Well, maybe . . .
In more than 20 years I've spent studying the issue, I have yet to
hear a convincing argument that college football has anything do with
what is presumably the primary purpose of higher education: academics.
That's because college football has no
academic purpose. Which is why it needs to be banned. A radical
solution, yes. But necessary in today's times.
-From Why College Football Should be Banned, in today's WSJ. This is written by Buzz Bissinger, the author who wrote Friday Night Lights.
This idea started going through my head as a student at Duke who lived in a quad across from the KA section. The KA's gave a home to the football players, except for the skill players, who were either Phi Delts or ATO's. I didn't have much use for any of them. (Somehow the University of Chicago seemed to get along just fine without much of a football program.)
On the other hand, college football undeniably builds "community," and community - at least healthy community - has to have a positive impact on "academics."
I would also suggest that to define "higher education" in terms of "academics" begs the question of what is (are?) "academics," as Mr. Bissinger views academics? For that matter, what does he mean by "higher education" beyond a simple definition of what happens after high school. I would suggest that college football needs to be put in its place, rather then banned, and I would also suggest that the problem can be traced to the board of trustees at a given institution.
Bissinger, then, can't really be serious about banning college football. And, finally . . .