| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
|
hyperetic
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 5361
Location: Fayetteville
Back to top |
 Posted: 09/06/14 5:22 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
| Correct me if I'm wrong but the NCAA has a board of directors that makes the final decisions on whether to adopt proposed changes, additions, etc. to the NCAA rules, right? Potential changes are proposed by member schools right? Doesn't mean that every school agrees to it. Doesn't mean that the Board of Directors decide the way any specific group of schools wants. But because they are official members they have to follow the Board of Directors rules. |
|
AJMMs
Joined: 09 May 2005
Posts: 139
Back to top |
|
linkster
Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5423
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/06/14 5:33 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
[quote="GlennMacGrady"]
| GEF34 wrote: |
Again, the rule applies only to telephone calls. Any coach could have communicated with Davis in numerous other permissable ways.
|
So if Geno drove to Mo'ne's home and was invited in to talk about attending UConn there is no violation but if instead he drove to her house and sat in his car at the curb and called her to have exactly the same conversation it is a violation.
Since the rule doesn't limit the definition of an "individual" other than being younger than a high school junior, no ncaa coach is allowed to make any phone calls since there is no assurance that an "individual" won't answer.
And for the record, Geno didn't call Mo'ne, he called a LL official and asked them to relay a message of congratulations. I guess he should have hung up on the young girl when she took the phone? Yeah, I can just imagine what some people would have made out of that. LOL
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
|
AJMMs
Joined: 09 May 2005
Posts: 139
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/06/14 6:00 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| justintyme wrote: |
| AJMMs wrote: |
| justintyme wrote: |
| AJMMs wrote: |
| Geno should've just not called her if he had any concerns of it being a violation. I would have chose not to. Was he seeking the limelight in doing so, since she was all over the news at the time? Did she specifically say that her dream would be to get a call from him at that moment? If she is saying that she wants to play for UConn one day, it doesn't matter if she is being recruited by the school or not. There are numerous players out there that say UConn is their dream school and even though there is no chance at all that they ever get looked at by Geno and his staff or any other "dream" school coaches out there, you still can't contact them like that. Geno should've known better. He wanted his name associated with her and the national media so he went for it, regardless. Too much ego in that man. And no one ever mentioned the porn pic he favorited on Twitter which was the cause of his not having a Twitter page any more. LOL. He's a great mastermind of a coach, but there's also something fishy about the little twerp. (: |
Are you kidding me? Geno does something nice for a young woman and it's all about him?
I have no horse in this race as I am a college hockey fan and only casually follow college basketball, and I can tell you that the leaps of logic it takes to draw this conclusion is beyond ridiculous. I suppose every time a coach or team does anything kind it is only to feed their ego.  |
You act as if she were dying of cancer or something. That I could see as being a nice gesture. Did she say that it would be her dream to get a call from Geno at that moment? Even if she did, he should've not done it. Please it isn't beyond ridiculous. My point is that he should've just stayed away from that phone call. What made him feel the need to make it? Seriously. |
She was a very impressive young girl who did something historic. She mentioned Geno by name and said it was her dream to play at UCONN. What Geno did was incredibly nice and completely made a young girl's day. This is something to be applauded. Why should he have stayed away from doing this for her? We shouldn't do nice things for people? Especially children? |
Because he obviously had some concerns about whether or not it could be a violation before doing so and it wasn't a life or death situation that he couldn't pass up doing. If it were me, I would've waited until after the whole media circus died down surrounding her, like months after, then when no one was looking, I would've sent a nice note of congratulations and maybe a phone call to express my admiration for her accomplishments. The fact that he went ahead and made a call to contact a "potential" recruit when he wasn't supposed to even when there was some sort of doubt about it being a violation, makes me question, what makes him think that she even needed to hear from him at that time of her limelight? Personally, I would've waited until it was just about Mo'ne and no media circus to congratulate her. That would be the ideal setting to make that phone call if he knew there was no chance of her playing basketball at the college level or during the "contact" period of whatever the rules are. That would've been such a cool thing to do. Do it when no one is looking.
|
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8231
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/06/14 7:40 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| hyperetic wrote: |
Soooooo...kids (prospective student-athletes) are not to make up their minds about where they want to go until their junior year in high school. If they do make up their mind before then, they have to keep it to themselves? They definitely can't share their interest with any athletic personnel from said school? Hmmmm....
|
No, hyperetic, that's not the way it is. Your problem, with respect, is that you don't understand the NCAA recruiting rules.
