Reality has a way of asserting itself. Eventually it will collapse under the weight of its own foolishness. As far as anyone seceding the NCAA, I think, just maybe, if a huge name program (like Notre Dame) did it, they could probably pull it off, because they'd still get a$$loads of media attention. Not to mention, the Fighting Irish is a mascot only very slightly removed from the Seminoles. Just as racist. They have a lot to fear from the NCAA's actions of late. Be that as it may, I think if a big name program were to have the guts to try quitting the NCAA, then other programs would folllow, and eventually create a rival tournament association. Maybe this is the path to my much anticipated playoff!
No way. It would take more than one big name program to secede in order to get any others to even think about it. It will take the D-1A, D-11 and the leeser D-1 voting memebers of the NCAA to draft legislation that effects the pockets of the BCS conference programs. That is the only way anything will ever be discusses even. That is why the CFA was formed in the 70's and why each conference and independent now has control over their own broadcast rights. Everyone seems to forget that the NCAA is the presidents of the colleges, not a separate organization. The mascot decision wasn't made by NCAA employees, it was made by a committee made up of NCAA presidents. Thr rules are made up by the presidents, the lack of a playoff is becuase of the presidents, the schedule guidelines are made up by the presidents, the men in charge are put in place by the presidents, etc. Any organization that would be formed by the members who did succees would be run just like the NCAA, with the presidents in charge of it as well. The only difference would be in name only.
Good post cajdav1. People like to bitch and moan about the NCAA but they have no clue how to fundamentally change anything. Changing people and organizations would effect things at the margin, but unless you want to eliminate enforcement and have a free for all, fundamentally things will remain the same. It's not easy to rein in highly competitive aggressive people who constantly push the envelop. I invite people to share with us their design for an "improved" NCAA.
For a start, they could do away with selective enforcement. It's funny how Notre Dame never get into any trouble.
Significant improvement could be made with a few iinitial, simple steps: 1. Be consistent 2. Condense the rule book to something coaches can read and understand. Right now it's worse than the IRS Tax Code. 3. Use good judgement. When a school asks a waiver in advance about something that makes sense and doesn't constitute a blatant violation, let it be. Use the Ga.-Boise St. thing as a good example.
What have they done wrong and where is the proof? Are you advocating that anyone who hasn't been punished should be punished on principle? Are you referring to the Kim Dunbar case? Do you know the specifics of the case? ND didn't really have anything to do with her. Their sin was more of a sin of omission; of Holtz not really caring about who their players who their players were involved with and what they were doing. You may not think that the penalty given was much, but it led to ND's setback over the last decade or so. Their restricting of entrance requirments was a direct result of this case and it's why Holtz left.
I. Consistency: I'm sure there is a perception of inconsistency, but I really do not know how inconsistent they are. Part of the problem is what is the basis for conistency. Many feel that it should be based on how much money is given. I think given their constraints, that attitude is as much if not more of a factor than money. The NCAA is not a government and does not have subpoena power. They cannot compell testimony or presentation of evidence. This is an extreme handicap in enforcement and allows the smarter, slicker, and more disciplined cheaters to get away with it. Believe it or not, the NCAA has to have some proof of cheating before penalizing. This leads to a perception of inconsistency among the more passionate fans. IMO, the NCAA has to depend a great deal on the integrity of an institution to play by the rules. Many times this is a gut feeling. In the LSU case with Brown, he showed complete contempt for the organization and the rules. LSU gave the impression of being a rogue institution by supporting him completely. We pretty much gave them no choice by to lay the hammer down when it became clear we didn't respect the rules. II. Condense the rule book. I agree that this is a real opportunity for improvement, but you have to ask how it got this way. The basis for much of the rules are pretty simple principles. But aggressive and competitive people with access to many lawyers have a way of pushing the envelop and demanding specificity as a way to avoid accountability. All the complexity that is there is because people have tried things and argued ignorance. A better approach would be to have simple principles and let judges use judgement. But alas, nobody seems to trust the judges. III. Use good judgment. See above. IMO, this was a case where it would have been better to ask forgiveness than to ask permission. If you really think you are doing the right thing, do it and be willing to accept the consequences if others don't agree with you. Asking these guys to pass judgement on stuff like this beforehand is really opening up a can of worms. All kinds of requests will start coming, rules will have to made up, more complexity will be added. As it is, given the number of schools, the enforement staff is really quite small (a desirable design trait btw). You would either have to expand the staff or more important things would go by the wayside.
