DOCSLIB.ORG

The Effects of Athletic Scholarships on Motivation in Sport

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Effects of Athletic Scholarships on Motivation in Sport The Effects of Athletic Scholarships on Motivation in Sport Nikola Medic McMaster University Diane E. Mack and Philip M. WUson Brock University Janet L. Starkes McMaster University The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of athletic scholarships on the motives of collegiate athletes for sport. "Present" and "perceived future" motivation was assessed in a sample of 70 non-scholarship and 46 scholarship basketball players. Male scholarship athletes reported higher levels of introjected regulation than female non-schol- arship athletes, and higher levels of external regulation compared to female scholarship athletes and all non-scholarship athletes. For non-scholarship athletes, the future possibil- ity of obtaining full athletic scholarships resulted in increased external regulation, de- creased intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation, and decreased intrinsic motivation to accomplish things. For scholarship athletes, the possibility of removing full athletic scholarships resulted in decreased intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation and de- creased intrinsic motivation to accomplish things. Collectively, the results of the present investigation offer support for Deci and Ryan's (1985) cognitive evaluation theory and point to the potential negative effects of scholarships on athlete's motivation for sport. Address Correspondence To: Nikola Medic, Department of Kinesiology, McMaster Uni- versity, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, L8S 4K1, Phone: (905) 525-9140 ext. 24625, E-mail: [email protected]. 292 The Effects of Athletic Scholarship... /293 Research has shown that intrinsic motivation (IM) and extrinsic motivation (EM) are important concepts for understanding motivational processes in sport settings (Deci & Ryan, 2002; Vallerand & Rousseau, 2001). IM refers to "doing an activity for its inherent satisfactions and pleasures rather than for some separable consequence" (Ryan & Deci, 2000, p. 56). On the other hand, EM reflects behaviors that are performed not for their own sake, but to achieve some separate goal (e.g., receiving a reward, avoiding punishment, maintaining contingent self-worth). Finally, amotivation refers to the absence of IM or EM and is considered central to understanding motivated behavior (Deci & Ryan, 2002). As such, it is perceived that one's actions have no control over outcomes and that forces beyond one's individual control deter- mine behavior (Deci & Ryan, 1985). According to self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985; 2002), motivational pro- cesses are best understood as a continuum of intemalizations ranging from volitional to highly controlling forms of regulation (Ryan & Deci, 2000). At one end, non-self-determined regula- tions in the form of EM operate to control behavior while, at the other extreme, self-determined intrinsic motives underpin behavior. These motives vary in the degree to which they reflect self-determined regulation of the behavior as they span the continuum between amotivation and IM. Four sources of EM have been noted in the sport motivation literature and include: external regulation, introjected regulation, identifled regulation, and integrated regulation (Vallerand & Rousseau, 2001). Externally regulated behaviors reflect the least self-determined form of EM whereby behavior is perceived to be controlled by outside sources. The next point along the continuum is introjected regulation, which refers to behavior that is reinforced through internal pressures such as guilt or anxiety that coerce participation rather than volitionally supporting involvement. Identified and integrated regulation are the most self- determined forms of EM which entail participating in an activity autonomously due to the importance of the outcomes stemming from the behavior or because the activity itself is coherent with other aspects of the self and thereby reflects the person's identity (Deci & Ryan, 2002). Three forms of IM have been identifled by Vallerand and Rousseau (2001), each reflec- tive of the most self-determined form of behavioral regulation. They include: (a) IM to know which regulates engagement in activity for the pleasure one receives from learning; (b) IM to accomplish which refers to the pleasure and satisfaction one feels while striving to accomplish particular tasks or goals; and (c) and IM to experience stimulation which occurs when one engages in a behavior because of the pleasurable sensations this act confers (Vallerand & Rousseau, 2001). Irrespective of the unitary (Deci & Ryan, 2002) or tripartite (Vallerand & Rousseau, 2001) conceptualization of IM, arguments put forth within the framework of SDT contend that self-determined motivation promotes adaptive cognitive, affective and behav- 294/Journal of Sport Behavior, Vol. 30, No. 3 ioral consequences including domain-speciflc indices of improved performance. Previous re- search has shown that more self-determined motives are positively associated with various cognitive, affective, and behavioral outcomes in sport settings (Gagne, Ryan, & Bargmann, 2003; Kowal & Fortier, 1999; Vallerand & Rousseau, 2001). Although research examining the motivation-performance link in sports remains scant (Vallerand & Rousseau, 2001), preliminary evidence indicates that identified and intrinsic motives predict behavioral engagement in swimming over time (Pelletier, Fortier, Vallerand, & Bri6re, 2001). Moreover, Marsh and Perry (2005) have demonstrated the importance of self-perceptions that serve a motivational func- tion indicating that they account for approximately ten percent of the residual variance in sport performance after the