Military Mulls Massive Recruiting Plan to Enlist College Athletes

April 29, 2022 6:59 AM

The U.S. military is actively discussing an initiative, proposed by a defense contractor, to fund athletic scholarships for tens of thousands of college athletes each year in exchange for their mandatory service.
posted by Etrigan (55 comments total)

I look forward to someone telling me why this is a bad idea, because on first read it makes sense to me.
posted by timdiggerm at 7:09 AM on April 29, 2022 [3 favorites]

I'll give it a try: Making all public colleges free would cost 10% of the current US defense budget. The current US defense budget is 10% larger than it was 10 years ago.
posted by gwint at 7:11 AM on April 29, 2022 [104 favorites]

"We must meet this threat with our courage, our valor, indeed with our very lives to ensure that human civilization, not insect, dominates this galaxy *now and always*!"
posted by fallingbadgers at 7:11 AM on April 29, 2022 [37 favorites]

WOULD YOU LIKE TO KNOW MORE?
posted by pompomtom at 7:11 AM on April 29, 2022 [37 favorites]

So four years of playing the sport to support college, then 8 (!) years in the service to support having played the sport?

How about free college, we cut the military down to Chinese levels, and we stop invading random countries?

What will actually happen is that the current non-basketball and football scholarships will die since the army will flush that cash in, leaving people with the "option" of taking the tour or self-funding. And for most folks self-funding is debt.

The other end of this is that many offices *do not need four year degrees* at the entry level. Stop asking for 4 year degrees.
posted by Slackermagee at 7:14 AM on April 29, 2022 [24 favorites]

I should add to my comment above that it would solve the "how to pay for college public college for everyone" problem but not the military recruitment problem, which, I would imagine, needs to be solved through finding a motivation to serve your country other than a paycheck.

And the "how do we stop exploiting college athletes by making gobs of money on their unpaid labor" problem also remains unsolved.
posted by gwint at 7:16 AM on April 29, 2022 [13 favorites]

How's about we make the same deal but only for coaches and administration instead ?
posted by NoThisIsPatrick at 7:23 AM on April 29, 2022 [28 favorites]

which, I would imagine, needs to be solved through finding a motivation to serve your country other than a paycheck.

Russia has this model.

In terms of invading sovereign nations, it seems to be about as effective as the US's approach, but maybe cheaper.
posted by pompomtom at 7:23 AM on April 29, 2022

I don't see a problem from the point of view of either the military or students who want to do this. Free college is a perfectly good perk, and getting the benefit before you serve instead of after makes it better. It also gets more and older people exposed to a relatively liberal, open atmosphere of college experience into the military for a broader civilian viewpoint.

I'm also in favor of free college and reduced military spending, but that seems totally unrelated. What's the argument? No federal employee should get educational benefits as part of their job until tuition is free?

My only complaint is it's a federal benefit to college sports, and I don't think that's a healthy thing colleges do. No football scholarships, at least, but still.

then 8 (!) years in the service

This is the West Point / Annapolis / ROTC time; I would assume this is less, though it's not clear.
posted by mark k at 7:25 AM on April 29, 2022 [4 favorites]

No college athlete who wants to go pro would take this deal, wouldn't it only apply to college athletes that don't have professional ambitions?

Also, don't college athletes already get a ton of scholarships? All four of my (female) cousins went to college on golf scholarships.

This seems like a good deal for the military, but a bad deal for the athletes, unless they were already planning to serve in the military.
posted by subdee at 7:28 AM on April 29, 2022 [6 favorites]

I'm also in favor of free college and reduced military spending, but that seems totally unrelated. What's the argument? No federal employee should get educational benefits as part of their job until tuition is free?


Look, obviously I'm a raving pinko, but how about replace:

No federal employee should get educational benefits as part of their job until tuition is free?

...with "Educational funding should not be prioritised for people who kill people, plan the killing of people, or enable the killing of people"?
posted by pompomtom at 7:33 AM on April 29, 2022 [25 favorites]

Is the military counting on the students not realizing how thinking about how long eight years is?

After all, future-them is paying that cost, not current-them.
posted by subdee at 7:34 AM on April 29, 2022

then 8 (!) years in the service

This is the West Point / Annapolis / ROTC time; I would assume this is less, though it's not clear.

