Making freshman ineligible again?

[coolhandgopher]

Although I think it has a snowball's chance in hell of becoming reality again and I think Jenkins is a bit Pollyana-ish in her claims that it will make all the college basketball problems go away, I like her point about how the NCAA focuses on the little things, while letting the big problems continue unabated.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/01/AR2009060102459.html

EDIT: Using Lou Holtz as a source in the name of reforming college sports doesn't help the credibility of Jenkins' article however.

 

[Jim V2]

Although I think it has a snowball's chance in hell of becoming reality again and I think Jenkins is a bit Pollyana-ish in her claims that it will make all the college basketball problems go away, I like her point about how the NCAA focuses on the little things, while letting the big problems continue unabated.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/01/AR2009060102459.html

EDIT: Using Lou Holtz as a source in the name of reforming college sports doesn't help the credibility of Jenkins' article however.

That was a fun read. Lot's of good points and good lines. I especially liked "slick and slack". But I think she's wrong on one point. Head coaches aren't just gym teachers. Under the current structure, they're CEO's. they run an organization and have to met sales, finance, human resources and and quality control objectives. they do have a specific technical experitise, but so do lots of CEOs. They're overpaid, like a lot of CEOs, but even if the overpayments go away, they're not going to become gym teachers.

 

[The Truth]

Which leads to the most important reason to make freshmen ineligible: because it would be a clear statement that the NCAA is a nonprofit that puts education ahead of business. Freshman ineligibility was a healthy, time-honored policy in American collegiate sports from the turn of the century until 1971, when the NCAA voted it down. The reason? Money. Member schools no longer wanted to house, feed and educate players who weren't bringing in trophies or revenue.

You'd have to lift scholarship restrictions for one. I don't see that happening anytime soon and the smaller schools and conferences will cry foul as they're the ones who have directly benefited from scholarship reductions in both major sports. And to think this notion will curb cheating is laughable. Nothing will totally eliminate cheating as long as obscene mounts of money are at stake. The NCAA knows this which is why it often practices "selective enforcement" or blatant hypocrisy in its judgments, rulings, investigations and findings.

Why is it no one ever asks the really tough question: What place does billion dollar television deals, merchandise rights and ad revenue have to do with higher education? The NCAA skirts these issues time and time again because the cash cow is way too fat (and for all my misgivings the money does do some good) and happy to give up. The day the NCAA finally admits this is all about the "athlete" and not the "student" is the day we will finally be making progress towards a healthy, cleaner and truly level playing field.