contributions of past sport performances have been taken into account. Further evidence has supported the importance of SDT's motivational continuum with studies showing that less self-determined motives including external regulation, and at times introjected regulation, to be related to maladaptive consequences including high levels of anxiety, inatten- tiveness, and negative mood states in athletes (Deci & Ryan, 2002; Vallerand & Losier, 1994; Vallerand & Rousseau, 2001). The effect of rewards on IM has generated substantial interest from both motivational researchers and sport psychologists alike. Early research findings in laboratory settings (e.g., Deci, 1971; 1972a, 1972b; Kruglanski, Friedman, &Zeevi, 1973) suggested that rewards nega- tively affected free-choice behavior, resulting in decreased IM. Two explanations were offered to explain these investigations. First, Lepper, Greene, and Nisbett (1973) proposed that offer- ing rewards as an incentive for engaging in an already interesting activity decreases IM as people eventually begin to attribute their participation to external causes (i.e., reward). Second, rewards may reduce IM when perceived as a mechanism through which individual behavior is controlled. More recently, researchers have challenged the contention that rewards result in decreased IM, suggesting rewards may increase IM when the presence of the reward is per- ceived as a source of competency and autonomous action (Deci & Ryan, 1985; 2002). Accord- ing to this perspective, rewards are not necessarily detrimental to intrinsic forms of motivation. In an attempt to clarify the relationship between extrinsic rewards and IM, a series of meta-analytic investigations have been undertaken. Initial fmdings supported the belief that rewards exert a detrimental inpact on IM (Rummel & Feinberg, 1988; Tang & Hall, 1995; Wiersma, 1992). Cameron and colleagues challenged these conclusions claiming that the negative ef- fects of rewards are rare and that rewards are beneficial in motivating behavior under condi- tions of performance-contingency or when task interest is low (Cameron, Banko, & Pierce, 2001; Cameron & Pierce, 1994; Eisenberger& Cameron, 1996). Cameron and colleagues'meta- analyses were criticized for methodological and interpretational errors which stimulated fur- ther discussion of the role of rewards on motivation (Kohn, 1996; Ryan & Deci, 1996). Results The Effects of Athletic Scholarship .../295 of two separate meta-analyses conducted by Deci, Koestner, and Ryan (1999a; 1999b) indi- cated that only verbal praise enhanced IM and that different reward characteristics signifi- cantly undermined IM (i.e., when a reward was tangible, expected, engagement-contingent, completion-contingent, and performance-contingent). One area of debate is the influence of performance-contingent rewards on IM. Perfor- mance-contingent rewards are defined as rewards "given explicitly for doing well on a task or for performing up to a specified standard" (Ryan & Deci, 2000, p. 27) such as offering monetary incentives for performances that exceed a known standard. Deci and colleagues (1999a; 1999b; Ryan & Deci, 2000) claim that the most detrimental reward contingency involves giving re- wards as a direct function of performance. Conversely, Cameron and colleagues (1994; 1996; 2001) claim that rewards that are tied to specific performance standards and to success exert a positive influence on IM. One application of performance-contingent rewards that is common- place in intercollegiate sport in the United States of America is athletic scholarships. Consistent with the experimental lab-based studies, research examining the influence of athletic scholarships on motivation has yielded equivocal results. Studies have demonstrated that athletes who hold an athletic scholarship report lower levels of EM (Ryan, 1977; Wagner, Lounsbury, & Fitzgerald, 1989). Conversely, Ryan (1980) reported
Load more

Recommended publications
  • THE TRUTH ABOUT SPORTS SCHOLARSHIPS by Bob Gardner
    THE TRUTH ABOUT SPORTS SCHOLARSHIPS By Bob Gardner, Executive Director of the National Federation of State High School Associations and Thomas E. Neubauer, Executive Director of the Delaware Interscholastic Athletic Association. Many parents dream of their children landing college athletic scholarships by specializing in a sport year-round outside of their schools. While not every child will earn an athletic scholarship, there are many benefits to high school athletics that students can realize. In education-based high school sports, student-athletes are taught, as the term implies, that grades come first. The real- life lessons that students experientially learn offer insights into leadership, overcoming adversity and mutual respect. Playing multiple high school sports also may help students get noticed by college coaches: many Division I football and basketball coaches have recently stated that they are committed to recruiting students who have played multiple sports within the high school setting. For example, of the 106 players who were on the active roster for Super Bowl LII, 102 [96%] played more than one sport during their high school careers. With 37 [35%] of them playing 3 or more sports in high school. The act of balancing quality schoolwork and a sports schedule is difficult, but manageable, and can help students become well-rounded, versatile members of our community as they grow older. While many of our students enjoy sports and, actually, excel in them, in reality, the odds of a sports scholarship paying for even a portion of a student’s college education are miniscule. The College Board, a not-for-profit organization comprised of 6,000 of the world’s leading educational institutions, reports that the moderate cost for college students who attend a public university in their state of residence is $25,290 per year.