The coach can't telephone any high school student before they finish their junior year in high school. That's the well-established rule for high school students. The specific issue in this situation was whether it applies to an 8th grader. The NCAA said yes.
There are exceptions to the no-telephone rule for WCBB that allow the coach to call as early as April of the junior year. There are dozens of other rules that allow other forms of communication between a coach and a high school student.
A high school student in any grade can call the coach on the telephone at their own expense as many times as they want. The telephone rules are to prevent coaches from harassing students, not vice versa.
The student can visit the school on unofficial visits, plural, in person and talk to the coaches in person. The student can visit the school, all expenses paid, on an official visit as early as April of the junior year.
Coaches and students can snail mail or email.
The texting rules have been changing. Texts are allowed in men's basketball but not currently in women's basketball.
The student and college coach can communicate indirectly through their high school or AAU coaches.
There are extremely complex rules that govern when a coach can contact a student in person off the college campus such as at a summer camp.
There are thus plenty of opportunities for a high school student and a college coach to communicate before the senior year.
These are all settled and well-understood NCAA rules for high school students ("prospective student-athletes"). The only ringer issue in this case was how the no-telephone rule applies to an 8th grader. The NCAA's clear answer, as can be seen by the swift secondary violation issued against UConn, is that the same rule applies to 8th graders that everyone has always known to apply to 9th, 10th and 11th graders.
And Art Best is right. The NCAA is not an alien organization imposing rules on schools from the outside arbitrarily. The NCAA is an elective, representative democracy that institutes, changes and abolishes rules by majority vote within committees and by the general membership. |
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8231
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/06/14 8:23 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Oldfandepot2 wrote: |
| So, Glenn all these newspapers, Michelle Voepel, Mel Greenberg et al are in Geno's hip pocket. |
OFD, I have absolutely no idea what you mean by this.
I said than none of the media I've seen have quoted the relevant NCAA Bylaw, the one that the NCAA said UConn violated, which is Bylaw 13.1.3.1. Instead, they have focused on the the definition of "prospective student-athlete" in Bylaw 13.02.12, which no one claims is relevant except for the UConn AD covering for the erroneous interpretation by his compliance office.
Since the media haven't even identified the relevant Bylaw, much less quoted it, they certainly can't have analyzed it or probed it's underlying purpose. That's what I've tried to offer. |
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/06/14 8:44 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
If Geno felt so compelled to talk to this girl, why not have someone from the 76ers or whoever call him with her in the room? The article mentioned many people "witnessed" the call. Why couldn't one of them called Geno? If they initiate the phone call, there is no violation.
And I'm glad someone else mentioned that people are making it seem like he reached out to a dying cancer patient for crying out loud. Relating this situation in any way to a professional athlete (another proposed similar situation) doing the same thing just doesn't work. They aren't held to the NCAA rules. Personnel of NCAA member schools are.
And the analogy of "jaywalking to help a kid on the other street" again doesn't work. It was a phone call to congratulate a girl for doing something special athletically. It wasn't like Geno ran across the street to save a kid from falling in a hole in the pavement. That is something that would have been heroic, unplanned & not thought out and done purely out of instinct to help another human being. How that is similar to him being contacted about talking to this girl, making the phone call after inquiring and doing research about whether he should is beyond me. They aren't even close to being the same thing.
|
|
hyperetic
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 5361
Location: Fayetteville
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/06/14 9:31 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
No, hyperetic, that's not the way it is. Your problem, with respect, is that you don't understand the NCAA recruiting rules.
