Ryan Robbins writes:
>I don't think people realize that the NCAA isn't some independent
>regulating body that arbitrarily places rules and regulations on
>its members. Its members ARE the NCAA; they approved each and every
>rule and regulation. There's no reason for anyone to whine. If the
>schools thought the rule was stupid, they never would have approved
>it or they would have repealed it.
 
In light of this discussion, it might be interesting to read a few
excerpts from the book "Undue Process: The NCAA's Injustice For All",
written by Don Yaeger and published in 1991.  I do not know if or how
things may have changed since the book was published, but I am always
interested to hear from anyone in the know or anyone with a
contradictory view.  I certainly got the impression from reading this
book that in many ways, the members have little say in how the NC$$ is
run.  And as far as not being an "independent regulating body that
arbitrarily places rules and regulations on its members", well, read
the latter half of the second excerpt and see if you agree.
 
These excerpts are given here without permission.  I found the book
at Barnes & Noble at a reduced price about two years ago; they may
still have copies available.
 
p. 48
   The NCAA's enforcement staff - no one else - determines which schools
will and will not be investigated.  The staff, after its decision to do
some initial poking around, eventually takes a recommendation to the
Committee on Infractions.  If the committee likes what it hears, it allows
the staff to continue its investigation with a formal blessing known
as a letter of preliminary inquiry.  The letter to the university says
little more than that NCAA investigators soon will be on campus.  It
gives the school no clue as to what the school may have done wrong, and
doesn't even say what sport is being investigated.
   Any time such power is vested in a group of bureaucrats that is
accountable to no higher authority, the potential for, and the perception
of favoritism is inherent.
END EXCERPT
 
p. 90-91
   Debate on all those rules can, and often does, become tedious.
Reporters at the 1989 convention amused themselves by counting the number
of times University of Arkansas Athletic Director Frank Broyles dozed
off to sleep.  When the count had reached six, the legendary coach was
roused for good by a thunderous applause.  The reason for the applause?
Someone asked that debate on an issue be limited.
   In this convention setting - a room filled with two thousand bored,
mostly graying, middle-class, white males - rules are passed that affect
the lives of student-athletes - a group of young and, in the case of the
"money sports", mostly black males.  "No wonder the rules read as they do,"
former Marquette basketball coach Al McGuire said.  Every NCAA meeting,
McGuire once said, "should be held in a fourth floor tenement house in
Brooklyn."  Even NCAA insiders question the ability of such a diverse and
diverted group to provide intelligent leadership in the tumultuous world
of intercollegiate athletics.  "I'm concerned that our membership comes
[to the convention] not as informed as it could be or should be, that we
don't take a serious look at elements of legislation that have far-ranging
effects," said Southeastern Conference Commissioner Roy Kramer, a member
of the powerful Committee on Infractions.
   Duquesne University Athletic Director Brian Colleary said the doldrums
of NCAA business is often the reason the organization "passes so many bad
rules.  The truth is, a lot of these rules have gotten through because you
get a thousand guys in a hot room listening to boring debate.  Then they
call for a vote and the guy next to you holds up his [voting] paddle, so
you hold up yours.  You don't have any idea what it means."
   The situation is even more confusing once the convention is over.
That's when it becomes the responsibility of NCAA staff to begin
interpreting the meaning of the new rules.  That's also when the unelected
staff exerts great influence over the organization's membership.
   "You want to buy a kid a Christmas present, a kid you know well on a
personal basis," said Lonny Rose, a University of Miami sports law
professor.  "You can't because that's a violation.  Now, who makes that
rule?  The schools vote on that rule, but how that rule is interpreted is
a legislative services or enforcement decision.  What the schools actually
voted on were no extra benefits.  It was the staff that decided that a
Christmas gift was an extra benefit.  It is an interpretation of the rule.
Those are decisions made administratively.  I think the NCAA should be like
the federal government.  Whenever it decides it is going to issue a
regulation which interprets a law passed by Congress, it should put it out
for public comment for 60 days.  Say this is the rule and this is how we're
going to enforce it.  Who is going to be in a better position to comment on
how things will be practically received than the people who are being
asked to comply?"
   "You want to talk about unbridled authority?" asked former NCAA
investigator J. Brent Clark.  "You've got a kid fresh from law school
who's got an NCAA Manual and 48 hours later, he's giving interpretations."
That authority grew immensely in 1989.  The NCAA Council, in a decision
that still is unknown to many members, agreed that the extra-benefits
rule - which prohibits giving anything to a student-athlete that is not
given to the entire student body - can now be extended for the life of the
athlete.  "Cradle to grave enforcement," a member of the Council called
the ruling, which states that if a coach or booster gives a former student-
athlete anything he wouldn't give anyone off the street, it will now be
an NCAA violation.
   "We probably have 15,000 former student-athletes around the country,"
said University of Nevada-Las Vegas Assistant Athletic Director Mark
Warkentein.  "And now we have to worry about any of them getting anything
that might in any way be construed to have been given to them because
they were a student-athlete.  That's impossible to control.  How can the
NCAA realistically expect that?"
END EXCERPT
 
---                                                                   ---
Mike Machnik                                            [log in to unmask]
Cabletron Systems, Inc.                                    *HMM* 11/13/93