[J. T. Toad]

Mike,
I don't disagree at all with the other respondents. I just wanted to add an impression of my perceptions. I felt like butting in.

It all comes down to semantic definitions.

Roll models are defined by what we allow our moral judgment to discern. This isn't limited to sports. With our modern day bombardment of instantaneous information, people tend to gravitate toward those in the public lime lite for a moral standard, thus making them role models.

People in the news are dissected, exposed, digested, and exemplified. Just go to a bunch of themes birthday parties, one can notice what a child will be influenced by.

Society lacks a direction on defining any type of moral ideal. Most information presented is motivated by money.

On a similar idea, can you define a hero? Now take that definition and apply it to those who are perpetuated to be heroes. (a hero is NOT the pilot who saves his own butt after getting shot down in enemy territory, it is the individuals who risk all to rescue him, but yet he was every news reporting agencies with interviews as such)

so, to answer your question...
Are they? No, unless we choose/allow them to be
Should they be? Yes, being in the forefront has power and responsibility.
Will they be? No, not unless it pays
Do they think they are? you bet. If any figure is perceived to be a role model, that means they will get support and supported by money.
Should I care about a sports character being a role model? no, I should chose a role model, regardless of who it is, by what moral attribute or character I can manifest in my own life.

Role models should be leaders of attributes we willfully follow. Just ask yourself where you want to be lead.

Now, I would like to know who you think a good roll model is?