The coach can't telephone any high school student before they finish their junior year in high school. That's the well-established rule for high school students. The specific issue in this situation was whether it applies to an 8th grader. The NCAA said yes.
There are exceptions to the no-telephone rule for WCBB that allow the coach to call as early as April of the junior year. There are dozens of other rules that allow other forms of communication between a coach and a high school student.
A high school student in any grade can call the coach on the telephone at their own expense as many times as they want. The telephone rules are to prevent coaches from harassing students, not vice versa.
The student can visit the school on unofficial visits, plural, in person and talk to the coaches in person. The student can visit the school, all expenses paid, on an official visit as early as April of the junior year.
Coaches and students can snail mail or email.
The texting rules have been changing. Texts are allowed in men's basketball but not currently in women's basketball.
The student and college coach can communicate indirectly through their high school or AAU coaches.
There are extremely complex rules that govern when a coach can contact a student in person off the college campus such as at a summer camp.
There are thus plenty of opportunities for a high school student and a college coach to communicate before the senior year.
These are all settled and well-understood NCAA rules for high school students ("prospective student-athletes"). The only ringer issue in this case was how the no-telephone rule applies to an 8th grader. The NCAA's clear answer, as can be seen by the swift secondary violation issued against UConn, is that the same rule applies to 8th graders that everyone has always known to apply to 9th, 10th and 11th graders.
And Art Best is right. The NCAA is not an alien organization imposing rules on schools from the outside arbitrarily. The NCAA is an elective, representative democracy that institutes, changes and abolishes rules by majority vote within committees and by the general membership. |
You're right. I don't understand the letter of NCAA rules and bylaws (I don't think an army of Harvard educated lawyers could get it all) Being facetious. But my point moreso than anything is that the NCAA has tried so hard to legislate, control, and micromanage how coaches and students interact that its, at least to me, lost a bit of touch with common sense.
Last edited by hyperetic on 09/07/14 12:50 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Brinx
Joined: 03 Oct 2013
Posts: 874
Location: CA
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/06/14 9:49 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| justintyme wrote: |
| Oldfandepot2 wrote: |
| So, Glenn all these newspapers, Michelle Voepel, Mel Greenberg et al are in Geno's hip pocket. It is not the technical application of the rule which can be interpreted widely as shown on this thread but the reporting that Mel and Michelle et al view as petty. So you can argue ad nauseum about its technical merits but that is not the issue. |
Yeah, basically it fails the common sense test. It's like reporting someone for jaywalking when they jaywalked to help a child on the other side of the road. |
This!!!
Side-note: does anyone even know how good of a basketball layer this girl is? Do people have a legitimate reason to claim this is unfair or is someone just taking advantage of an opportunity to muddy another programs reputation?
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/07/14 12:54 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| hyperetic wrote: |
But my point moreso than anything is that the NCAA has tried so hard to legislate, control, and micromanage how coaches and students interact that its, at least to me, has lost a bit of touch with common sense. |
The NCAA doesn't "legislate, control or micromanage" anyone. The member schools regulate themselves. The schools themselves vote on these rules, and all of the schools agree to abide by the rules that the majority vote to adopt.
This really isn't a difficult concept.
|
|
hyperetic
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 5361
Location: Fayetteville
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/07/14 1:05 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| hyperetic wrote: |
But my point moreso than anything is that the NCAA has tried so hard to legislate, control, and micromanage how coaches and students interact that its, at least to me, has lost a bit of touch with common sense. |
The NCAA doesn't "legislate, control or micromanage" anyone. The member schools regulate themselves. The schools themselves vote on these rules, and all of the schools agree to abide by the rules that the majority vote to adopt.
