Every week, the headlines of sports pages across the country are littered with stories of collegiate abuses of power, privilege and people. Accounts of bribes, thefts and rapes have soiled the reputations of many universities. In response, certain universities have clarified and strengthened their student-athlete discipline policies, including the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Simply put, the university's policy automatically suspends any player charged with a local, state or federal crime until further notice.
In the past year, athletes Boo Wade, Ernest Mason and Dwayne Smith have been suspended and cleared through this policy. All three cases were brought up in front of the appeals committee and were closed before their trials in court. However, those associated with the University's Athletic Department are vehement in separating their process from the legal system, despite acting on charges originating within the system.
\Our policy is independent from the legal system. We're really not trying to judge innocence or guilt with our discipline policy,"" said Associate Athletic Director Steve Malchow. ""We're trying to determine if a person has acted appropriately enough to maintain the privilege to represent their school in athletics.""
The key word to understand is ""privilege."" According to the University, it is an athlete's privilege to participate in athletics, not a right within the university system. So while the student-athlete is disciplined through a separate board, the privilege of ""athlete"" is completely separate from right of ""student.""
Other universities do not make such a distinction. St. John's University in New York suspended five players and expelled another after a woman accused the men of raping her, but later recanted her story. Despite not being charged by the local authorities, the players were still dealt with a heavy hand by the University for breaking student conduct rules, not merely athletic ones.
""Everybody's a student first,"" said St. John's Media Relations Director Jody Fisher. ""We view this as a matter of conduct of the part of the students ... and St. John's is confident that it acted appropriately in disciplining the students in this unfortunate incident.""
In the past, disciplinary measures were handled primarily by the coaches. However, recent scandals across the country from the recruiting and rape scandals in Colorado to the Patrick Dennehy murder scandal at Baylor University have led to calls for stricter oversight of athletic programs by the school administration. Measures such as this university's policy are results of this movement.
However, there is a question of due process. The policy states that, ""The Chair [of the Appeals Committee] shall present the case leading to the suspension of the student-athlete to the Committee."" Also, he or she has the power to limit testimony, and where and when the defendant's witnesses can speak. Yet, the chair is still on the decision-making panel. This is the equivalent to the judge prosecuting a case and then deciding on it. That being said, none of the cases that have gone to appeals has not been overturned.
In the end though, the policy stands to act not as merely a law, but more as a deterrent to the student-athlete who takes his or her responsibilities so seriously, that the removal of one aspect of the ""student-athlete"" moniker would be sufficient punishment outside of the legal system.
""We live in the real world,"" Malchow said. ""Let's face it. Student-athletes go to school for two reasons: to go to school and play athletics. If you take one of those two components away, they'll think twice before they do it.\
