly thrilled with their boss. This attitude carries over into the classroom. We give them to much work, we ask to much of them. Give that scholarship back and go to the local Community College, if you want no responsibilities. When are we going to step up to these kids and say “grow up”?
williams_kathy - January 14, 2011 at 8:16 pm
@prof1977 — Your comments are insulting to the following groups: student-athletes, bosses, young adults, people who know when to use “to, too or two” and students,faculty and administrators at community colleges. My guess is you only meant to insult the first group.
Have a nice weekend.
22116123 - January 14, 2011 at 8:36 pm
When I taught at Drake University between 1994 and 1999, I had a better chance to get to know student athletes than I did at the two research institutions at which I have taught, before and since. The pharmacy program provided about 20% of Drake’s students at the time, and many of its best women athletes. The Drake women’s basketball team went to the NCAA 3 times while I was there, and in 4 of the 5 years the MVP was a pharmacy student. The women’s team averaged around a 3.5 GPA, and one MVP was a 4.0 pharmacy student until her final year, when she “sunk” to a 3.92. I was at the “seniors farewell game” at which her GPA was announced, and everyone in the stands wanted to know which of our many pharmacy faculty members in attendance had given her a B. These young women were outstanding scholars and athletes, and were taking a program of study in which we recommended that outside employment should be limited to 16 hours per week. I wouldn’t be surprised if they far exceeded this level during the season, and several of them also had to participate in clinical activities at the same time.
Drake was a Division I-A school, so most student athletes were not on scholarship (the basketball team was). But our softball players, track, and soccer teams worked equally hard.
I’m not in a mood to accept the results of this survey as any criticism of student athletes.
11186245 - January 15, 2011 at 10:08 am
The study suggests that the student/player wants less emphasis on her sport. My impression from the year I spent with a women’s basketball team (Duke, 1999/2000) was that the norm was to be early for practice, work exceedingly hard (all out) during practice, and then stay around for pick up games or study film of upcoming opponets. If you would not/ could not fit the norm, you would not play. I felt these students were highly dedicated and focused – they wanted to be the best they could be. Group camaraderie was quintessential and the only way for that to develop was to spend time with coaches and team mates. The program I observed paid attention to the academic side as well, providing study tables and tutors for the team, along with coaches checking in with faculty on how their players were doing in classes. The support was truly wonderful, I thought.
The player/coach relationships I observed were very good, so I am surprised in the survey’s conclusion that players want less time with coaches, especially the head coach. Interesting.
John Lubans Jr.
mbelvadi - January 16, 2011 at 8:15 pm
Am I the only person reading this wondering if the whole “too much time with coaches” thing isn’t code for a problem of sexual harassment? Disclaimer – I absolutely know nothing specific about women’s collegiate basketball, but this just seems very odd to me.
msucareers - January 17, 2011 at 9:58 am
The complexity associated with “dissatisfaction” is far to much for this short piece to address. Having been a division I athlete I can say that to be good (win), it takes lots of time (and the coach is usually there). Any student athlete that is able to manage the many demands placed upon them (time )successfully is somebody I’d want to hire. These athletes learn to work together (diversity, conflict resolution, communication, leadership) to accomplish team goals. Of course these athletes don’t want to spend 40 hours a week on their sport. They see their friends having a much different college experience. When I was done competing, I was in AWE of what the average college student does during the day. They actually have FREE time.
goxewu - January 17, 2011 at 10:03 am
The obviously biggest “problem spot” in D-1 women’s basketball is that it’s becoming a “revenue sport.” While it may not yet fill 20,000-seat college arenas with shirtless people who paint themselves bright colors and hand-signal that they can count to one, it’s starting to be all over the ESPN and ESPN2 program menus, as well as those of other regional and local cable networks. The kind of money schools can thereby earn = recruiting violations / excessive practice time / maltreatment of players / bloated schedules and travel causing missed classes, etc.
So far, at least, high school girls’ basketball doesn’t involve substandard students’ grades being manipulated to maintain eligibility, “prep academies” that concoct minimal college-admission qualifications for barely literate 19-year-olds who couldn’t graduate from their regular high schools, and national televised “showcase” high school games. But these things are probably coming.
And re prof1977′s Panglossian comment: Yes, 39 hours a week (and most often it’s more than that) of physically draining work that demands hours of recuperative down time IS too much to ask in return for an athletic “scholarship,” especially if the student-athlete is supposed to carry a full load. (It’s the exceptional student, not the average one, and especially not the under-qualified revenue-sports athlete, who can work a full-time job and carry a full academic load.) Athletic “scholarships” in revenue sports come down to this: The college says, “We’ll give you room and board and let you take classes for five years. But we’re only interested in keeping you academically eligible so that we can win, get the program on television, and make money and get free advertising for the school. Actual progress toward a degree is your problem, as is your getting something resembling a ‘education’ out of the whole deal. Good luck.”
washingtonwarrior - January 17, 2011 at 10:19 am
I think the Drake example is not indicative of Division I athletics as a whole. Drake has much higher admissions standards and is not a true representation of athletes across the board.
