Don't know NCAA's rational

Donate To GopherHole


I will be writing my Congressman to sponsor a private bill for this kid.
 

The NCAA may be the only organization on earth that can make the Minnesota State High School League look good by comparison.
 

NCAA and rational probably shouldn't be in the same sentence. Maybe rationale?
 



I think it's more likely the schools lack of creativity on this one rather than the NCAA. Here's argument for the Marine:

The NCAA waives his losing two years already and chooses to adhere to their rule strictly on the transfer clause. Which by definition is completely rational. They're just looking for a way to get past the rule. The article mentions had he enrolled in school before enlisting he'd be immediately eligible.

I was an infantryman and at most schools if I tried hard enough could have finagled some college credit out of my 4 years of service. Surely, a Sergeant, Air traffic controller, has demonstrated skill an expertise enough to attain some college credit for his time in service. If not for his Non Commissioned Officer course alone. Thus, he enrolled in a program of higher learning with the intention of learning said skill and meets the criteria for immediate eligibility.
 

Last week, MTSU won a partial appeal to the NCAA to recoup those two years of eligibility (giving Rhodes four total seasons of eligibility), but he still must sit out this season. MTSU’s athletic compliance office is now reloading its argument in hopes of also gaining Rhodes’ immediate eligibility due to his unique situation.
Click to expand...

So, it looks like he's keeping all his years of eligibility, but at least for now, he has to sit out this year.

“All this is strictly because of how the bylaw is worded,” Simpson said. “In my opinion, there is no intent of anyone to not allow protection to our U.S. service members.”

The aforementioned NCAA rule first took shape in 1980, when “participation in organized competition during times spent in the armed services, on official church missions or with recognized foreign aid services of the U.S. government” were exempt from limiting eligibility.

The 1986 revision of the rule further clarified student-athlete’s right to participate in recreational sports during military service.

But through several revisions and branches of the rule — all for reasons unrelated to military exceptions — the clause allowing competition during military service was lost and not carried over into the current bylaws.
Click to expand...

It looks like a loophole that they ought to fix. It's a rule that needs to be fixed, but if he was playing for a BCS team, the NCAA would probably grant a waiver quickly. I understand the intent of the rule, it keeps schools from parking players in non-school organized competition, but playing for a base team isn't what the rule was intended to prevent.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
The NCAA may be the only organization on earth that can make the Minnesota State High School League look good by comparison.
Click to expand...
+1

It all starts with arrogance. And a complete lack of common sense.

Here is all you need Mr. Emmert

Nearly every fort, or base has touch football, basketball, fast pitch softball, boxing. I remember Herb Orvis who returning from a two years in the military to joined the 1968 Colorado Football Team.

If Mr. Emmert does not change this, he has to go.
 



Looks like the NCAA found a heart. After this......back into the attic it goes.
 






stocker08 said:
Looks like the NCAA found a heart. After this......back into the attic it goes.
Click to expand...

I expect this rule will be changed permanently. The rule was never intended to apply to people playing football in the military, it was bad wording, not malice.
 

NCAA will be a thing of the past within the next decade.
 

RodentRampage said:
I expect this rule will be changed permanently. The rule was never intended to apply to people playing football in the military, it was bad wording, not malice.
Click to expand...

My big problem is that in large organizations, the bad wording is the product of one or two problems. Either, no one who noticed the bad wording said anything about the it the organization discourages rocking the boat, or (as in my experience with beauracracies is usually the case), somebody did say "hey, I think we need to reword this, it probably covers some situations we don't want it to", and everyone else rolls their eyes, tells that person that "the construction you are giving it isn't what we mean, of course it won't cause those problems", and then accused the person who said something of being "the wording police" or something ridiculous like tha.

I guess there is a third possibility, which is that nobody recognized the wording problem. That would just illustrate the NCAA's sheer incompetence if that were the case. Either way, the NCAA always seems to fail to impress me with its policy making, regardless of whether it has to do with malice, stupidity, or willful ignorance.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom