(Source)

 

College athletics are often seen as an asset to both universities and students. For universities, athletics programs generate revenue and influence student enrollment. For student-athletes, participating in athletics can provide financial assistance through scholarships and may be a pathway towards continuing to professional sports. Additionally, even if students-athletes don’t aspire to continue on to the next level, they still often develop lifelong bonds with their teammates. However, in many instances, the college athletics experience can turn toxic, especially the relationship between coaches and players.

There have been increasingly more reports of coaching abuse across both men’s and women’s sports. Coaching abuse takes many forms: physical, verbal, and/or sexual and has long lasting implications on the physical and mental health of athletes. To deal with this issue players can report the behavior to the school and/or litigate their complaints.  However, this process is often stymied by power imbalances between students and universities who prioritize winning records.  To combat this problem, there should be increased oversight from the NCAA,  players should push for employee status at their universities, and states should make legislative changes to protect student-athletes’ rights.

 

A Tale of Abuse

At Colgate University, 20 players left the women’s lacrosse team since Kathy Taylor started as the  head coach. Players accused Taylor of commenting on their weight and causing injuries through overtraining. Taylor called one player a “refrigerator on wheels” and told a player that she spent more time snacking than in the weight room. Additionally, Taylor pressured players to play through their injuries. Gracie Bowers continued to play through hip labrum tears and a slipped disc because Taylor “treats injured people like nothing.” One player stated:

“For me, and a lot of the girls on the team, I so badly wanted to satisfy all of her expectations of me, as a player, as a leader on and off the field, … I desperately wanted that reassurance that I satisfied all of her needs. And so she definitely took advantage of that. And that’s what she would do with all the injured players.”

The players accused Taylor of bullying and psychological abuse in a letter to the university president. Despite complaints,  the university announced that Taylor would remain head coach after an investigation.

The experience of the Colgate women’s lacrosse team is shared by many college athletes. At Cornell University, softball coach Julie Farlow pressured players with concussions and other serious injuries to continue playing games and practice. At the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, football coach Tim Beckman threatened to revoke players’ scholarships if they didn’t return to practice quickly from injuries. Greg Winslow, former head coach of the University of Utah’s men’s swimming team, “forced a team member to swim underwater with his hands tied to a PVC pipe that was strapped to his back until he blacked out.” Rick Seeley, former head coach of the women’s hockey team at Quinnipiac University, took a slap shot at a player’s head and told players to kill themselves. Bobby Knight, a famous men’s basketball coach in Indiana, was fired in 2000 after a series of violent incidents, as evidenced by a video him choking one of his players three years earlier in 1997.

These incidents are part of an alarming pattern of behavior for collegiate coaches. While this is a widespread problem, athletes often struggle to come forward because they must report these incidents to internal bodies within their universities. Sometimes these investigations result in coaches being fired, but other times, universities choose to keep the coaches on staff despite overwhelming evidence of harm, as seen in the Colgate and Cornell cases. Universities should consider whether there have been reports of abusive coaching in the hiring process, and more regularly check-in with student-athletes to ensure that athletes’ physical and mental needs are being met by athletic staff.

 

Litigating the Issue

One currently available response to insufficient action from the school is for players to sue the coach and the university. A Northwestern volleyball player is suing the university after experiencing “hazing, harassment, bullying and retaliation.” This recent lawsuit is a part of series of lawsuits against Northwestern University on behalf of players across different sports programs. There is also a lawsuit currently pending against the University of California at Berkley and Olympic swimming coach Teri McKeever. McKeever is accused of insulting athletes with degrading language and singling out athletes based on race and disability.

While recently tort suits have experienced greater success, the damages are often limited to compensatory damages. This means victims can only recover for the injury itself, which can be difficult to quantify in cases of emotional and verbal abuse. For example, a University of San Francisco basketball player won her lawsuit claiming intentional infliction of emotional distress and was awarded $750,000 in damages because the jury found that the coach, Molly Goodenbour, and/or the school was “grossly negligent.” However, on appeal a judge reduced the jury award to $250,000 because the evidence did not support punitive damages.  Despite the result of the lawsuit, USF retained Molly Goodenbour as head coach.

These lawsuits may provide players with financial compensation for some of the injuries suffered, but more importantly they put a spotlight on athletic programs with toxic cultures. Litigation against high-profile sports programs tends to receive media attention that universities would rather avoid. As a result, it may cause universities to fire coaches who have otherwise built athletically successful programs.

 

The NCAA as a Governing Body

Currently, the NCAA does not have clear guidelines regarding coaching abuse. This leaves universities the flexibility to police their own affairs and may result in a coach being fired but may not. The Drake Group, a nonprofit focused on collegiate athletics, released a position statement in 2016 recommending the adoption of a “Coaching Code of Ethics.” The Code lays out standards that all coaches would be expected to comply with and would make athletics staff mandatory reporters of any violations they witness. This recommendation would help mitigate the issue of underreporting by athletes afraid of retaliation. The NCAA should have a more extensive role in ensuring that athletes are physically and mentally prepared to compete. If the NCAA were to set up a code of conduct, then universities would face greater accountability for hiring coaches who prioritize winning over the physical and mental health of their players.

 

Student-Athletes as Employees

In June 2021, the NCAA implemented a policy allowing student-athletes to benefit from their name, image, and likeness (NIL). This means that student-athletes can be paid for things such as autographs, memorabilia, and personal appearances, among other things. However, the NCAA continues to prohibit athletes from getting paid to play, opting to provide scholarships instead. The pay-for-play model carries implications that could reap potential benefits for student-athletes beyond financial compensation.

If athletes were employees, they would be protected by employment statutes that do not limit punitive damages and file complaints that would lead to external rather than internal investigations. In the event of injury, athletes could receive worker’s compensation. Unionization could also even out the power imbalance between student-athletes and the institutions that allow this behavior to continue. The National Labor Relations Board issued a statement in 2021 claiming that student-athletes should be considered employees of their universities indicating that the sea might be changing regarding the status of student-athletes. The NLRB noted that because colleges control large aspects of athletes’ lives, athletes should receive benefits that come with this level of control.

 

Legislation Asserting the Rights of College Athletes

Some states have already taken steps towards protecting student-athletes. The California Assembly passed the College Athlete Protection Act which requires that schools outline college athletes’ rights and provide protections against retaliation for reporting violations. The act also requires schools to create designated funds that support degree completion programs and cover medical expenses for athletes after graduation. This type of legislation helps to prevent a culture of silence around coach behavior and provides remedies for injuries athletes suffer while participating for their schools.

 

The Impact of Abuse

Coaching abuse has both short and long-term effects on the physical and mental well-being of athletes. When coaches push athletes to play injured, it can result in disability or chronic pain. Coaching abuse can and should be prevented through increased oversight from universities, the NCAA, and state agencies. Litigation is one pathway towards deterrence, but ideally these issues should be handled before situations escalate to that level.

There is a clear line between tough coaching and abusive coaching that coaches should not have the freedom to cross. College athletics should enrich the student experience, and therefore change is needed to ensure that student-athletes are protected from harm.

 

Suggested Citation: Deanna Palma, Rub Some Dirt in It: An Analysis of Coaching Abuse in College Athletics, Cornell J.L. & Pub. Pol’y, The Issue Spotter (November 27, 2023), http://jlpp.org/blogzine/rub-some-dirt-in-it-an-analysis-of-coaching-abuse-in-college-athletics/.