In light of recent events, I think discussing sexual identity among women’s college basketball and player dissatisfaction is relevant. Many coaches implicitly or explicitly discriminate against lesbian players. Until coaches are more understanding/accepting, unhappiness will continue.
vherzog - January 17, 2011 at 11:58 pm
The NCAA needs to eliminate the category of “voluntary” activities. They are not voluntary. All athletes know that if they want to keep their scholarships, they better attend every “voluntary” conditioning workout, team meeting, individual workout, weight-lifting session, etc. Athletes should only put in 20 hours per week, period. If this isn’t feasible, the NCAA should increase the limit to 25 hr/week, but keep it firm and have it include ALL team activities.
Athletes need to have enough time to earn a quality education in any major they choose, not just a handful of majors that seem to fit around their schedules.
wilcoxlibrary - January 24, 2011 at 1:58 pm
What would the complaints look like if they had to practice at 2 am in the morning to get ice time? I would like to see the study on other sports as well.
rsmulcahy - January 25, 2011 at 4:55 pm
“And re prof1977′s Panglossian comment: Yes, 39 hours a week (and most often it’s more than that) of physically draining work that demands hours of recuperative down time IS too much to ask in return for an athletic “scholarship,” especially if the student-athlete is supposed to carry a full load.”
If the whole enterprise is just too much work then why are graduation rates for women’s basketball far better than for their non-athlete peers?
“Athletes need to have enough time to earn a quality education in any major they choose, not just a handful of majors that seem to fit around their schedules.”
That is what you want to believe not something you have researched and found to be true. Please provide us with the distribution of women’s basketball majors in D-I schools before the disconnect between brain and finger pressing starts again. And I will say this for the 100th time, why are athletic depts responsible for accrediting majors? There are hundreds of majors at most large research institutions bur most undergrads cluster in the same small number of core degrees as do their athlete peers. Why do you care what they major in? Most undergrads major in something from college of arts and sciences and usually the major is about 1/3 of your total graduation credits. The major for most students is “liberal arts” and if you can distinguish between the rigor/importance of a philosophy major and a sociology major definitely key us all in.
goxewu - January 25, 2011 at 5:21 pm
@ rsmulcahy:
At the moment, women’s D-1 basketball is not the “revenue sport” that men’s D-1 basketball is. It doesn’t have the size and intensity of fan base, nor the television ratings and profits of men’s D-1 basketball. Women D-1 basketball players don’t have the dream of becoming millionaires by playing in the pros, nor do female high school basketball players. So right now, fewer (than male) really good female high school basketball players are substandard students who have to be sent off to some basketball-factory “prep school” in order to acquire the bare minimum admission requirements for college. And fewer (than male) obviously unqualified-for-college female basketball players are admitted just to get the basketball team into “March Madness.”
But women’s D-1 basketball is rising in fan base and TV ratings. So everything even remotely possible to keep women D-1 basketball players eligible is done: tutors, preferred courses, managed schedules, grade pressure from the athletic department, etc. And because “non-athlete” peers includes a much wider variety in students’ ages, outside commitments, off-campus jobs, etc., of course the players’ graduation rate is better.
And prof1977′s Panglossian comment referred, I thought, to all D-1 revenue-sports athletes. Women D-1 basketball players probably spend a little less time on their sport than do the men, or football players. That’s because the money, and the attendant corruption, isn’t there…yet.
Let me put it this way:
* If something makes a lot of money, you want to hire pros to do it.
* If the pros have to have a cover as “student-athletes,” that can be done. (Not a lot of physics majors in the “revenue sports”; a disproportionate number of “Recreation Administration” majors.)
* When push comes to shove (i.e., when academics go up against bowl-game payouts or tournament runs), money talks, academics walk.
I’ve been there. I’ve seen it wholesale, and I’ve been pressured myself. Reggie Bush and (just wait) Cam Newton are more examples of big-time college sports’ SOP than most people are willing to admit.
mtvaughn5 - January 27, 2011 at 9:38 pm
As a female high school athlete myself. I can completely relate to what these girls are saying. I am seventeen and play three sports, basketball, volleyball, and track and field. Female athletes are expected to do it all: be mini geniuses and great phenoms in the sport you play. I am currently playing basketball right now and will move onto track when spring starts. Basketball was the first sport I played and loved it. Right now my heart is not in it anymore. I keep telling everyone that I have no plans to play in college. I just cannot see myself playing this sport for the next four years of my life. I would love to play two sports in college, track and (Basketball or Volleyball). I wake up at 5:30 am every morning and have a two hour practice or game. Somedays I am up until 12 or 1 in the morning doing homework and I have to wake up and do it all again. I dont want to continue the same stress and tireless days in college. Right now I need sports to get into school. I have decent grades (As and Bs) and still its a struggle to find an athletic scholarship. I could go on and on about my troubles, but in the end I know what most of these female athletes go through.