    [Show full text]
  • Sla-2021-01-29
    SPORTS LITIGATION ALERT January 29, 2020 Vol. 18, Iss. 2 Case Summaries Soccer Coach Obtains Partial Victory court properly dismissed soccer coach’s right of priva- cy, invasion of privacy and negligence claims against in Lawsuit Against University the University as the claims were based on duties aris- By Jordan B. Rosenberg, Esq. ing out of his employment contract and therefore time ormer University of Montana soccer coach ob- barred. However, the Montana Supreme Court reversed Ftained a partial victory on his claims for defama- and remanded the trial court’s decision on the coach’s tion and tortious interference, as Montana’s highest claims for defamation and tortious interference because court reversed and remanded the lower court’s deci- they were found to arise under statutes and common sion in part. The Montana Supreme Court held the trial law and thus brought within the statute of limitations. Table of Contents Here’s the latest issue of Sports Litigation Alert, the na- • A Former Miami Dolphin Accountant’s Claim tion’s only subscription-based periodical reporting on the That His Employment Status Was Intentionally intersection of sports and the law. We also publish 11 other Misclassified, May Not Add Up in Federal Court .. 17 sports law periodicals. Visit www.hackneypublications.com • Ifrah’s George R. Calhoun Discuss Sports to learn more. Betting and Pivotal Case Law ................. 19 Case Summaries • Facing Title IX Lawsuit, East Carolina University Agrees to Reinstate Sports Programs, • Soccer Coach Obtains Partial Victory in Lawsuit Develop Gender Equity Plan .................. 20 Against University ........................... 1 • Jackson Lewis Reinforces Title IX Legal Team • First U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Student-Athletes by Institution
    Arkansas Division of Higher Education Annual Report on Retention and Graduation of College Student-Athletes at Arkansas Institutions of Higher Education Academic Year 2018-19 Research & Analytics December 2020 Arkansas Division of Higher Education 423 Main Street, Little Rock, AR 72201 Agenda Item No. 5 Higher Education Coordinating Board July 31, 2020 ANNUAL REPORT ON PARTICIPATION, RETENTION AND GRADUATION OF STUDENT-ATHLETES ____________________ This report complies with Act 267 of 1989 that requires reporting of retention and graduation rates for first-time in college students who participate in Arkansas intercollegiate athletics. This information is collected through institutional data submissions to the Arkansas Higher Education Information System (AHEIS) from all public colleges and universities with athletic programs. In addition to retention and graduation rates, this report provides data on all athletic participation by sport and scholarship status. Methodology The methodology used in this report closely follows the methodology used in the Annual Report on Student Retention and Graduation. The retention calculations are based on fall-to-fall comparisons of the student-athletes in the IPEDS cohort of first- time in college, full-time, and credential-seeking students from the fall term only. A student is considered retained if they returned to the same institution in the fall term of the next academic year. Graduation rate calculations use the same cohort of first-time in college, full-time, credential-seeking students from the fall term. The graduation rates presented here include a 100% rate representing those graduating with a Bachelor’s degree in four years, which is considered graduating ‘on time’, and a 150% graduation rate representing student-athletes graduating with a Bachelor’s degree in six years.
