SCHAUB BACK to pass. He scans the field, looking for the open man. Dodges the defender in the backfield and sees Miller open on the sideline. The pass is in the air, but it's tipped at the line of scrimmage. And, what's this? The ball is intercepted by Attorney General Jerry Kilgore! The Scott Stadium crowd erupts with booing. It seems another politician has stuck his nose where it doesn't belong: In the world of college sports.
The preceding scene is but a figurative representation of an actual disturbing trend, wherein elected officials have sought to express undue influence in the structure of collegiate athletics. In the past six months, sports have become the focus for a new style of pork-barrel politics. By using their positions to bring about outcomes favored by their sports-loving constituents, politicians can indirectly shore up public support for themselves at the expense of colleges' rights to govern their own athletic programs. More than simply being annoying, this intrusion of political figures into the realm of sports bodes ill for both the schools involved in those sports and for politics as a whole.
Two recent events illustrate this concept perfectly. Last Thursday, Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff issued a letter threatening to initiate an investigation into college football's Bowl Championship Series for violating anti-trust laws ("Utah AG threatens investigation of BCS," si.com, Nov. 15). The Commonwealth of Virginia made national news over the summer when Gov. Mark R. Warner and Attorney General Kilgore intervened to ensure that the University would support Virginia Tech's inclusion in the Atlantic Coast Conference's expansion plans.
By claiming to be in search of broader political goals, politicians can seek to make actions like these appear legitimate. In Utah, Shurtleff has lamented the lack of fair market competition in light of the exclusive monopoly the BCS holds over the process for selecting the national football champion. For Virginians, the Hokies' presence in a viable football conference was said to be crucial to maintaining the economic health of Southwest Virginia. Never mind that the BCS actually allows greater access to high profile bowls than the previous system, or that the shear volume of Tech's student body alone might be the determining factor in powering the Blacksburg economy.
Despite what the parties involved might claim, intervention into sports has yet to be motivated by anything other than political gain. The state of Utah is home to three football programs with avid followings -- Utah, Utah State and BYU -- that are not members of the BCS conferences. The attorney general certainly isn't losing any approval points over attacking the institution that purportedly denies these schools national recognition. A similar situation exists in Virginia, where a large number of Hokie faithful can be found voting in just about every precinct. What Virginia politician wouldn't want to be known as the guy who rescued Frank Beamer's squad from the jaws of a dying Big East?
Exercising power in the sphere of college athletics is quickly becoming the politician's preferred method for boosting his or her image. Under the guise of advocating a worthy social cause, those in office can please sections of the public without having to solve actual problems or enacting effective policy. This cheapens the nature of politics and places an emphasis on modes of entertainment rather than issues.
When such practices prevail, the universities involved won't always emerge unscathed. Since politicians hold the keys to coveted state funding, their preferences for a school to take a certain direction can easily slip into coercion. Some pundits accused Warner and Kilgore of doing this by pressuring the University into convincing the ACC to extend a membership invitation to Virginia Tech. Whether or not this is actually how the events played out, the growing trend of political control over sports should be a frightening prospect for every college administrator. There is no guarantee that the interests of politicians will match those of the athletic departments they seek to control. The autonomy of state universities is threatened if politicians do not begin to reign themselves in and refuse to make decisions regarding college sports.
There are a lot of ways that politicians can rightfully get involved in college sports. They can ensure that state schools receive adequate funding, approve construction projects for new athletic facilities and even attend games in person. However, when those in public office begin to view intervention in collegiate sports as another method by which to increase their personal popularity, they demonstrate a blatant case of unsportsmanlike conduct.
(Chris Kiser's column appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at ckiser@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 2 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | January 9, 2025Every student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