Everyone who enlists in the US military does so for eight years. Some people sign up for 2 or 4 years on active duty and then spend the remaining time in the Reserves, and their Reserve time ends up being in the Individual Ready Reserve, which is basically just making sure someone in an office somewhere has your address and phone number (and a lot of people just never bother and no one really misses them).

Academy graduates almost always get a 5/3 deal, where they have to spend their first 5 years on active duty. ROTC scholarship cadets (and midshipmen) generally go active as well, but for 4/4.
posted by Etrigan at 7:36 AM on April 29, 2022 [16 favorites]

The Scholar-Athlete Intelligence and Leadership Program...suggests that DoD offer to replace school-funded athletic scholarships for every sport other than football and basketball at the collegiate level—NCAA, NAIA and junior college. Those athletes would have no obligations while in school, but would be committed to a yet-to-be-determined amount of service after they’re done.

Interesting that they specifically would not target the big-money sports, football and basketball. Assumedly this is because those two are, in every way other than in name, minor-league development programs for the pros.
posted by Thorzdad at 7:41 AM on April 29, 2022 [3 favorites]

is there a point in getting a college degree if you have to spend the next 8 years in the services?

you're not going to do this if you want to go pro sports

you're not going to do this if you want to go pro academic and/or get a masters or doctorate

you're not going to do this if you want a piece of paper that will get you into a mgmt or professional career

you're not going to do this if you want an mba

come to think of it, if you were really serious about joining the army or whatever, you could just go ahead and do that and eventually get some college too, so you wouldn't do this either

so, what is the point?
posted by pyramid termite at 7:42 AM on April 29, 2022 [16 favorites]

How's about we make the same deal but only for coaches and administration instead ?

I freely admit that I am basing this response on some stereotypical assumptions, but - GOD no, aren't college football coaches already testosteroned-up enough without upping the ante by putting them in the military?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:44 AM on April 29, 2022

They lost me at 'proposed by a defense contractor.'
posted by box at 7:45 AM on April 29, 2022 [25 favorites]

I don't know ... the coaches order people around in uniform already and help people get ready for a draft.

Seems pretty spot on for the coaches. And for creating a bureaucratic killing machine an uni admin would also be in a comfort zone.
posted by NoThisIsPatrick at 7:50 AM on April 29, 2022 [1 favorite]

No college athlete who wants to go pro would take this deal, wouldn't it only apply to college athletes that don't have professional ambitions?

The article talks about funding scholarships outside the big name college sports. So the small number deluded enough to think they can go pro probably drops to zero. If it actually replaces existing scholarships, yeah, that would be a really bad trade for athletes--which on reread maybe it does? If it increases the scholarships then it's a net improvement from the student's point of view.

you're not going to do this if you want to go pro academic and/or get a masters or doctorate

you're not going to do this if you want a piece of paper that will get you into a mgmt or professional career

you're not going to do this if you want an mba

Huh? I've worked with people who served and then have gotten MBAs, other Masters', PhDs, are in professional management positions, etc. My brother in law enlisted in part because of the tuition benefits after service, now has a career indistinguishable from anyone else at his workplace. Why are you imagining this is a non-starter?

Everyone who enlists in the US military does so for eight years. Some people sign up for 2 or 4 years on active duty and then spend the remaining time in the Reserves, and their Reserve time ends up being in the Individual Ready Reserve

Ah, thank you for clarifying. I knew about two year terms, and while aware of the fine print that you could be called up didn't realize you were still technically "serving."
posted by mark k at 7:51 AM on April 29, 2022 [3 favorites]

Why are you imagining this is a non-starter?

because your friends did the service first, then got the education - that can make sense
posted by pyramid termite at 7:56 AM on April 29, 2022 [1 favorite]

"This seems like a good deal for the military, but a bad deal for the athletes."

Probably why the military proposed it instead of a bunch of college athletes.
posted by Naberius at 7:57 AM on April 29, 2022 [21 favorites]

because your friends did the service first, then got the education - that can make sense

Why doesn't it make sense if you reverse it? I really don't understand your point. It's a better deal for the enlistees if the college comes first.
posted by mark k at 7:59 AM on April 29, 2022

I think that the meta-question here is: is this really necessary, or is this the product of a military that's been so big and so revered for so long now that it simply can't conceive of a post-Iraq/Afghanistan world in which they simply need less soldiers? If the real problem is too many generals, not enough grunts, well, there's another solution to that.
posted by Halloween Jack at 8:00 AM on April 29, 2022 [12 favorites]