    [Show full text]
  • The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Intercollegiate Student-Athletes with Learning Disabilities Yuri Nicholas Walker
    Marquette Sports Law Review Volume 15 Article 8 Issue 2 Spring Playing the Game of Academic Integrity vs. Athletic Success: The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Intercollegiate Student-Athletes with Learning Disabilities Yuri Nicholas Walker Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/sportslaw Part of the Entertainment and Sports Law Commons Repository Citation Yuri Nicholas Walker, Playing the Game of Academic Integrity vs. Athletic Success: The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Intercollegiate Student-Athletes with Learning Disabilities , 15 Marq. Sports L. Rev. 601 (2005) Available at: http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/sportslaw/vol15/iss2/8 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Marquette Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. COMMENTS PLAYING THE GAME OF ACADEMIC INTEGRITY VS. ATHLETIC SUCCESS: THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) AND INTERCOLLEGIATE STUDENT- ATHLETES WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES INTRODUCTION At some point in our lives, most of us can recall being told by a parent, friend, teacher, or coach, "It doesn't matter whether you win or lose, it's how you play the game." The process that is used to determine eligibility to participate in intercollegiate athletic programs under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA)' and National Collegiate Athletic Association 2 (NCAA) guidelines makes this clich6 take on a new meaning. The number of students reporting learning disabilities in colleges and universities has significantly increased in the last fifteen years. 3 In 1988, prior to the passage 1. 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101-12213 (2000).
    [Show full text]
  • Edinboro University of Pennsylvania – Athletic Department Handbook – 2020-2021
    MEMO TO: Athletic Department Personnel RE: Acknowledgement of Receipt – EDINBORO UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA – ATHLETIC DEPARTMENT HANDBOOK – 2020-2021 The EDINBORO UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA – ATHLETIC DEPARTMENT HANDBOOK includes an overview of Edinboro University’s rules, regulations, policies and procedures and is not meant to be all-inclusive. It is designed to be a reference guide for Athletic Department employees. The statements contained within that notebook may be changed by the PASSHE and/or the University whenever appropriate. Nothing in this handbook in any way creates an expressed or implied contract of employment. Legal Plan Documents will govern any discrepancies that may arise. The Edinboro University of Pennsylvania – ATHLETIC DEPARTMENT HANDBOOK is in no way designed to contradict or supersede the collective bargaining agreement and/or University policy. The Constitution and Bylaws of the NCAA, PASSHE, PSAC, and MAC have not been printed in this manual. As active members of these associations, Edinboro University adheres to the rules and regulations of these conferences. All Athletic Department personnel should familiarize themselves with, and abide by, all rules and policies of the University, PASSHE, NCAA, PSAC and MAC. I affirm that I am obligated to report, to the director of athletics or the associate director of athletics at Edinboro University, any violations of NCAA regulations involving me or the institution. In the event that you have any questions pertaining to information contained in this handbook, please contact the Director of Athletics for clarification. My signature below confirms that I have received a copy of the EDINBORO UNIVERSITY OF PENNYSLVANIA – ATHLETIC DEPARTMENT HANDBOOK 2020-21.
    [Show full text]
  • Expanding Student-Athlete Benefits: Are There Costs?
    EXPANDING STUDENT-ATHLETE BENEFITS: ARE THERE COSTS? Timothy Davis∗ At the January 2015 National Collegiate Athletic Association (“NCAA”) Convention, universities that comprise what are characterized as the “autonomy schools”—consisting of institutions that are members of the Atlantic Coast Conference (“ACC”), Southeastern Conference (“SEC”), Pacific 12 (“Pac-12”), Big Ten and Big-12—adopted legislation that expands the benefits available to student-athletes. College presidents, NCAA administrators, and others have described this legislation as a genuine attempt by the organization, athletic conferences, and their respective member institutions to improve student-athlete welfare. Critics argue that these and other student-athlete welfare initiatives represent efforts to get ahead of recent litigation1 in order to change much of the negative narrative regarding college sports. Much of the narrative surrounding the alleged inequitable treatment of college athletes has emerged as a consequence of the litigation. Whatever the true motivations, the reform initiatives may reflect that the consequences of O’Bannon v. NCAA and other cases extend beyond the rules of law articulated by courts. This article will briefly address the implications of recent initiatives targeting the enhancement of student-athlete welfare. It will begin with a description of some of these measures. The centerpiece of NCAA legislation, passed by the aforementioned autonomy schools in January 2015 with an effective date of August 1, 2015, is the redefinition of permissible financial aid. Prior to this legislation, a student-athlete could receive a combination of certain sources of financial aid totaled up ∗ Executive Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and the John W. & Ruth H. Turnage Professor of Law, School of Law, Wake Forest University.
