Geno's telephone congratulations to Mo'ne Davis dubbed a "violation"[merged thread]

[RoyDodger]

The thing that fascinates me is that this wasn't a violation. It seems like when UConn is involved, the NCAA just makes up offenses on the fly. That organization is an abomination.

The lawyer in me made me find the NCAA by-laws and I specifically found this (if someone else has posted this information, I apologize--had no time to read all the posts):

"13.02.12 Prospective Student-Athlete. A prospective student-athlete is a student who has started classes for the ninth grade. In addition, a student who has not started classes for the ninth grade becomes a prospective student-athlete if the institution provides such an individual (or the individual’s relatives or friends) any financial assistance or other benefits that the institution does not provide to prospective students generally. An individual remains a prospective student-athlete until one of the following occurs (whichever is earlier): (Revised: 1/11/89, 1/10/90, 4/28/05, 1/17/09, 1/19/13 effective 8/1/13) [the rest of this section is not quoted because it is irrelevant].

The rules continuously refer to a "prospective student-athlete" until we get to the relevant rule:

13.1.3.1 Time Period for Telephone Calls—General Rule. Telephone calls to an individual (or his or her relatives or legal guardians) may not be made before September 1 at the beginning of his or her junior year in high school (subject to the exceptions below). If an individual attends an educational institution that uses a nontraditional academic calendar (e.g., Southern Hemisphere), telephone calls to the individual (or his or her relatives or legal guardians) may not be made before the opening day of classes of his or her junior year in high school. Thereafter, an institution may make telephone calls to the prospective student-athlete at its discretion. (Revised: 1/10/91 effective 7/1/91, 1/16/93, 1/9/96 effective 8/1/96, 4/22/98, 4/26/01, 4/29/04 effective 8/1/04, 4/28/05 effective 8/1/05, 1/9/06, 6/13/08, 1/15/11, 1/18/14 effective 8/1/14)

Notice that this rule refers to an "individual" rather than a "prospective student athlete." This is the only basis I can imagine for the NCAA's tortured interpretation of its own rules. Any rational person reading these rules would define individual, in the context, to mean a "prospective student-athlete" which could not possibly include Mo'ne Davis since she has not started the ninth grade.

The rules can be found at:

http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D115AUG.pdf

 

[doggydaddy]

Same ol' DD.

Is that good or bad?

 

[bdbd]

Any1 familiar with Freedom of Information Request can file one with each suspected school in an effort to determine if they have filed any complaints against UConn and Geno.

Bingo -- EVERYONE familiar with FOI request should file with each suspected school. Can someone on the board provide the addresses to which the requests should be submitted? Then the submitter will rue the day when he/she/it decided to pursue this bogus issue.

 

[triaddukefan]

What makes you think that still won't be the score?

 

[easttexastrash]

Sounds like much ado about nothing to me. What are the consequences of the communication between Geno and Davis?

You would think I'd know since Mulkey had one. She had limits on recruiting, I believe.

 

[easttexastrash]

Get the story right, will you? Geno didn't contact her - the Philadelphia 76ers did. Their intentions were the best, I'm sure, but they got their pal Geno into this brouhaha.

In Russian there is no single word for "disservice" - instead they use the idiom "a bear's favor," from a story by the Russian classic fabulist, Krylov. Think Aesop or La Fontaine.

It seems a certain Russian hunter's best friend was a bear he met in the woods. They were inseparable buddies. One morning the bear happened to wake up before the hunter and noticed a fly was walking on his pal's forehead. Rather than waking up his sleeping friend, the bear picked up a 10 kilo rock and brought it down square on the guy's forehead with all the force he could muster.

I wonder if the bear was wearing a Philadelphia tee shirt?

Oops, I should have said "when I heard that Geno had communicated with Davis." When I heard that on TV my first thought was that I wondered if that could be perceived as communicating as a prospective recruit.