This really isn't a difficult concept. |
Well explain to me oh knowledgeable one, if the NCAA is made up of member schools the regulate themselves, what is it that they call themselves? NCAA right? So if its not the organization made up of member schools called the NCAA with its board of directors that are the final decision makers of rules then how is order kept and who are those people handing out the sanctions? Apparently you and I are getting caught up in semantics. The member schools are the NCAA that make the rules and police those rules, correct? Who was that that just found Geno guilty of a recruiting violation? |
|
GEF34
Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 14109
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/07/14 2:23 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| hyperetic wrote: |
You're right. I don't understand the letter of NCAA rules and bylaws (I don't think an army of Harvard educated lawyers could get it all) Being facetious. But my point moreso than anything is that the NCAA has tried so hard to legislate, control, and micromanage how coaches and students interact that its, at least to me, lost a bit of touch with common sense. |
I disagree for the simple fact that people are always trying to find ways around the rules and the "common sense" you speak of is taken advantage of.
Say I was coaching at a mid-major and I was really interested in Mo'ne Davis and I thought this would be a perfect opportunity to open up lines of communication and show her we are interested, but I didn't talk about recruiting, I just said "Hi my name is ___ and I saw you play in the little league world series and I thought you did a great job and I wanted to say congrats on advancing semifinals." I didn't mentioned anything about recruiting, but then that opens up the lines of communication. If I said I was just really impressed by her performance I'm a big baseball, there is no way the NCAA could prove I had an ulterior motive, and I called with recruiting in mind, but in reality that is why I made the phone call to begin with.
Now I'm not saying that is what is happening here, but that is why the NCAA has such over the top rules, to take into consideration all these coaches who try to get around the rules to boost up recruiting.
|
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/07/14 7:38 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| GEF34 wrote: |
| hyperetic wrote: |
You're right. I don't understand the letter of NCAA rules and bylaws (I don't think an army of Harvard educated lawyers could get it all) Being facetious. But my point moreso than anything is that the NCAA has tried so hard to legislate, control, and micromanage how coaches and students interact that its, at least to me, lost a bit of touch with common sense. |
I disagree for the simple fact that people are always trying to find ways around the rules and the "common sense" you speak of is taken advantage of.
Say I was coaching at a mid-major and I was really interested in Mo'ne Davis and I thought this would be a perfect opportunity to open up lines of communication and show her we are interested, but I didn't talk about recruiting, I just said "Hi my name is ___ and I saw you play in the little league world series and I thought you did a great job and I wanted to say congrats on advancing semifinals." I didn't mentioned anything about recruiting, but then that opens up the lines of communication. If I said I was just really impressed by her performance I'm a big baseball, there is no way the NCAA could prove I had an ulterior motive, and I called with recruiting in mind, but in reality that is why I made the phone call to begin with.
Now I'm not saying that is what is happening here, but that is why the NCAA has such over the top rules, to take into consideration all these coaches who try to get around the rules to boost up recruiting. |
Exactly! These rules don't just come out of thin air. Most of the recruiting rules have come about because of things that have happened and are perceived by the schools to give others an advantage. The whole point of the rules is to make sure that everyone is on as even a playing field as possible. Yes, that is very hard to do but that is the intent of the rules...to keep things fair.
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/07/14 9:08 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| hyperetic wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| hyperetic wrote: |
But my point moreso than anything is that the NCAA has tried so hard to legislate, control, and micromanage how coaches and students interact that its, at least to me, has lost a bit of touch with common sense. |
The NCAA doesn't "legislate, control or micromanage" anyone. The member schools regulate themselves. The schools themselves vote on these rules, and all of the schools agree to abide by the rules that the majority vote to adopt.
