Title: Background checks - good or bad? Post by: Terrie1959 on March 02, 2011, 07:54:11 PM The number of players with criminal histories turned up by the SI/CBS News investigation reinforces a pervasive assumption that college coaches are willing to recruit players with questionable pasts to win. More surprising, however, is just how little digging college coaches do into players' backgrounds before offering them a scholarship.
Among the 25 schools in the investigation, only two -- TCU and Oklahoma -- perform any type of regular criminal background searches on recruits. But even TCU and Oklahoma don't look at juvenile records. No school does, even though football and basketball players are among the most high-profile representatives of a university. (Of the 25 schools, only Virginia Tech did any type of background checks on admitted students, and admissions questionnaires at more than half the other universities ask applicants if they have ever been arrested.) http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/the_bonus/02/27/cfb.crime/index.html?eref=sihp (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/the_bonus/02/27/cfb.crime/index.html?eref=sihp) What do you think? Should colleges do thorough background checks before recruiting players? Title: Re: Background checks - good or bad? Post by: ssmith general on March 02, 2011, 08:04:09 PM I guess selectively, most of these kids are 18 and their records as juveniles would be sealed....
But I guess if they did something so bad they were charged as an adult it would show, but how do you hide something that serious? Title: Re: Background checks - good or bad? Post by: CrimsonCrusader on March 02, 2011, 08:23:22 PM If they have a criminal record do you deny them a chance to succeed or do you throw them away because of a mistake they made as a kid. I don't know the answer so I guess it gets left up to debate.
Title: Re: Background checks - good or bad? Post by: Terrie1959 on March 02, 2011, 08:30:41 PM I don't know either. I mean, chances are that if a recruit is a criminal or a thug, his/her reputation would be out there. Would it make a difference on what the crime was? I mean, a one time misdemeanor wouldn't be a flag, but someone with multiple offenses, especially behavioral issues would be, wouldn't they?
Title: Re: Background checks - good or bad? Post by: bamasaint on March 02, 2011, 08:45:43 PM I don't think that you would really turn up anything since we offer now when the kids are 16 or 17, but like someone said earlier, if they were charged as an adult chances are they are not playing football :o
Title: Re: Background checks - good or bad? Post by: ssmith general on March 02, 2011, 08:46:21 PM If they have a criminal record do you deny them a chance to succeed or do you throw them away because of a mistake they made as a kid. I don't know the answer so I guess it gets left up to debate. Good point. But still would be good to know the high risk kids. Title: Re: Background checks - good or bad? Post by: Chechem on March 02, 2011, 08:54:07 PM I understand the problem, but let's get real. It's win at all costs at many schools. That's what the story is about.
It's a given that a player can get into most any school even if he's a marginal student (and get a scholarship). That much alone is a joke. Academics hardly matters any more, if the kid can just score high enough on the SAT to get in. Now this thug measurement? Check for criminal past. Why? If academics doesn't matter at a university, why should criminal past? When you recruit the sewers, it's hard to complain about the stink. Title: Re: Background checks - good or bad? Post by: Terrie1959 on March 02, 2011, 09:11:02 PM I understand the problem, but let's get real. It's win at all costs at many schools. That's what the story is about. It's a given that a player can get into most any school even if he's a marginal student (and get a scholarship). That much alone is a joke. Academics hardly matters any more, if the kid can just score high enough on the SAT to get in. Now this thug measurement? Check for criminal past. Why? If academics doesn't matter at a university, why should criminal past? When you recruit the sewers, it's hard to complain about the stink. That's true BUT there ARE schools who do not allow for bad behavior or at least drop players if they have continuous problems. It's too bad though because the sports program has the chance to help form and mold these young people into great individuals and they blow it - for the money! Title: Re: Background checks - good or bad? Post by: Chechem on March 02, 2011, 09:32:47 PM I understand the problem, but let's get real. It's win at all costs at many schools. That's what the story is about. It's a given that a player can get into most any school even if he's a marginal student (and get a scholarship). That much alone is a joke. Academics hardly matters any more, if the kid can just score high enough on the SAT to get in. Now this thug measurement? Check for criminal past. Why? If academics doesn't matter at a university, why should criminal past? When you recruit the sewers, it's hard to complain about the stink. That's true BUT there ARE schools who do not allow for bad behavior or at least drop players if they have continuous problems. It's too bad though because the sports program has the chance to help form and mold these young people into great individuals and they blow it - for the money! Thug misbehavior is getting so common that it's predictable; rampant at UT and UF, it seems. I don't know the answer. I've been on several committees where we discussed it, met with coaches and administrators. Thugs follow money; college football is oozing big money. Schools want the money, the glory, the excitement. But they don't want the consequences. It'll take a catastrophe to change it now. Like you said, the opportunity is there for the players. Some can't seem to adjust to life as a college student. Title: Re: Background checks - good or bad? Post by: ssmith general on March 02, 2011, 09:35:28 PM I understand the problem, but let's get real. It's win at all costs at many schools. That's what the story is about. It's a given that a player can get into most any school even if he's a marginal student (and get a scholarship). That much alone is a joke. Academics hardly matters any more, if the kid can just score high enough on the SAT to get in. Now this thug measurement? Check for criminal past. Why? If academics doesn't matter at a university, why should criminal past? When you recruit the sewers, it's hard to complain about the stink. That's true BUT there ARE schools who do not allow for bad behavior or at least drop players if they have continuous problems. It's too bad though because the sports program has the chance to help form and mold these young people into great individuals and they blow it - for the money! Thug misbehavior is getting so common that it's predictable; rampant at UT and UF, it seems. I don't know the answer. I've been on several committees where we discussed it, met with coaches and administrators. Thugs follow money; college football is oozing big money. Schools want the money, the glory, the excitement. But they don't want the consequences. It'll take a catastrophe to change it now. Like you said, the opportunity is there for the players. Some can't seem to adjust to life as a college student. So what are we doing different? Legal trouble under Saban's watch has been minimal, especially lately. How much of it is the kids we recruit? How much is the staff? and how much do we just never hear about? Title: Re: Background checks - good or bad? Post by: ricky023 on March 02, 2011, 09:39:27 PM Well if a kid made a mistake he should be forgiven after his punishment is completed. I would say if he does something a 2nd time then he should be monitored with his tests and maybe even put into a rehab program before coming into college. I will say that if you look at Fla. even after they let some of their guys play Alabama still spanked them. Win at any cost is the schools fault. you recruit character and lose you are in bad trouble. RTR!
Title: Re: Background checks - good or bad? Post by: MDB Tide Roll on March 02, 2011, 09:55:12 PM I would wonder about kids qualifying academically when they have had criminal charges. I worked in the juvenile system in Georgia for a couple of years and no way were the kids involved anywhere near performing on a high school level. The classes they were "taking" were usually on an elementary level. Several of the kids on my caseload were 14 and 15 and their testing indicated they were reading at a 2nd or 3rd grade level.
|