It sounds as if Geno was put in an awkward position of not being given the time to remove himself from the situation.

 

[UcMiami]

Sounds like much ado about nothing to me. What are the consequences of the communication between Geno and Davis?

You would think I'd know since Mulkey had one. She had limits on recruiting, I believe.

Probably nothing - it is deemed secondary which sometimes comes in the form of an official reprimand attached to the coaches file, or a compliance class, or a day without diet coke. I believe Mulkey had a violation that was not deemed 'secondary' but was still considered 'minor' and had some restrictions placed on the number of calls her staff could make for a year, or the number of off campus travel days or something. As i remember they had made too many calls to a number of different recruits because of bad record keeping or something.

 

[cabbie191]

Hey I'm glad ETT mentioned Mulkey. How come Kim wasn't banished by the NCAA for all the contact she had with Makenzie Robertson while she was growing up.

 

[stamfordhusky]

It may be a laughing stock, but they have the power to tarnish Coach Auriemma and his WCBB program, not to mention take away scholarships and ban the team from post-season play. I refuse to laugh at an organization that can pretty much do whatever they want when it comes to enforcement. This very well could be payback for Shabazz spouting off and embarrassing Emmert on national TV.

This is a minor secondary violation and, like almost all secondary violations, will result in no real punishment. Maybe a "try not to do it again" semi-warning.

 

[RadyLady]

This is a minor secondary violation and, like almost all secondary violations, will result in no real punishment. Maybe a "try not to do it again" semi-warning.

Yet it garnered a lot of publicity which normally would be negative publicity for Geno and UConn, as any sound bite of news stating infraction would have pretty much everybody up in arms, however because of the pettiness of this particular claim and I think the positive lauds and publicity that this young lady garnered as well, quite the opposite happened. if the person who made the complaint was looking for a negative impact to UConn they were sorely mistaken.

In fact should it ever be leaked the name of the person who made the complaint they will find themselves more than likely in a storm of very unfriendly backlash.

Likely they would find themselves very isolated too, as people with distance themselves not wanting to be covered with the stain of shame.

Can you say "holy backfire Batman!"

 

[geneticrex]

"Holy backfire Batman"

Yes, it appears I can.

 

[j66kicker]

Just caught Mo'ne on Fallon. No mention of Geno thing, or even basketball at all (and she wasn't wearing a UCONN hoodie) . I'm pretty sure they record both the Thursday and Friday late-night talk shows both on Thursday evenings early. So the fuss wouldn't have been as big as is is by now. Think the story on the complaint came out Wednesday afternoon, and the NCAA citation just broke Thursday afternoon.

 

[Icebear]

The lawyer in me made me find the NCAA by-laws and I specifically found this (if someone else has posted this information, I apologize--had no time to read all the posts):

"

The rules continuously refer to a "prospective student-athlete" until we get to the relevant rule:

13.1.3.1 Time Period for Telephone Calls—General Rule. Telephone calls to an individual (or his or her relatives or legal guardians) may not be made before September 1 at the beginning of his or her junior year in high school (subject to the exceptions below). If an individual attends an educational institution that uses a nontraditional academic calendar (e.g., Southern Hemisphere), telephone calls to the individual (or his or her relatives or legal guardians) may not be made before the opening day of classes of his or her junior year in high school. Thereafter, an institution may make telephone calls to the prospective student-athlete at its discretion. (Revised: 1/10/91 effective 7/1/91, 1/16/93, 1/9/96 effective 8/1/96, 4/22/98, 4/26/01, 4/29/04 effective 8/1/04, 4/28/05 effective 8/1/05, 1/9/06, 6/13/08, 1/15/11, 1/18/14 effective 8/1/14)

Notice that this rule refers to an "individual" rather than a "prospective student athlete." This is the only basis I can imagine for the NCAA's tortured interpretation of its own rules. Any rational person reading these rules would define individual, in the context, to mean a "prospective student-athlete" which could not possibly include Mo'ne Davis since she has not started the ninth grade.