This really isn't a difficult concept. |
Well explain to me oh knowledgeable one, if the NCAA is made up of member schools the regulate themselves, what is it that they call themselves? NCAA right? So if its not the organization made up of member schools called the NCAA with its board of directors that are the final decision makers of rules then how is order kept and who are those people handing out the sanctions? Apparently you and I are getting caught up in semantics. The member schools are the NCAA that make the rules and police those rules, correct? Who was that that just found Geno guilty of a recruiting violation? |
No "board of directors" vote on the rules. The entire group of Div I member schools vote on the Division I rules. And they all - including UConn - agree to abide by them. It really doesn't matter if some fans think they're silly or trivial. A majority of the schools believed they were appropriate and necessary. And if a majority ever thinks they're unecessary, they can change them.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11152
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/07/14 10:15 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| hyperetic wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| hyperetic wrote: |
But my point moreso than anything is that the NCAA has tried so hard to legislate, control, and micromanage how coaches and students interact that its, at least to me, has lost a bit of touch with common sense. |
The NCAA doesn't "legislate, control or micromanage" anyone. The member schools regulate themselves. The schools themselves vote on these rules, and all of the schools agree to abide by the rules that the majority vote to adopt.
This really isn't a difficult concept. |
Well explain to me oh knowledgeable one, if the NCAA is made up of member schools the regulate themselves, what is it that they call themselves? NCAA right? So if its not the organization made up of member schools called the NCAA with its board of directors that are the final decision makers of rules then how is order kept and who are those people handing out the sanctions? Apparently you and I are getting caught up in semantics. The member schools are the NCAA that make the rules and police those rules, correct? Who was that that just found Geno guilty of a recruiting violation? |
No "board of directors" vote on the rules. The entire group of Div I member schools vote on the Division I rules. And they all - including UConn - agree to abide by them. It really doesn't matter if some fans think they're silly or trivial. A majority of the schools believed they were appropriate and necessary. And if a majority ever thinks they're unecessary, they can change them. |
If the NCAA had any credibility at all, it would be a lot easier to take this seriously. As it is, rules are violated on a daily basis, in most cases because they are both really unenforceable and counter to common sense (you can buy a prospective athlete an apple but not a bagel, or something like that), and then punishments are handed out that seem to vary wildly from case to case.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
scfastpitch
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 616
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/07/14 10:21 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Love that great quote from Jerry Tarkanian, when he heard Kentucky had committed a rules violation . Tark said " The NCAA is so upset with Kentucky they are giving Cleveland State two more years on probation " .
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/07/14 10:36 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| hyperetic wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| hyperetic wrote: |
But my point moreso than anything is that the NCAA has tried so hard to legislate, control, and micromanage how coaches and students interact that its, at least to me, has lost a bit of touch with common sense. |
The NCAA doesn't "legislate, control or micromanage" anyone. The member schools regulate themselves. The schools themselves vote on these rules, and all of the schools agree to abide by the rules that the majority vote to adopt.
This really isn't a difficult concept. |
Well explain to me oh knowledgeable one, if the NCAA is made up of member schools the regulate themselves, what is it that they call themselves? NCAA right? So if its not the organization made up of member schools called the NCAA with its board of directors that are the final decision makers of rules then how is order kept and who are those people handing out the sanctions? Apparently you and I are getting caught up in semantics. The member schools are the NCAA that make the rules and police those rules, correct? Who was that that just found Geno guilty of a recruiting violation? |
No "board of directors" vote on the rules. The entire group of Div I member schools vote on the Division I rules. And they all - including UConn - agree to abide by them. It really doesn't matter if some fans think they're silly or trivial. A majority of the schools believed they were appropriate and necessary. And if a majority ever thinks they're unecessary, they can change them. |
If the NCAA had any credibility at all, it would be a lot easier to take this seriously. As it is, rules are violated on a daily basis, in most cases because they are both really unenforceable and counter to common sense (you can buy a prospective athlete an apple but not a bagel, or something like that), and then punishments are handed out that seem to vary wildly from case to case. |
Just more silliness pretending that the NCAA is some independant alien third party. You're just saying that 300+ schools themselves have no credibility and act contrary to common sense and their own self interest. You've made clear ad nauseum how much you despise the NCAA but that's simply ridiculous. And if the schools agreed with you they'd change it.
These seemingly trivial rules only exist because SOME coaches constantly try to push the limits and weasil around the more obvious ones.
|
|
Ex-Ref
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 8949
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/07/14 11:50 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Why did it take a call from another institution to get the NCAA to look into this?