    [Show full text]
  • 2014-2015 NJCAA Eligibility Pamplet.Pdf
    ELIGIBILITY RULES OF THE NATIONAL JUNIOR COLLEGE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION 1631 Mesa Avenue, Suite B, Colorado Springs, CO 80906 2014-2015 Effective August 1, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS Article V — Eligibility Rules Section 1 General Information ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Section 2 Certified Sports of the NJCAA .................................................................................................................... 2 Section 3 Requirements for Entering & Continuing Student-Athletes ........................................................................ 2 Section 4 Requirements for Athletic Eligibility ........................................................................................................... 3 Section 5 Eligibility of Student Who Withdraws from Classes ................................................................................... 5 Section 6 Eighteen Calendar Month Non-College Attendance.................................................................................... 5 Section 7 Number of Seasons a Student Can Participate ............................................................................................. 5 Section 8 Hardship....................................................................................................................................................5-6 Section 9 Physical Examination .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Sports Scholarships in The
    SPORTS SCHOLARHIPS There are many opportunities to play sports at universities in the US. University sports programs are offered at the varsity (organized competition between universities) and the intramural or club (participation-oriented, less competitive) level. Some universities offer sport scholarships at the varsity level to students who are academically- qualified and very gifted in a particular sport. However, no scholarships are offered for participation in sports at the intramural or club levels. Overview: The process by which a student athlete is considered for a sport scholarship is a lengthy and complicated one. Unlike academic scholarships, where one submits an application indicating interest in receiving funding to study at a university, students must engage in a highly-regulated recruitment process. Sport scholarships are granted by the university or athletics association in which a university participates with athletic directors or coaches playing a central role in decision-making. Scholarships can be awarded for the following sports: baseball, basketball, bowling, crew (rowing), cross-country, fencing, football (American), golf, gymnastics, ice hockey, indoor track, lacrosse, skiing, soccer, softball, swimming and diving, tennis, track and field, volleyball, water polo, women’s field hockey and wrestling. Equestrian, rugby, sand volleyball, and triathlon have been designated as 'emerging sports' and scholarships in these sports are often available to women only in an effort to achieve equality between men's and women's scholarships. Some universities offer martial arts, riflery, rodeo, rugby and sailing, but very few of those will offer these sports on a scholarship basis. Scholarships are provided on a yearly basis and are generally renewable for four years, the normal amount of time required to complete a US undergraduate degree.
    [Show full text]
  • ASU CDS 2017-2018 Tempe Campus Final 05-01-18.Xlsx
    Arizona State University at the Tempe campus Common Data Set 2017-2018 A. General Information A0 Respondent Information (Not for Publication) A0 Name: Mary Hyduke A0 Title: Specialist Senior A0 Office: Institutional Analysis A0 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 875304 A0 City/State/Zip/Country: Tempe, AZ 85287-5304 A0 Phone: (480) 965-2318 A0 Fax: (480) 965-1559 A0 E-mail Address: [email protected] A0 Are your responses to the CDS posted for reference on your institution's Web site? Yes No X A0 If yes, please provide the URL of the corresponding Web page: https://uoia.asu.edu/content/common-data-set A0A We invite you to indicate if there are items on the CDS for which you cannot use the requested analytic convention, cannot provide data for the cohort requested, whose methodology is unclear, or about which you have questions or comments in general. This information will not be published but will help the publishers further refine CDS items. A1 Address Information A1 Name of College/University: Arizona State University at the Tempe campus A1 Mailing Address: Admissions Services, P.O. Box 870112 A1 City/State/Zip/Country: Tempe, AZ 85287-0112 A1 Street Address (if different): University Drive & Mill Avenue A1 City/State/Zip/Country: Tempe, AZ 85287 A1 Main Phone Number: 855-278-5080 A1 WWW Home Page Address: www.asu.edu A1 Admissions Phone Number: (480) 965-7788 A1 Admissions Toll-Free Phone Number: A1 Admissions Office Mailing Address: Admissions Services, P.O. Box 870112 A1 City/State/Zip/Country: Tempe, AZ 85287-0112 A1 Admissions Fax Number:
    [Show full text]
  • Sandra Day O'connor College of Law Arizona State University
    ARIZONA STATE SPORTS AND ENTERTAINMENT LAW JOURNAL VOLUME 8 FALL 2018 ISSUE 1 SANDRA DAY O’CONNOR COLLEGE OF LAW ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY 111 EAST TAYLOR STREET PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85004 ABOUT THE JOURNAL The Arizona State Sports and Entertainment Law Journal is edited by law students of the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law at Arizona State University. As one of the leading sports and entertainment law journals in the United States, the Journal infuses legal scholarship and practice with new ideas to address today’s most complex sports and entertainment legal challenges. The Journal is dedicated to providing the academic community, the sports and entertainment industries, and the legal profession with scholarly analysis, research, and debate concerning the developing fields of sports and entertainment law. The Journal also seeks to strengthen the legal writing skills and expertise of its members. The Journal is supported by the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law and the Sports Law and Business Program at Arizona State University. WEBSITE: www.asuselj.org. SUBSCRIPTIONS: To order print copies of the current issue or previous issues, please visit Amazon.com or visit the Journal’s website. SUBMISSIONS: Please visit the Journal’s website for submissions guidance. SPONSORSHIP: Individuals and organizations interested in sponsoring the Arizona State Sports and Entertainment Law Journal should contact the current Editor-in-Chief at the Journal’s website. COPYRIGHT ©: 2018–2019 by Arizona State Sports and Entertainment Law Journal. All rights reserved except as otherwise provided. CITATION: ARIZ. ST. SPORTS & ENT. L.J. The Arizona State Sports and Entertainment Law Journal thanks its sponsor, Jackson Lewis, P.C., for its financial contribution.
