Category Archives: The NCAA

Autono-mean

So, we’re now officially in the new era of NCAA autonomy.  The conferences have had two months to put together their proposals for providing greater support for student-athletes – remember, that’s what all the hoo-ha was about.  As John Infante points out, the initial results are less than overwhelming.

This one’s my favorite:

“Ensuring Nutritional Needs of Student-Athletes are Met in a Reasonable Way” (ACC): Virtually unlimited food was already adopted, so my sense is that “in a reasonable way” is the most important phrase in this idea. Remember that the ACC was pitching a need-based cost of attendance proposal, which is now DOA after the O’Bannon injunction. That makes it unlikely the ACC is pushing for even fewer limits on feeding, like removing board from the scholarship calculation and making food truly unlimited. Instead I suspect the ACC wants to roll back some of the changes brought by Proposal 2013–31-B and impose some more defined limits on what schools can provide.

You can just feel the player concern oozing out of those guys.

About these ads

5 Comments

Filed under The NCAA

Friday morning buffet

Mmm, mmm good.

46 Comments

Filed under Coach O Needs Another Red Bull, Georgia Football, It's Just Bidness, Strategery And Mechanics, The Body Is A Temple, The NCAA

“It’s easy to go back and Monday-morning quarterback something like that.”

So Mark Emmert washes his hands of domestic violence.

NCAA president Mark Emmert believes it’s the responsibility of individual schools to handle issues of domestic violence and sexual assault, and that a spate of recent cases reflect greater societal problems.

Question:  what if Emmert discovered that a school was enabling a player or players who were accused of such violence and/or sexual assault?  Why would that be a different situation from what moved him to act against Penn State?

13 Comments

Filed under The NCAA

Tone deaf

Mark Emmert, of course.

There’s a reason Stacey Osburn keeps her mouth shut most of the time, Mark.  You should ask her about that.

3 Comments

Filed under The NCAA

“We’ll abide by the final order, whatever that is.”

You may be surprised to learn that there are actually some athletic directors out there pondering an O’Bannon future.  Shockingly, some of them are even willing to concede that future won’t be apocalyptic.

Throughout college sports, there’s a wait-and-see approach on what the O’Bannon ruling will ultimately mean. Clemson athletic director Dan Radakovich said in a recent interview he has started to financially plan three- to five-year forecasts for a future in which the O’Bannon injunction goes into effect.

“You better be able to give some thought, whether it’s with your president, your board, all the key decision-makers on campus, to let them know as much information as you have,” Radakovich said. “You have to say, ‘Look, we’re going to have to do some things differently from an allocation standpoint in the future.”

Radakovich said he believes the O’Bannon ruling should be viewed within the context of NCAA autonomy “because a lot of things that are shown in the O’Bannon case are student-athlete welfare issues, and that’s what the autonomy was going to work at to try to get better.”

Jim Delany’s Chicken Little act notwithstanding, if you’re running a Power Five conference athletic program, you’ve got money rolling in.  You’ll just have to be prudent allocating your resources.  Unless you’re at Texas or Alabama, of course.

Comments Off

Filed under It's Just Bidness, The NCAA

Just when Stacey Osburn thought it was safe to go back in the water…

The next round of antitrust litigation is heating up.

In his filing Thursday, Kessler wrote that the NCAA and conferences’ motion to dismiss is “based on a fundamental misconstruction” of what Wilken decided in O’Bannon. That ruling is being appealed by the NCAA.

The NCAA’s motion to dismiss “brazenly portrays the Court’s trial decision as an NCAA victory on the antitrust merits that affords Defendants blanket antitrust immunity for any NCAA restraint that does not conflict specifically with the terms of the Court’s O’Bannon injunction,” Kessler wrote. “No such per se lawful rule can be found in O’Bannon or anywhere else in the history of antitrust law.”

There’s a motion to dismiss hearing coming up next month.  If Kessler survives that, then the fun will really begin with more discovery.

6 Comments

Filed under The NCAA

“If you have a social problem that I have a question about, I non-renew you.”

Personally speaking, any topic of conversation that elicits a blunt “That’s bullshit” from the likes of Nick Saban is of interest, but on the subject of multi-year scholarships, I think Saban’s right when he goes on to say,

“It really is not an issue either way, though,” Saban said. “A player’s on a one-year scholarship and it’s automatically renewable. It’s not like you can just take it away. And if he’s on a four-year scholarship and does something in violation of university policy or athletic policy, you can still take it away. It really is insignificant.”

In other words, if you’re a student-athlete, it’s still a matter of trusting your head coach.  Hell, even Chris Conley isn’t sure what he’s got as far as a formal commitment.  He just knows Richt.

But ask Conley how many years his scholarship has technically been for during his career and he hesitates. Conley admits he’s uncertain.

Some head coaches, such as Georgia’s Mark Richt, “make a pledge to that kid for four years and that’s what he does,” Conley said. “But not every coach has to do that. They can make decisions on whether or not they want a player to be there. So it really comes down to that administration and coaching staff.”

3 Comments

Filed under The NCAA