Replace all college sports with giant hamster wheels hooked to electrical generators. Give scholarships to the students who agree to run in those wheels for X hours per week. Give trophies to the runners who generate the most electricity, or to the teams that generate the most collectively. Spectators can gather in the stadiums and cheer on the runners.
posted by Faint of Butt at 8:08 AM on April 29, 2022 [4 favorites]

High speed rail connecting metro areas to move troops in case of invasion. USACE to deploy solar and wind energy and infrastructure overhaul. VA to provide single payer for all. Peace Corp deployments overseen by the Department of Defense. If that gets things funded across the aisle, so be it.
posted by bendybendy at 8:09 AM on April 29, 2022 [3 favorites]

come to think of it, if you were really serious about joining the army or whatever, you could just go ahead and do that and eventually get some college too, so you wouldn't do this either

Wouldn't the advantage to doing college first be that you go in immediately eligible to attend officer candidate school?
posted by solotoro at 8:14 AM on April 29, 2022 [9 favorites]

Not mentioned yet but also relevant to why this may not be such a great idea: what’s the racial breakdown of college athletes this would affect?
posted by eviemath at 8:29 AM on April 29, 2022

more and older people exposed to a relatively liberal, open atmosphere of college experience into the military for a broader civilian viewpoint

As a veteran, yes, bring in people who are a little less impressionable than my dumb ass was. A diversity of opinion is healthy under arms.
posted by Abehammerb Lincoln at 8:35 AM on April 29, 2022 [8 favorites]

so, what is the point?

People who are actually veterans could answer this better than me, but my impression from working with a lot of them, the benefits are:
-Free leadership training while in service, leading to a better possibility of leadership/management jobs once you're out
-Other advanced training (Masters-equivalent programs) offered while in service
-Various veterans benefits including healthcare and pension (think about "retiring" at 40, collecting a government pension, and then taking another high-powered, high-paying job)
-Depending on what you want to do after leaving service, preferential hiring practices for veterans
-"Active service" can mean a lot of different things, and if you have a degree (especially a STEM degree or other specialization like law) you're very likely to be bouncing from office park to office park within the US and not, you know, seeing combat
posted by backseatpilot at 8:36 AM on April 29, 2022 [8 favorites]

Making all public colleges free would cost 10% of the current US defense budget.

"Educational funding should not be prioritised for people who kill people, plan the killing of people, or enable the killing of people"

I agree with these sentiments, but I thought that was the point? It was my cynical understanding that educational and health care benefits—which are otherwise not provided to (read: withheld from) the hoi polloi at large—are intentional incentives to spur enlistment for people who otherwise would not be able to afford them.

A quick google search brought me to this article:

Benefits: A significant number of soldiers (32%) called military benefits a major motivation for enlisting: health care, active-duty tuition assistance, and post-service support structures like the GI Bill. Military service is a “lifeline” for some Americans, the researchers note, citing one single mother who joined “just because I had my son and I needed the benefits, I guess you could say.”

That quote, and really the whole article, turns my stomach.
posted by rustybullrake at 8:47 AM on April 29, 2022 [5 favorites]

Rounded numbers for context - student athletes by NCAA division:
Division I - 184,000
Division II - 123,000
Division III - 184,000
TOTAL - 490,000

Also consider NAIA (77,000) or junior college (23,000).

So about 600,000 at any given time, the majority of whom have only partial or no scholarship support. Seems like a rich recruiting territory: a diverse, talented, focused, team-oriented population.
posted by Caxton1476 at 8:50 AM on April 29, 2022 [3 favorites]

I think that the meta-question here is: is this really necessary, or is this the product of a military that's been so big and so revered for so long now that it simply can't conceive of a post-Iraq/Afghanistan world in which they simply need less soldiers?

My take on it is that college athletes (in pretty much any sport) are largely going to be very physically fit, which probably makes them more apt to not need a whole lot of extra training just to get them into basic military shape, as opposed to the general shape of today's average volunteer. Also, athletes are already in the midset of following orders and working as a team. So, overall, it's probably a cost savings, even when taking into account the scholarship money.
posted by Thorzdad at 9:08 AM on April 29, 2022 [5 favorites]

This would give the military and defense contractors effective veto power over courses, course content, and the makeup of faculty. And it would allow the military to control the politics of the student body. What do you think would happen to your scholarship if you participated in a protest, for example?

