Last week, as I was leaving the Law School after a long day of studies, classes and meetings, a friend of mine approached me and said that he liked my column. After I thanked him for the kind words, he said, \I was wondering if you could write a column about why Barry Alvarez should be fired."" His chief reason for wanting Alvarez's departure was his lack of control over his players'as exhibited by the recent altercations involving senior center Al Johnson, senior wide receiver Lee Evans and sophomore running back Anthony Davis.
I disagreed with my friend's conclusion and still do. However, upon inspection, I found a good number of hard questions that need to be asked, and answered. And with the most recent arrest'coming after junior tight end Rob Tucker decided to pass Saturday night away by beaning a Kollege Klub waitress with a lid of chewing tobacco and kicking out the window of a police car'the questions become more pressing.
Consider the specific case of Johnson. The facts, as we know them, are as follows: Johnson was arrested Oct. 6 for driving under the influence of alcohol, his second offense. Charges are still pending, but a court date has been set for next Monday. According to The Wisconsin State Journal, the Athletics Department knew of the charge within days of the incident. For his part, Johnson has declined comment, except to say that he believes that he will be cleared.
What can be made of this? For a start, the nature of the offense and the standard procedures that are followed prior to any DUI arrest indicate, to me, that it is wholly improbable that Johnson would be able to cast enough doubt on the police report so as to defeat it. So while Johnson currently stands innocent before the law, UW athletic officials have, for weeks, had very good reason to believe that Johnson drove under the influence and placed the lives of motorists and bystanders in grave danger.
Yet, Johnson was permitted to play in all games subsequent to his arrest. Even after the disclosure of the arrest'made one month after the fact'he was allowed to play against Illinois and at Michigan. Moreover, Johnson's team captaincy has not been revoked.
The question is, with all this in mind: Is the football team's policy of not administering punishment to players who are charged with serious offenses in need of revision? It may appear that a revision of sorts is in place, as Tucker has been suspended for Saturday's misconduct. But that seems to be more a product of specific warnings made by Alvarez in the wake of the three prior incidents. Whether or not this change in policy becomes permanent remains to be seen.
There are arguments that could be made either way. Some may say that players might find themselves falsely accused and, as such, deserve the benefit of the doubt until the legal system puts that doubt to rest. Others may say that bringing disrepute to the team and the university is, in and of itself, an offense worthy of suspension. And some may want to see different crimes treated differently, based on factors like severity, reliability of proof, past conduct and others.
There are other questions concerning the recent arrests which could be asked of the Athletics Department. For instance, why was the Johnson arrest not made public immediately after the department learned of it? Should the department's substance abuse program be revised? Should athletes be made to refrain from in-season alcohol use? And should anger-management counseling be made mandatory for student-athletes?
Then there are the academic questions. According to NCAA reports, the football team's 49 percent graduation rate lagged behind the rate for student-athletes schoolwide and behind the general student population. These statistics represent a slight decline on the previous year. So are there any changes that can be made to the current package of services made available to football players, and to student-athletes generally, by the Academic Affairs Office, so that the department's educational mission is accomplished more successfully?
In the end, our community has a choice to make. We could decide to let these incidents stand as a mark against our athletics program. On the other hand, we could use the incidents as a catalyst for the reform of things that are in need of reform, and for an improvement upon aspects of Wisconsin athletics that already are a credit to this university. All stakeholders in the success of the program'student-athletes, casual students, faculty, alumni, administrators and community members'should feel free to add their questions to mine by writing to The Daily Cardinal, and by engaging in the ensuing debate.
Win this weekend against Minnesota. Happy Thanksgiving.