    [Show full text]
  • When the Numbers Don't Add Up: Oversigning in College Football Jonathan D
    Marquette Sports Law Review Volume 22 Article 13 Issue 1 Fall When the Numbers Don't Add Up: Oversigning in College Football Jonathan D. Bateman Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/sportslaw Part of the Entertainment and Sports Law Commons Repository Citation Jonathan D. Bateman, When the Numbers Don't Add Up: Oversigning in College Football, 22 Marq. Sports L. Rev. 7 (2011) Available at: http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/sportslaw/vol22/iss1/13 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Marquette Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BATEMAN (DO NOT DELETE) 12/21/2011 2:18 PM ARTICLES WHEN THE NUMBERS DON’T ADD UP: OVERSIGNING IN COLLEGE FOOTBALL JONATHAN D. BATEMAN∗ I. INTRODUCTION Congratulations. After months of receiving letters in the mail and answering telephone calls from college football coaches around the country, the recruiting process has finally ended because today is February 2, 2012, National Signing Day. Although you have been verbally committed to Hometown University for months now, today is the day that you (and your parents) will formally sign the National Letter of Intent (NLI),1 the document that will serve as your binding commitment to play football for Hometown University next fall. You spend the spring and summer months training in anticipation for your first season as a college football player, all the while dreaming about the future opportunities and experiences that enrolling at Hometown University will provide. Fast-forward to your first day of practice.
    [Show full text]
  • College Athlete Protection Guarantee a F Air Deal for You and Your School
    COLLEGE ATHLETE PROTECTION GUARANTEE A FAIR DEAL FOR YOU AND YOUR SCHOOL With the College Athlete Protection (CAP) Guarantee, you can request and secure legally binding protections/benefits worth over $100,000 dollars beyond a minimum scholarship without breaking NCAA rules . You need transparency on protections and benefits because coaches too often break verbal promises. Coaches themselves don’t rely on verbal promises from their college and neither should you. Use the CAP Guarantee to gain key physical, academic, and financial protections. *Walk­Ons: Any promises of future financial aid, medical expenses, transfer releases, and the freedom to participate in various employment/activities can be secured using this document. Possible Protections/Benefits Guaranteed Scholarship Money o Multi­year scholarships (instead of the NCAA’s minimum 1­year scholarship that coaches can refuse to renew for any reason i.e. injury, new coach wants to give your scholarship away, etc.)* o Summer school scholarships (not included in the NCAA’s minimum scholarship) o Degree completion scholarships (if you exhaust your athletic eligibility/enter a professional draft before you graduate and wish to complete your undergraduate degree) o Scholarships for graduate school (college can give you a scholarship beyond athletic eligibility) Stipend Money o Typically ranges between $2000­$5000/year and covers your out­of­pocket educational­related expenses that even the NCAA “full” athletic scholarship does not cover Reimbursement Money o The NCAA gives colleges funds to reimburse some of your out­of­pocket expenses i.e. cell phone bill, parking fees, etc. o For family to attend NCAA basketball championship tournament games and football bowl games Medical Expenses o 100% of sports­related medical expenses i.e.
    [Show full text]