Plus it’s hard to distinguish from indentured servitude.

Other than that, it’s a fine idea.
posted by jamjam at 9:39 AM on April 29, 2022 [8 favorites]

This would give the military and defense contractors effective veto power over courses, course content, and the makeup of faculty.

The U.S. military currently funds more than 10,000 scholarship students at colleges and universities across the country. I was one of them. 20 years later, I was an ROTC instructor. I didn't get to exert veto power over shit. I had cadets who just straight-up didn't attend significant training events because they had class conflicts.

What do you think would happen to your scholarship if you participated in a protest, for example?

When I did it, I was advised not to wear my uniform to the protest, not to advertise myself as a cadet, and not to commit any crimes.
posted by Etrigan at 9:58 AM on April 29, 2022 [30 favorites]

If the federal government of the United States thinks it can improve access to post-secondary education by moving budget money from the DoD into students' hands while avoiding the political quagmire around actually just going ahead and funding public education directly, okay, let's just carry on and do that. Great way to slim down DoD funding a hair while providing some public benefit. Better that than continuing to make education increasingly inaccessible.

It's not clear to me why the conditionality on athletic performance or enlistment adds value to the process, though.
posted by majick at 10:33 AM on April 29, 2022 [2 favorites]

Leaving out football and basketball makes this seem like an end run around Title IX.
posted by nat at 10:38 AM on April 29, 2022

Making education funds more available to athletes and military enlistees is pretty damn ableist
posted by LindsayIrene at 11:03 AM on April 29, 2022 [9 favorites]

How physically solid will the student athletes be after their time in sport? The ones I know had a lot of body damage by graduation and had to get physical therapy for ages, but it might have been because they did American football. And maybe there would be less motivation to run your body ragged if you have a longer-term plan following graduation.
posted by cadge at 11:22 AM on April 29, 2022 [1 favorite]

I don't see this as anything but a good thing. It helps give economically disadvantaged kids a pathway to college, gives the military access to able-bodied adults with at the least the ability to accomplish 4 years of college, and means that our military is full of well-rounded and educated adults. I'd much rather people making decisions on the ground have 4 years of a liberal arts education or something similar.

Right now the qualification to getting 4 years of free college is having rich parents (or much more rare, a full scholarship) and that seems as much as arbitrary as joining the military.
posted by geoff. at 11:46 AM on April 29, 2022 [4 favorites]

Playing a sport takes time (training, practice, and competition), participating in the military takes time, and being in school takes time. Student athletes are already juggling time and resources to fulfill their obligations. I do not see how this will benefit students, nor learning, nor encourage an overdue conversation that needs to be had about supporting and appropriately funding US post-high school education.
posted by mutt.cyberspace at 12:01 PM on April 29, 2022 [2 favorites]

because your friends did the service first, then got the education - that can make sense

One of my roommates in college did this. He did 4 years in college and is now career air force. It's pretty similar. He also played a sport (polo) but it was a club sport, so they didn't offer direct scholarships.

My brother joined the reserves while in college, dropped out to do 3 tours, and had to fight to get them to pay for some college once he finished.

Getting the college first seems like the better deal to me.
posted by The_Vegetables at 12:04 PM on April 29, 2022 [1 favorite]

College should be free & the military should not be feeling the need to invent new forms of coercion to populate itself. People should be doing things because they want to not because they have no other options.
posted by bleep at 12:27 PM on April 29, 2022 [11 favorites]

My son got an ROTC scholarship and is serving now. It was great. For me. Before he signed, and we were so proud, I told him that I get the benefit (did not have to pay for college) and he got the obligation (4 years). He said that no, he got what he wanted which was to join the Army as an officer. He has a pretty typical college experience except getting up at 5am to run and having to piss in a bottle every few weeks. Drug tests smooth out the college experience. A lot less highs and lows (see what I did there?) He joined a fraternity, had a gf, went to sporting events, etc. He just was very careful to separate his military life from his personal like Etrigan mentions above.
posted by JohnnyGunn at 12:29 PM on April 29, 2022 [1 favorite]

The military is like a fungus that spreads its toxic logic-spores throughout our land in much the same way that slavery/racism and genocidal settler colonialism infected every aspect of US domestic law and (foreign) policy...just tax the rich, ffs.
posted by nikoniko at 12:32 PM on April 29, 2022 [11 favorites]

aren't college football coaches already testosteroned-up enough without upping the ante by putting them in the military?

