Presidential directive to loosen service obligation of SA and ROTC athletes

The 2 greatest professional athletes to graduate from Service Academies, Roger Staubach and David Robinson, got no special service waivers, completed their service requirements, and went on to have Hall of Fame Professional careers. It can be done the right way.

Service Academies were created and are funded to produce military officers not professional athletes. No one on the field of battle gives a damn what Army, Navy, or Air Force's football record was last year, they have bigger issues to worry about. To further erode Academy admissions standards to admit even more otherwise unqualified athletes is insulting to every past and current SA Cadet,Airman, and Midshipman.. Lets not loose sight of the mission the SA's are charged with..
David Robinson was allowed to go pro after only serving 2 years - special dispensations have been granted on a case by case basis for decades.

The antagonism some have towards sports and athletes is curious.

Yep. I've never understood why...

The reality is the athletic component to service in our Army is as important as the intellectual for many, not all jobs. This is particularly true for platoon leaders in my world where leading from the front means exactly that.
 
The modern-day D-1 path is not one the academies can succeed at without compromising standards in a similar manner as civilian colleges, nor should they wish to. If they can compete at the D-1 level without compromising standards (Squash? Sailing?), then fine. All others should be D-3.
Except that I know many D1 athletes at USNA who do just fine in the full gamut of sports from Basketball to Wrestling while taking the range of "tough" majors, etc. As it happens I am a University Professor and often have D1 athletes in my classroom. I've had many student presentations about the life of a D1 athlete at my school and they are indeed athlete students, not student athletes but that is just not the case at USNA.
 
I've had many student presentations about the life of a D1 athlete at my school and they are indeed athlete students, not student athletes but that is just not the case at USNA.

It is a sliding scale. At the top end (E.g., U of Alabama Football) the football players are Athlete-Students. Down at the Division III level, almost all students are Student-Athletes. I guess the question is: Where on the sliding scale are the needs of the military best-served in striking a balance between athletics and academics. Both are important. I agree with @jl123, that perhaps the needs of the military would best be served if the service academies were Division II or Division III in most sports. A cadet or mid can be extremely physically fit and get just as much out of team sports in any division of NCAA sports. I don't understand how a Division 1 football captain would be a better platoon leader than a Division 3 football captain if both are physically fit. But likely, the Division 3 football captain would be a better electrical engineer or cyber warrior.
 
The modern-day D-1 path is not one the academies can succeed at without compromising standards in a similar manner as civilian colleges, nor should they wish to. If they can compete at the D-1 level without compromising standards (Squash? Sailing?), then fine. All others should be D-3.
Except that I know many D1 athletes at USNA who do just fine in the full gamut of sports from Basketball to Wrestling while taking the range of "tough" majors, etc. As it happens I am a University Professor and often have D1 athletes in my classroom. I've had many student presentations about the life of a D1 athlete at my school and they are indeed athlete students, not student athletes but that is just not the case at USNA.
Yes, at the academies - academy athletes do fine, but do not consistently compete for D-1 national championships. At civilian universities that compete for national championships, athletes are athlete-students. There are always exceptions, but for most D-1 athletes it is a choice to prioritize sport or school.

In today's environment the academies would have to follow that same athlete-student path to compete at the top level with civilian colleges. Maybe academies can be #1 in a few sports without compromise, but winning D-1 championships in most sports today requires a precedence of sport over academics, even minor sports.
 
David Robinson was allowed to go pro after only serving 2 years - special dispensations have been granted on a case by case basis for decades.

The antagonism some have towards sports and athletes is curious.

In Robinson's case, his 2 year service obligation probably had more to do with his height than his athletic ability. He was 7'1" when he graduated, and that height would have prevented him from serving at sea. He was commissioned as a civil engineering officer.
 
He grew while at USNA, and most seagoing specialties were closed to him.
 
He grew while at USNA, and most seagoing specialties were closed to him.
Capt MJ would have more knowledge from the "inside" but I'll relate what I was told by "The Admiral" when I had the chance to meet him years ago. I asked about the academy, basketball, and his desire to serve. If I remember correctly (it's been a while) he related that he was intrigued by the navy, wanted to play D1 ball, and while at the academy he grew something like six more inches and that put a seagoing career out of reach due to his height.

There's probably more to it than that but that's what I remember from the conversation. He was a very nice gent to speak with.

Steve
USAFA ALO
USAFA '83
 
His former room was in my Batt. You could see the marks in the wall where his custom bunk had ended.

He was not sought after by the “usual” basketball powerhouses, due to his height in HS.

It must have been that King Hall food that accelerated his growth. A coach’s dream!.

It’s always a great day on the Yard when he just appears and chats with the mids, or eats lunch with the Brigade.
 
Back
Top