No. Tertiary education is about getting an education which means by nature they have to think for themselves, rather than being told what to do. Which is what happens with footballers. They have their managers that tell them where to sign and pay their bills, buy their homes and the like; PR people who handle any indiscretions; football managers that tell them where to be and when, coaches that tell them to do this today; dieticians telling them what to eat etc etc. It's not unlike being institutionalised.
Force them to get an education for 3-4 years and make them live in the real world. They will have to learn to pay bills, to do their own grocery shopping, go pay the rego, struggle financially and interact with society. They will have to do their own thinking. Not live the sheltered life of a footballer. By nature they become better rounded individuals. Not dopey footballers. Don't see what the problem is. They come out better equipped for retirement, they get all the crap out of their system away from the public eye and they can think for themselves.
They didn't renew because of player behaviour.
http://www.current.com.au/2009/07/07/article/Samsung-considers-whether-to-dump-Roosters/RKBVDOOCSD
It's about saving face.
Spell out the standards? Ummm... Really? You need a standard of behaviour in writing to realise that sh*tting in hotels, peeing on walls and getting your balls licked by a dog is not acceptable? How about beating your girlfriend? Drunk driving? Hmmm....
It's not getting technical. If you want say crowd figures are up, then you need to look at a historical basis as well as how that compares to population growth. That's what you need to compare against. The number of people at games doesn't count, it's the percentage that matters. If the population increases and the percentage attending drops year to year in line with that population increase, then it is wrong to say crowds have increased. The number of people is not statistically significant. It's the percentage.