However, as the show did, I can begin to hint at the issue's complexity. One's opinion on the issue shouldn't simply be a matter of either instinctively resenting the Georgetown forward who can't spell his name or cheering on the kid who otherwise wouldn't have a chance. There are other questions to consider.

There are questions about the school. What is the purpose of a college? Is it to educate those who are most ready, or to create a sense of community for community's sake? Or should it be motivated primarily by the bottom line?

There are questions about the athletes themselves. Considering that society has allowed them to ride their skills this far, are schools doing the academically unqualified a greater disservice by accepting them or rejecting them? Are the student-athletes being used? If so, does the way in which they benefit make it okay?

There are questions of broader social concern, as well. What impact does the sports-based opportunity for higher education have on impressionable youth as they learn to prioritize? How about the overwhelming differences between the mostly poor, minority athletes and the Kates, Katies and Caitlins who battle on Jordan and Ohiri Fields? To what extent should race enter the equation?

These are only some of the questions that must be considered in evaluating the modern student-athlete. Their implications extend far beyond the back page, and are anything but multiple choice.