The Weight of Accountability in College Athletics

A recent court ruling has allowed the case against former Bucknell football coach Mark Kulbis to proceed, raising questions about accountability within college athletics. At issue is hazing and player safety, particularly when coaches prioritize team loyalty or winning culture over athlete well-being.

Hazing has long been a contentious issue within athletic departments across the country. The practice of subjecting freshmen or younger players to physically demanding exercises as initiation has led to numerous high-profile cases of injury and death. A notable example is the 2017 Penn State University scandal, which exposed decades-long systemic abuse under the guise of hazing and team-building.

The case against Kulbis is particularly egregious given that he received training on hazing, sickle-cell trait, and rhabdomyolysis (rhabdo), yet chose to ignore this education when subjecting players like Calvin “CJ” Dickey Jr. to punishment workouts. The coroner’s office initially listed Dickey’s cause of death as natural causes due to an enlarged heart, highlighting a disturbing pattern of neglect and denial within athletic departments.

Kaiti Hager, former head football athletic trainer at Bucknell, testified that the team’s medical staff was not adequately equipped or empowered to respond to emergencies. When Hager arrived at the weight room after receiving reports of Dickey’s collapse, she suspected a “sickling crisis” and administered oxygen while instructing Kulbis to call 911.

The defense attorney argued that Kulbis should be granted immunity due to his 911 call, but this claim is a red herring. The fact remains that Kulbis’ actions put Dickey and others at risk of serious harm. Pennsylvania’s anti-hazing law grants immunity for those who seek emergency medical help, but it does not pardon negligent behavior.

The trial scheduled to begin on November 2 will be a crucial moment in holding athletic departments accountable for prioritizing player safety. As the case against Kulbis unfolds, we must consider the broader implications for college athletics. Several high-profile cases have highlighted the need for greater oversight and accountability within athletic departments, with the NCAA taking steps to address hazing and player safety.

However, these measures have been criticized as inadequate by many experts. The case against Kulbis is a stark reminder that coaches like him bear responsibility for prioritizing player well-being over team culture. By allowing the trial to proceed, Judge Jeffrey L. Mensch has sent a clear signal: accountability will not be swept under the rug in college athletics.

As the nation watches this trial unfold, we must also hold ourselves accountable for demanding greater transparency and safety within our athletic departments. The case against Mark Kulbis serves as a painful reminder that silence about player safety can have fatal consequences.