Bayside44
Moderator
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 15,575
- Like
- 32,123
I read the article. Really wish someone who was a better writer tackled the subject.
Carlson stressed the importance of the NCAA rule change that finally allows them to take circumstantial evidence into account when performing investigations and says this could be a big factor in getting Syracuse into trouble with the NCAA.
And ignores the fact that Adam Weitsman has been exceptionally open on everything he is doing from day one.
This, IMHO, is what makes Adam fundamentally different from 99% of the people paying athletes today under the guise of NIL. And it makes the central point of his story, the importance of the policy change to consider circumstantial evidence, essentially moot.
Chris should have been impartial enough to discuss this in his story and should have had the impressive group of experts he interviewed for his story discuss this.
As well as the difficulty Syracuse and all other schools are encountering dealing with the NCAA. He should have discussed how the NCAA ignored NIL for an extended period, the vacuum this bizarre decision caused, and how the lack of oversight and guidance encouraged boosters to do anything they wanted.
Weitsman and other Syracuse boosters got involved in NIL because other schools were using it extensively to get better players on their teams. NIL was making a major impact on the Syracuse basketball program and if Syracuse was to remain competitive, he and others had to do something to level the playing field.
Trying to paint Weitsman as an extreme figure in NIL is easy because he is basically the only one doing this above board. But it is lazy and inaccurate and disingenuous.
Quick hitter - thirty years later and the local rag is still attacking loyal local business people.