The rules can be found at:

http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D115AUG.pdf

Roy, what about the detail that the call was not made to any of those in italics but rather to the coverage team. They handed the phone over to Mo'ne who as the conversation went Geno seemed unaware she was present until the coverage team mentioned it.

 

[pap49cba]

Oh boy.... now Geno's really in trouble.

Bria HartleyVerified account ‏@Breezyyy14
Happy I got to meet money @Monedavis11 today...such a bright future ahead of you and hopefully we cross paths again pic.twitter.com/0VcTQBFzEL

• Reply
• Retweet
• Favorite

 

[pap49cba]

Mel Greenberg @womhoopsguru · 10h
Wonder if anyone is going to turn in LSU after notable alum Donna Brazille at WNBA luncheon tells Mo'ne the school is a great place.

 

[RoyDodger]

Roy, what about the detail that the call was not made to any of those in italics but rather to the coverage team. They handed the phone over to Mo'ne who as the conversation went Geno seemed unaware she was present until the coverage team mentioned it.

In criminal matters, "intent" is an essential element. Obviously, the NCAA did not consider Geno's intent. It was a phone call to a potential recruit, apparently as far as they were concerned. I would be very curious to hear the NCAA explain their ruling.

 

[Icebear]

In criminal matters, "intent" is an essential element. Obviously, the NCAA did not consider Geno's intent. It was a phone call to a potential recruit, apparently as far as they were concerned. I would be very curious to hear the NCAA explain their ruling.

Exactly, as far as they were concerned but it certainly did not match their rule based on its wording.

 

[geneticrex]

Bria looks awfully tall in that pic and if that's Kara Lawson in the background, she look quite perturbed about this "obvious" recruiting violation.

 

[huskeynut]

Exactly, as far as they were concerned but it certainly did not match their rule based on its wording.

This is the meat of the debate. The wording of the NCAA rules does not match the decision.

So the question that needs to be answered - who interpreted the ruling on the NCAA's part and why. Saying Davis is a special case is not good enough.

 

[Icebear]

THE NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION
P.O. Box 6222
Indianapolis, Indiana 46206-6222
ncaa.org

 

[RoyDodger]

As written in The Courant: "According to an athletic department source, the NCAA viewed Davis, despite her age, as someone more significant than a typical "individual athlete" because of her notoriety and previously expressed interest in playing for UConn."

I've written to the NCAA, noting that the conclusion of a violation is inconsistent with the rules set forth in their by-laws, and asking for an explanation if they stand by their decision. Obviously, I don't really expect a response, but if this statement in the Courant is correct, it seems the NCAA makes up its rules as it goes along. Try to imagine what it would be like in our society if that's the way things were done by our government and courts.

 

[DaddyChoc]

Geno should call her back and get the most out of that "violation"... its a damn shame!

 

[temery]

Call me crazy, but I can see it a violation that if left unchecked, could easily be abused. With that said, a first "offense" should be little more than a stern warning. A pattern of calling such athletes ... Yeah, that would and should be a problem for any school.

One thing for sure, if it had been the coach of a UConn rival who had made the call, it would have been considered a crime against humanity in the minds of many here.

 

[Icebear]

Then make the rule clear. The NCAA did not follow their own written rules.

 

[Kibitzer]

Call me crazy, but I can see it a violation that if left unchecked, could easily be abused. With that said, a first "offense" should be little more than a stern warning. A pattern of calling such athletes ... Yeah, that would and should be a problem for any school.

One thing for sure, if it had been the coach of a UConn rival who had made the call, it would have been considered a crime against humanity in the minds of many here.

I would agree with you to the extent that it is a practice that sets an unfortunate precedent if not discouraged.

Responses by the complaining school, by the NCAA, by many media, and, yes, by some Boneyarders, may be characterized as over-reactions, reasonably attributable to off-season boredom.