Pogue Colonel: What is that you've got written on your helmet?

Private Joker: "Born to Kill", sir.

Pogue Colonel: You write "Born to Kill" on your helmet and you wear a peace button. What's that supposed to be, some kind of sick joke?

Private Joker: No, sir.

Pogue Colonel: You'd better get your head and your ass wired together, or I will take a giant shit on you.

Private Joker: Yes, sir.

Pogue Colonel: Now answer my question or you'll be standing tall before the man.

Private Joker: I think I was trying to suggest something about the duality of man, sir.

Pogue Colonel: The what?

Private Joker: The duality of man. The Jungian thing, sir.

Pogue Colonel: Whose side are you on, son?

Private Joker: Our side, sir.

Pogue Colonel: Don't you love your country?

Private Joker: Yes, sir.

Pogue Colonel: Then how about getting with the program? Why don't you jump on the team and come on in for the big win?

Private Joker: Yes, sir.
posted by kirkaracha at 1:05 PM on April 29, 2022 [3 favorites]

How physically solid will the student athletes be after their time in sport? The ones I know had a lot of body damage by graduation and had to get physical therapy for ages,

Was thinking same. Either (a) student has potential to get injured while doing their sport and possibly can't end up doing their military service well/in full/whatever, or (b) student can't do their sport after their service because they got injured while in the military. That's the big pitfall I see in this plan right there. If you want to go into a sport career, joining the military after doesn't seem advantageous.
posted by jenfullmoon at 1:54 PM on April 29, 2022

How will this win a land war in Asia?
posted by parmanparman at 2:18 PM on April 29, 2022 [3 favorites]

so, what is the point?

Boosting sagging enlistment numbers.

This is just one of several ploys for exciting interest in would-be recruits. One such involves appealing to the romance of the Greatest Generation.

They might do better by stressing the fact that only about ten percent of military personnel are intended for combat. Alexander, Hercules, Hektor, and Lysander are yesterday's news.
posted by BWA at 4:41 PM on April 29, 2022

Wolverine(s)


posted by clavdivs at 5:46 PM on April 29, 2022 [1 favorite]

I am a veteran and don't see the point. If they want more scholarships, why don't they just increase ROTC? Or the enlisted-to-officer scholarships?
posted by NotLost at 8:02 PM on April 29, 2022 [3 favorites]

I almost went into the Navy, they offered Annapolis and a degree in Nuclear Engineering and active service could be minimized a bit by getting time and a half for sub duty. I have a reasonable gut feeling that I'd have ended up in some research lab somewhere. (I had the highest score on the tests that the regional center had seen from a student. The only higher score was a teacher who had taken the test to see what was on it.) Don't know if they were lying or not about the whole offer. I didn't want to cut my hair and probably didn't think I could take orders, would probably gotten into trouble.
posted by zengargoyle at 7:40 AM on April 30, 2022

I am a veteran and don't see the point. If they want more scholarships, why don't they just increase ROTC? Or the enlisted-to-officer scholarships?

The descriptions aren't written very clearly but seem to say that you wouldn't have any obligations during college, very unlike rotc. Except for the obvious bias in college graduates, it's not obvious that it would be targeting people to become officers.
posted by GCU Sweet and Full of Grace at 8:09 AM on April 30, 2022

This is basically silly and it appears to be a proposal by one contractor who wants to make the systems to administrate such a program, who now even got a puff piece written about it.

That being said, a free college for, say, 4 years of civil service, starting at GS-9 with a promotion of 12, would be fantastic. I would be thrilled to hire out of that pool.

College should of course be free for everyone.
posted by rockindata at 12:49 PM on April 30, 2022 [2 favorites]

it simply can't conceive of a post-Iraq/Afghanistan world in which they simply need less soldiers?

They're planning for Iran.
posted by pompomtom at 7:15 AM on May 2, 2022 [2 favorites]

Big complaint, not enough children being born. Many people marry in, or just after college, and start families. So all the fit, educated college grads move right to base housing, the women dragging their spouses, the men dragging their spouses, the children, born i to mitary bratitude? This population dynamic is not workable. The military has to change, and make routine military life more healthy and integrated into regular American life.
posted by Oyéah at 11:05 AM on May 2, 2022 [1 favorite]