So we've spent the last hour reading about and researching the new study released by the "Center for Ethical Theory and Honor in Competitive Sports" — which, from what we can find, appears to be something operated out of the University of Idaho's basement (we imagine the office looking something like Peter Venkman's and Egon Spengler's at the beginning of Ghostbusters) — that says today's athletes "lack moral reasoning." This "study" surveyed 72,000 athletes over a 17-year stretch, which sounds to us like a pretty liberal definition of "today's athletes," but whichever.
Now, we certainly won't argue that a fair number of athletes get themselves into trouble, perhaps even at a higher rate than the population at large (though somehow we kind of doubt it; from our experience, the real bad kids were the ones kicked off the team). But we have to wonder about the "questionnaires designed to measure their moral reasoning abilities." What were the questions? Who were these athletes? (Were they all from Idaho?) Were they pro athletes? College? High school? What sport do they play? What about their background? Can we compare the answers to society? How about those sainted, sin-free athletes from 40 years ago?
Can the study give us any of this info? Or are they just capitalizing on a smattering of tired sportswriters eager to jump on the "Athletes Are Bad Because They Do Elaborate Celebrations In The End Zone" angle? Whatever the answer is, we see that it has worked out for those who conducted the study; professor Susan Stoll has been hired by the Atlanta Braves to come up with a teaching curriculum. Perhaps she should come up with a lesson for their manager.