Apparently the Big Ten proposed last year to allow all athletes in all sports the ability to transfer once in their five year eligible period without any sitting out. It was tabled this year but is still up for consideration.
One thing I am missing (someone help me if you can explain it): dropped in the middle of the article, completely nonsequitur, are two lines saying race has something to do with it.
More than 55 percent of the athletes in football, men's basketball and women's basketball -- three of the five singled-out sports -- are minorities. In men's basketball alone, that figure is 65 percent.
"It's not that we believe the rules are racist," Manuel said. "The rules are disproportionately impacting a group of people that are distinctive by race."
The paragraphs above this and below this have nothing to do with this at all, and there's no explanation of how race is affected by the current rule or how this would solve a racial issue anywhere else in the entire story. It goes back to the main discussion and doesn't mention race any further. It almost feels like this article was cobbled together from several other stories (or, well, maybe the author just isn't very good). Does this make sense to anyone else just from reading this?
I'm not arguing it makes sense in the context of the article, but if the rule disproportionately effects one race or another it could be argued as discriminatory. Of course the current rule could, therefore, also be arguably discriminatory. But then, it's not really the rules that are doing anything disproportionately, but the composition of major college athletics is racially skewed.
Troy Dannen has tweeted in strong support of this measure.
“We will expect success in all endeavors and be prepared to assess and hold ourselves accountable when we aren't successful. Tulane is a top 40 academic institution and it should expect nothing less from its athletic department.”--Troy Dannen 11.5.16
gerryb323 wrote:I'm not arguing it makes sense in the context of the article, but if the rule disproportionately effects one race or another it could be argued as discriminatory. Of course the current rule could, therefore, also be arguably discriminatory. But then, it's not really the rules that are doing anything disproportionately, but the composition of major college athletics is racially skewed.
Disparate impact
Using big words is not a personal attack
#cousins don't count