Wasn't it pretty much splashed everywhere that he had called her? Why didn't the NCAA initiate on their own?
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66927
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/07/14 11:58 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Ex-Ref wrote: |
Why did it take a call from another institution to get the NCAA to look into this?
Wasn't it pretty much splashed everywhere that he had called her? Why didn't the NCAA initiate on their own? |
The NCAA never investigates until there is a formal complaint from someone.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/07/14 1:49 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| hyperetic wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| hyperetic wrote: |
But my point moreso than anything is that the NCAA has tried so hard to legislate, control, and micromanage how coaches and students interact that its, at least to me, has lost a bit of touch with common sense. |
The NCAA doesn't "legislate, control or micromanage" anyone. The member schools regulate themselves. The schools themselves vote on these rules, and all of the schools agree to abide by the rules that the majority vote to adopt.
This really isn't a difficult concept. |
Well explain to me oh knowledgeable one, if the NCAA is made up of member schools the regulate themselves, what is it that they call themselves? NCAA right? So if its not the organization made up of member schools called the NCAA with its board of directors that are the final decision makers of rules then how is order kept and who are those people handing out the sanctions? Apparently you and I are getting caught up in semantics. The member schools are the NCAA that make the rules and police those rules, correct? Who was that that just found Geno guilty of a recruiting violation? |
No "board of directors" vote on the rules. The entire group of Div I member schools vote on the Division I rules. And they all - including UConn - agree to abide by them. It really doesn't matter if some fans think they're silly or trivial. A majority of the schools believed they were appropriate and necessary. And if a majority ever thinks they're unecessary, they can change them. |
If the NCAA had any credibility at all, it would be a lot easier to take this seriously. As it is, rules are violated on a daily basis, in most cases because they are both really unenforceable and counter to common sense (you can buy a prospective athlete an apple but not a bagel, or something like that), and then punishments are handed out that seem to vary wildly from case to case. |
Just more silliness pretending that the NCAA is some independant alien third party. You're just saying that 300+ schools themselves have no credibility and act contrary to common sense and their own self interest. You've made clear ad nauseum how much you despise the NCAA but that's simply ridiculous. And if the schools agreed with you they'd change it.
These seemingly trivial rules only exist because SOME coaches constantly try to push the limits and weasil around the more obvious ones. |
I think you are over-simplifying the situation. Yes, the NCAA is made up of the member schools, and yes they are the ones who determine the rules...but the NCAA is the actual body that has been given the responsibility of investigating, enforcing, and adjudicating the potential violations. It is that enforcement and adjudication that people feel is lacking.
Think of it like the Federal Justice Department. Congress passes laws, but it is the Justice Department and the US Attorneys that are ultimately responsible for bringing charges against an individual. And much like the Justice Department, the NCAA has prosecutorial discretion when enforcing these rules. In other words, if something violates the letter of the law, but not the spirit (which this is an obvious case of) they can opt to not take any action.
It's not the rule itself that has people rolling their eyes, it's the draconian application of the rule in this specific case that defies common sense. Think of it like an ADA deciding to charge someone with jaywalking even though the reason they jaywalked was to help a child, and no actual harm came from their decision to do so. Pretty sure that it's not the legislature creating jaywalking rules in the first place that would have people annoyed, but rather the decision to prosecute.
So yes, the NCAA is a suitable target for our annoyance.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/07/14 2:01 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| justintyme wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| hyperetic wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| hyperetic wrote: |
But my point moreso than anything is that the NCAA has tried so hard to legislate, control, and micromanage how coaches and students interact that its, at least to me, has lost a bit of touch with common sense. |
The NCAA doesn't "legislate, control or micromanage" anyone. The member schools regulate themselves. The schools themselves vote on these rules, and all of the schools agree to abide by the rules that the majority vote to adopt.
