RF2044
Living Legend
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2011
- Messages
- 30,522
- Like
- 98,101
"The issues at the heart of this case are clearly the NCAA's business. When a member institution
allows an academic department to provide benefits to student-athletes that are materially different from
the general student body, it is the NCAA's business. When athletics academic counselors exploit
"special arrangement" classes for student-athletes in ways unintended by and contrary to the bylaws,
it is the NCAA's business. When a member institution provides student-athletes an inside track to enroll
in unpublicized courses where grades of As and Bs are the norm,1 it is the NCAA's business. When a
member institution uses "special arrangement" courses to keep a significant number of student-athletes
eligible, it is the NCAA's business. When a member institution fails or refuses to take action after
receiving actual notice of problems involving student-athletes, thereby allowing violations to
compound and to continue for years, it is the NCAA's business. In sum, it is an NCAA matter when
other member schools who choose not to provide impermissible benefits are disadvantaged by their
commitment to compliance."
Great to see them take this interpretation -- frankly, it was baffling why they wouldn't.
The highlighted parts above are light years away from the "not in our wheelhouse" see no evil / hear no evil / speak no evil sentiment expressed by Mark Emmert.