Contract Bonuses
With this university’s move to the Big Ten, it could become very easy for it to place a higher emphasis on athletic performance instead of academic performance.
However, that has not been the case. On Oct. 14, a University System of Maryland policy was passed through the Board of Regents’ Organization and Compensation Committee, stating that if student-athletes at this university and other system institutions that field Division I teams fail to achieve minimum academic standards, coaches and athletic directors would be denied contract bonuses.
Student-athletes’ academic achievements are extrapolated using athletes’ scores on the Academic Progress Rate created by the NCAA. The APR is a team-based metric that measures the eligibility and retention of each student-athlete during each term of study, according to the NCAA website.
The policy moves to a full Board of Regents vote this Friday, and if it should pass, the policy would apply to all future coaches and athletic directors in the university system who work with Division I teams. Incentive and performance bonuses are standard in contracts for coaches and athletic directors, so if this policy were to pass, this state would be a trailblazer in this endeavor.
According to the proposed Policy on Academic Achievement in Intercollegiate Athletics, the point of the new policy is to make sure each institution in the university system is upholding educational values. The Organization and Compensation Committee sweetens the academic pot by saying that institutions should aim to surpass the APR’s minimum threshold of a score of 930 out of 1,000.
In light of a Big Ten homecoming win, the decision to move this policy through the necessary channels to become active highlights that this university intends to keep the value of education at its core. And hopefully, coaches, athletic directors and student-athletes will view education as a priority as well.
Attending college is about education and earning a degree, and coaches need to prioritize academic performance over athletic performance. Money often is regarded as the most influential incentive, so this university is smart to use that to its advantage and make coaches’ bonuses hinge on whether or not their teams meet academic standards.
For student-athletes, time spent with coaches could exceed the amount of time spent off the field or court. Coaches are incredibly influential and should use this influence to help student-athletes realize their studies and academic achievements hold more importance than how many points they score during a game. Even if coaches were not receiving performance bonuses based on their student-athletes’ academic performances, they still should instill their players with the value of education.
A stipulation in the proposed policy states that teams at this university will be evaluated on a year-to-year basis, as opposed to a four-year average evaluation, to make sure new coaches and athletic directors are not penalized or given a leg up by previous coaches’ actions. It is a fair decision to evaluate year-to-year to keep a close watch on the student-athletes and their coaches, making it easier to pinpoint the level of academic achievements for student-athletes and what their coaches do for those achievements.
If this policy passes Friday, the university will be making an important step in illustrating that this university and other system institutions value education and expect their coaches and athletic directors to value it as well.