This really isn't a difficult concept. |
Well explain to me oh knowledgeable one, if the NCAA is made up of member schools the regulate themselves, what is it that they call themselves? NCAA right? So if its not the organization made up of member schools called the NCAA with its board of directors that are the final decision makers of rules then how is order kept and who are those people handing out the sanctions? Apparently you and I are getting caught up in semantics. The member schools are the NCAA that make the rules and police those rules, correct? Who was that that just found Geno guilty of a recruiting violation? |
No "board of directors" vote on the rules. The entire group of Div I member schools vote on the Division I rules. And they all - including UConn - agree to abide by them. It really doesn't matter if some fans think they're silly or trivial. A majority of the schools believed they were appropriate and necessary. And if a majority ever thinks they're unecessary, they can change them. |
If the NCAA had any credibility at all, it would be a lot easier to take this seriously. As it is, rules are violated on a daily basis, in most cases because they are both really unenforceable and counter to common sense (you can buy a prospective athlete an apple but not a bagel, or something like that), and then punishments are handed out that seem to vary wildly from case to case. |
Just more silliness pretending that the NCAA is some independant alien third party. You're just saying that 300+ schools themselves have no credibility and act contrary to common sense and their own self interest. You've made clear ad nauseum how much you despise the NCAA but that's simply ridiculous. And if the schools agreed with you they'd change it.
These seemingly trivial rules only exist because SOME coaches constantly try to push the limits and weasil around the more obvious ones. |
I think you are over-simplifying the situation. Yes, the NCAA is made up of the member schools, and yes they are the ones who determine the rules...but the NCAA is the actual body that has been given the responsibility of investigating, enforcing, and adjudicating the potential violations. It is that enforcement and adjudication that people feel is lacking.
Think of it like the Federal Justice Department. Congress passes laws, but it is the Justice Department and the US Attorneys that are ultimately responsible for bringing charges against an individual. And much like the Justice Department, the NCAA has prosecutorial discretion when enforcing these rules. In other words, if something violates the letter of the law, but not the spirit (which this is an obvious case of) they can opt to not take any action.
It's not the rule itself that has people rolling their eyes, it's the draconian application of the rule in this specific case that defies common sense. Think of it like an ADA deciding to charge someone with jaywalking even though the reason they jaywalked was to help a child, and no actual harm came from their decision to do so. Pretty sure that it's not the legislature creating jaywalking rules in the first place that would have people annoyed, but rather the decision to prosecute.
So yes, the NCAA is a suitable target for our annoyance. |
Actually that's not correct either. In most cases (like this one) schools admit the violation. When they don't its handled by a compliance committee made up of representatives of member schools, not by NCAA staff members. And again fans can get annoyed all they like when their favorite coach gets caught, but if the schools thought the system was broken, they'd change it. They obviously don't.
|
|
AJMMs
Joined: 09 May 2005
Posts: 139
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/07/14 4:17 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
FWIW regarding my posts above, I also believe that the person(s) who reported this to the NCAA are envious and childish for doing so. That's why I wonder why Geno went ahead with that phone call if there was any question of it possibly being a violation. He should know by now that there are some who do have this envy of what he has accomplished and how he can pretty much have the pick of the litter when it comes to elite recruits that fit his style. That's what makes me question whether ego played a part in it. Of course some hater is gonna try to report this as a violation especially the minute Mo'ne mentioned playing for UConn women's basketball. All the world's eyes were on this young woman. Let me make a phone call and get my name recognized too. Or maybe he is just naive (don't think so). I honestly believe he wouldn't have accomplished half of what he's done without the aid of Chris Dailey. He's done/said some really off-the-wall things throughout his career that leaves me scratching my head as to how he can get away with it. His players seem to love him, so he's not a terrible person, just a little to egotistic IMHO.
He would've had a bigger effect on this young woman if he had waited until she was out of the limelight and called or sent her note of congratulations. Do it when she's know longer in the public's eye and no one is watching. That would've been a much cooler and powerful gesture.
|
|
Ex-Ref
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 8949
Back to top |
|
|
|
