Allegations of gang rape by men’s lacrosse players at Duke University could lead to changes in athletics programs far beyond Durham, N.C.
The accusations that prompted Duke’s president, Richard H. Brodhead, to cancel the lacrosse team’s season have caused college officials elsewhere to examine the roots and repercussions of athletes’ boorish behavior — and ask what universities can do to help prevent students from acting irresponsibly.
Late last week, many college officials refused to discuss the story for fear of judging Duke, its lacrosse players, or how the university has handled the crisis. But some legal experts and athletics officials shared ideas about how the scandal might affect college sports.
A new lacrosse landscape. Several college lacrosse coaches predict that Duke will permanently disband its lacrosse program.
Mr. Brodhead has appointed a six-member committee to examine all aspects of Duke’s lacrosse team. That committee, which is expected to make recommendations about its findings to the president by May 1, could recommend eliminating the program, says Chris Kennedy, Duke’s senior associate athletics director.
Even if Duke saves the program, it may have trouble fielding a team next season. The university has offered all seven of its recruits and its 47 current players the option of either keeping their scholarships (regardless of whether Duke has a team), or receiving a release from their commitments to play for Duke. All seven recruits and about half of the squad’s players are exploring the option of playing elsewhere, Mr. Kennedy says.
Even if those students want to transfer, they may find it difficult to do so. Dave Urick, men’s lacrosse coach at Georgetown University, says that several Duke players and some of its recruits have contacted him about playing for the Hoyas next season. But because most Division I lacrosse programs have already signed most of their players for next season, Mr. Urick says, “it’s not likely that too many schools will have the resources to sign any Duke players.”
Still, he is working with Georgetown’s admissions office to try to bring in as many as three Duke players and recruits.
The cancellation of the Duke lacrosse season has also had a big impact on the sport. Duke was ranked among the nation’s top programs and had a 6-2 record before its season was canceled.
Last week the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s Division I lacrosse committee discussed how to handle those results when selecting the field for next month’s NCAA championships. The committee is also concerned that some women’s-rights advocates might hold protests during the lacrosse season’s final weekend.
No more free rides. Some legal experts predict that the Duke investigation will lead more colleges to dismiss players who violate team rules.
According to NCAA rules, athletics scholarships are renewed annually. Until now, the majority of colleges have viewed scholarship renewals as perfunctory, honoring their aid commitments to all athletes even if some have occasionally run afoul of the law.
But that may change, says Pamela J. Bernard, vice president and general counsel at the University of Florida. She predicts that in an effort to protect their reputations, more colleges will look closely at players’ off-the-field behavior when making annual financial-aid decisions.
“You have to make sure athletes understand the expectations,” says Ms. Bernard, who is scheduled to become Duke’s general counsel on July 1. “And if students violate a university’s policies, swift action should be taken.”
Rooting out problems. The Duke scandal was a topic of conversation last week as 100 college officials gathered at Clemson University to discuss what causes athletes to act irresponsibly and how universities can prevent students from misbehaving.
Athletes’ off-the-field problems are often caused by their environment, says Sharon K. Stoll, a professor of physical education at the University of Idaho, who spoke at the conference. Her research suggests that the moral values of college athletes are declining.
Athletes do not just “turn bad,” Ms. Stoll says. Rather, they learn to make poor choices because their peers and coaches support them in those decisions. She believes that coaches and parents need to rearrange their priorities.
“Why do coaches spend so much time developing motor skills,” Ms. Stoll says, “but so little time developing moral skills?”
Looking inward. In light of what is happening at Duke, some college officials are starting to scrutinize their own programs.
Robb Jones, general counsel for claims management at United Educators Insurance, a major insurer of colleges, says that the Duke story has led some college administrators to discuss strategies for making coaches and athletics directors more responsible for policing athletes’ off-the-field activities — and recruiting players who are not likely to cause problems.
United Educators helps colleges and universities establish policies to try to prevent off-court indiscretions. This year the company has made five presentations to college officials at meetings across the country describing how to handle a hypothetical crisis in which a high-profile coach covered up a hazing incident.
Some college officials have reacted as if such a scenario would never happen on their campuses, Mr. Jones says. That, however, was before the news of the allegations at Duke, long considered one of the cleanest programs in college sports. The lesson from Duke’s woes, Mr. Jones says, is that bad things can happen in any athletics program.
http://chronicle.com Section: Students Volume 52, Issue 33, Page A48
