Might as well complete the trifecta and bring Art Briles on board. Maybe he could run the Title IX department.
Category Archives: Political Wankery
I doubt this goes anywhere quickly, but two Connecticut legislators have proposed a bill that would create a “athletic protection commission” to monitor and enforce the safety for all NCAA athletes in the state.
As you can probably guess, that isn’t sitting well with the affected parties, who are indignant that anyone would think they need prodding to make sure their student-athletes are tended to properly.
“Do I really think there’s this kind of need? The answer is no,” Fairfield AD Eugene Doris said. “Normally, you hear the nightmare things behind the scenes. I don’t get any sense that student-athletes are in any jeopardy in any way. All of my colleagues, to a person, would be appalled if it happened on their campus and would fire people if they found out something was occurring and not being done correctly.”
Well, color me reassured.
Like I said, this bill’s likely doomed before it gets out of the gate, but add it to the steady drip, drip, drip of concern regarding players’ health. Guys like Doris would be wise to get ahead of things, but that would require thinking ahead, which isn’t a strong suit for most athletic directors.
Gridiron Now posts an interview with the doofus… er, Mississippi legislator… who’s pitching a bill that would fine the NCAA $10,000 a day for every day an investigation lasts past a year.
It’s as muddled as you’d expect someone who thinks a private, voluntary organization has to apply due process in dealing with its membership would sound. Although it feels like he knows he’s not going far with his bill:
Q. Have you talked to people in other states that have had similar situations with the NCAA, and if so, what has been the feedback from those people?
A. Recently, I have had calls as far away as Connecticut to California, and in my preliminary research, I didn’t find where any other state had looked at it from this angle.
I think the conversation is ongoing, and that’s the goal, which is to raise awareness and create conversation on this topic.
Conversation? Not until Stacey Osburn sings, skippy.
I’m not sure how this proposed law would work, since the schools don’t control conference scheduling…
… but if somehow it leads to Jim Delany’s arrest one day, I’m down with it.
Gee, who could have expected that a former Ole Miss football player who’s now a state legislator is introducing a bill aimed at NCAA investigations?
Rep. Trey Lamar, R-Senatobia, introduced the potential legislation (House Bill 1040), which would force under the threat of financial penalty for the NCAA “to complete its investigation, present findings to the NCAA Committee on Infractions and to render its final decision either imposing penalties for the violations proven in the investigation process or dismissal of the allegations” within nine months of a member institution’s response to a letter of inquiry.
“Financial penalty”? Do tell us more, Trey.
Should the NCAA fail to meet these time frames, the bill proposes it would be fined $10,000 each day it goes past the window of time and said fine should be “payable to the member institution subject to the investigation and actionable through the Circuit Courts of the State of Mississippi.”
Only in Mississippi would somebody think it a good idea to incentivize schools to drag out violation investigations. At least I hope only in Mississippi.
Though Rep. Lamar can rest comfortably with the thought that the NCAA’s head of enforcement is sensitive to time issues.
For once, I welcome our new legislative overlords.
With the athletic departments of Washington’s two biggest public colleges reporting budget deficits two years in a row, state Sen. Michael Baumgartner (R-Spokane) is proposing a bill that will subject college athletics budgets to legislature approval if their athletic departments run deficits for three consecutive years.
Washington State’s athletics department has reported deficits of about $13 million in each of the last two fiscal years, while UW’s athletics department projected a deficit of about $15 million for the 2016 fiscal year, but that figure was later updated to about a $7 or $8 million deficit. Last year, new WSU President Kirk Schulz also proposed a plan that he believes will get WSU’s athletic department solvent by 2019.
Under the new bill Baumgartner is proposing, if a college athletic department cannot get back in the black after three consecutive years, its budget will have to be reviewed and approved by the Commerce, Labor and Sports committee before it can be adopted by the college.
‘Bout damned time.
“I’m a big fan of college athletics, but I have no doubt much of the public would appreciate a timeout on the arms race of college athletics spending,” Baumgartner said in the news release. “This is about ensuring the long-term viability of these programs that give our state’s students so many opportunities. This bill gives our state’s universities a three-year runway from today to get their budgets balanced, and if they can’t do it, my committee will help do it for them.”
Help us to help you!
Of course, the hard part comes in deciphering a college athletics department’s budget.
“The overriding goal is to bring transparency and public oversight to the use of public resources,” Baumgartner said in a phone interview with The Seattle Times. “I think sports is an important part of the university experience, but within balance and reason. More than determining the outcome, I want to make sure public dollars are protected.”
If this bill passes, what do you want to bet those deficits come down faster than planned?
LEAD1 Association (the “Association” or “LEAD1”), which represents the 129 athletic directors and programs of the Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) schools, announced the formation of a Political Action Committee (“PAC’), a means by which the Association’s members and affiliate members can support candidates for elective office. A PAC allows the Association’s members and affiliate members to pool their personal financial resources to support candidates who philosophically align with the Association’s goals and objectives so that they achieve a stronger voice on Capitol Hill. The LEAD1 PAC will be the first for a college sports organization.
The Honorable C. Thomas McMillen, the President and Chief Executive Officer of LEAD1, who served three terms in Congress, commented, “This is a positive move by the board of the Association to support the goals of its members in dealing with policy makers. At the annual meeting in September, the members agreed to hold next year’s annual meeting in our nation’s capital and to explore the formation of a PAC. With the PAC now approved, it further ensures that the concerns of the LEAD1 members will be heard by members of Congress, and other key decision makers in Washington, D.C. and across the country.”
Essential to the mission of the LEAD1 Association are influencing how the rules of college sports are enacted and implemented, advocating for the future of college athletics, and providing various services to the members, ranging from professional development to pooled purchasing arrangements. The mission statement of the LEAD1 Association is, “Supporting the athletic directors of America’s leading intercollegiate programs in preparing today’s students to be tomorrow’s leaders.”
I don’t know about you, but I’m inspired.