1) It’s not, in fact, a 4-year commitment. Athletic scholarships are one-year renewable grants and schools always have the option and complete discretion (for PR reasons, not exercised, except in situations of misconduct and not for “not panning out”) not to renew. Back in the Wild-West days, coaches “running players off” who had not progressed athletically was incredibly common. Had Watson gone to Duke, would she have suffered some form of this?

2) I agree that Duke should have handled this better. But Watson gets the benefit of the race to the bottom in college recruiting–a free education at a top university that she would not have received (based on her basketball skills) in a functioning market. Again, assuming the coaches didn’t try to run her off.

3) At some level, I can’t be too hard on the coach. Because even in women’s sports, the coach’s job security is based on winning, not on the quality of the women in the program or how well they do in the classroom.

4) One thing Prof. Yen’s post leaves out that was in the story is the personal harm and loss of trust that this girl has suffered. She is going back through the recruiting process, but her faith in the adults she is dealing with has been shaken.