Religion in College Football

College football is one of the biggest sporting events that writhes through the hearts and veins of many Americans. Some of its fans have never even thrown a football in their life, yet they breathe it; they live it. If you would ask any of its many fans, their reasons for watching college football would always be the same. "It's the players!" "I like the coach!" "The feel of the game is the reason I watch." "It's all about team spirit!" The number one response would be: "I support the school and my community." These responses put a lot of responsibility on the coaches and players to make sure they continue to receive support from their adoring public.

Some college coaches have decided to invite their players into religious deviants in hopes of unitizing and boosting the morale of the team. It comes to no surprise that critics will immediately jump into this college football forum to make sure their great game is adequately protected. Of true importance are the players and how too much control has left them on the sidelines.

Coach Bobby Bowden of Florida State University says that "70 percent of his players come from single-parent homes or are reared by an extended family" (Drape F1). Ethics is a very big question in college football today. This doesn't apply just to the players but also the staff. The reason being is the incredible amount of money involved including gambling, promotion and school investments. At huge amounts, in millions or maybe billions, temptation on all sides can supersede the importance and integrity of the game (Ethics, par. 1).

Back in 1925, football was all about the players' well-being and total conditioning. At Springfield College, summer school football students would be taught three drills that emphasized the essentials toward the success of their ability and their team. The person teaching them, Mr. Rockne, believed a football player need to "establish freedom and power of movement,... and the science of correct falling and rolling with perfect relaxation" (Langmack ix-x). One could think that this would be enough to ensure the success of a football team but obviously not in our society today. Football nowadays is a medley of players, coaches, multitudes of fans, critics, impresarios, scouts, and a long opaque trail of cash.

Coaches can't just coax these players and embed in them Rockne's three drills; they have to make sure, to their greatest ability, that these players come out successful enough to appease all aspects of the game. Is the coach actually trying to cover all the aspects of modern college football? Not dubbed as a strategy, Joe Drape (biased toward the coaches) of the Houston Chronicle article "God on the Gridiron" implies that colleges are justified and backed by the American people in their coaching, on or off the field. The assumption here is that college football players need coaches (father figures) to guide their lives toward American religious idealism. This religious idealism, not actually a single religion or even "a" religion, has been used by authoritative figures throughout American history. These people saw this idealism as a god-given right to subjugate another to one's beliefs.

Though said, there is a good reason to invite religion into the lives of many of these college football players. In a study of the temperament of high school players and coaches compared to normal students and regular adults, studies showed that high school "coaches were superior to football players in the traits of restraint, ascendance, sociability, emotional stability, objectivity, friendliness, and personal relations" (Kassen vii). A truly discernible individual would see that the coaches were in a great position to coerce any ideas they might have on less experienced, rudimentary players.

The author of "God on the Gridiron" seems to value the importance of religious guidance in all forms of our lives. This is made readily apparent by his acknowledgment of even the notion of religion being presented into football. Just the inquiry can lead one to think that something is wrong with our current system of coaching. If this question was addressed in this argument, then maybe there would have been a premise for religion in football. Even with that premise, the players would still have to accept the invitation or at least allow the option to be presented. Or is it their decision at all?

This line of thought will lead to the players feeling pressured to attend religious events in fear of disappointing their coach. The gesture by the college coach could be seen as coercion of religion as a front to control the players. The players' religion and familial bonds with the team haven't been looked at. Most athletes have already made friends with other players and even with the coaching staff. Don't forget that most of these players played in high school and have a lot of experience being on a team. And some were even at the top of their class on the football field back then.

We should heed the fact that this country was built on the individual ingenuity of single persons. But this argument is about unity and the boosting of morale. It is showing more and more in this time that athletes (and most people in general) achieve better where they are most comfortable and accepted. In the article "God on the Gridiron", it is noted that not all of the players joined in on the religious activities offered by these coaches. Surely leaving a player out, no matter the team activity, does not promote unity and boost morale. Should the player that was left out worry if he will start first string or trust the coach to treat him fairly?

I guess we should assume that even though we have laws against the combination of church and state, everybody in America supports college coaches otherwise and shouldn't question the decision. These unsavory assumptions only point in one direction. You could say these assumptions create the pretense for the expansion of religion in college football when it was never needed in the first place. Motives, true motives, of the coaches are the question here. What does Bowden and other coaches alike have in plan for these players?

Religion, technically and in the past, has had no part in the conditioning and success of a college football team. At least from a coaching perspective this is true. Do you remember that freedom of movement and perfect relaxation Mr. Rockne was talking about? Maybe he was actually insinuating freedom of religion and to make sure the players were not made uncomfortable by the coaches in a team environment. Instead of adding additional physical and emotional strains on the college football players, maybe we should make sure their coaches don't step out of their boundaries.

References:

Drape, Joe, "God on the Gridiron." Houston Chronicle 26 Nov. 2005. "Ethics and College Football." Agnosticism/Atheism 2003. About.com - Religion and Spirituality. 18 Sept. 2003. URL:

(http://atheism.about.com/b/a/026868.htm?terms=athlete+college+money)

Kassen, Tex Leo, "An analysis of temperament traits of selected high school football coaches and varsity football teams as measured by the Guilford-Zimmerman temperament survey." Houston: University of Houston, 1968

Langmack, Holger Christian, "Football Conditioning; an illustrated handbook for coaches, students and players, by Holger Christian Langmack." New York: A.S. Barnes, 1926