 

[JS]

Call me crazy, but I can see it a violation that if left unchecked, could easily be abused. With that said, a first "offense" should be little more than a stern warning.

One of the articles did articulate a rationale. It's that without some check, recruiters could bombard a pre-high school kid with calls to their hearts' content as long as they go silent for a couple of years after the kid enters the ninth grade.

Would they? Maybe some would.

Trouble with that is, now you've got all kinds of objective rules on contacts and calls for "prospective student athletes" (ninth grade and up) and a completely subjective test (something along the lines of "Is it plausibly a call with some recruiting angle?") for calls to all other "individuals" from birth.

Taking up your challenge, Tom, if a rival coach made the call in this case I'd still think from everything I read about the call that it's absurd to suggest it was intended to recruit the "individual."

Now, assuming for an impossible moment that the rival coach had the stature of Geno, I'd say "There he goes, playing up that his school is every young player's dream and he's a wonderful person."

So now we're talking reality. Not a recruiting call but a stroke of good PR that might make rival coaches grit their teeth. Viewed differently, the best get an advantage from their reputation as the best. That reputation is earned.

Should such PR matters be the business of the NCAA? No.

But now that the big football conferences are moving toward paying their players and telling the NCAA to stick it, the NCAA has to have something to do to those it can still push around. And what better way to demonstrate some feeble twitching of life than to hit the most prominent coach in the game with a ticky-tack foul?

No, there's virtually no punishment for secondary violations, most of which are deemed inadvertent. And that holds true of multiple offenses. Tennessee WBB, just to pick another team at random, had about 15 known ones last time I looked, several more than UConn. Never any consequences other than live and learn.

Of course we're not talking about doing the exact same thing over and over again each time expecting a different result (one definition of insanity).

So here we are in the far reaches of subjective NCAA nonsense, making a young athlete "sad" (her word) while the whole notion of amateur athletics elsewhere in D-1 moves from something of an illusion to something for the history books.

Getting so it won't even be necessary for North Carolina to offer fake courses to athletes anymore (a real head-scratcher for the NCAA: "Hmmmm, should we begin to make plans to prepare for possibly organizing a potential future investigation? Wouldn't want move too hastily.").

Heck with that. Just pay the players, give them a union, 401(k) and bonuses. Don't waste their time or challenge their intellect with difficult choices among fake courses.

Anyway, we've now saved the college athletics world from good-PR, non-recruiting phone calls.

And the anonymous (of course) rival coach who dropped a dime over this is still a petty-ass who should step forward, claim "credit" and reap the PR results .

 

[temery]

Taking up your challenge, Tom, if a rival coach made the call in this case I'd still think from everything I read about the call that it's absurd to suggest it was intended to recruit the "individual."

You hardly represent the "many" people here who I believe would have unreasonably shredded a rival coach for calling the girl.

 

[Kibitzer]

You hardly represent the "many" people here who I believe would have unreasonably shredded a rival coach for calling the girl.

Horrors! Boneyarders would actually and unreasonably shred a rival coach! I'm shocked!

Actually, the reason so many of us want to identify the complaining coach is so we can congratulate him/her for helping to uphold the NCAA standards of integrity.

Sure.

 

[temery]

Horrors! Boneyarders would actually and unreasonably shred a rival coach! I'm shocked!
View attachment 6795
Actually, the reason so many of us want to identify the complaining coach is so we can congratulate him/her for helping to uphold the NCAA standards of integrity.

Sure.

Don't get me wrong. Whoever complained anonymously should be pulled into the sunlight and baked until done.

S/he's a coward.

 

[Icebear]

You hardly represent the "many" people here who I believe would have unreasonably shredded a rival coach for calling the girl.

Not under similar circumstances. Remember Geno did not call the girl. He called the coverage team. He apparently didn't even know she was going to be in the booth. I would give any coach the benefit of the doubt it that circumstance.

This was not a call to her home, her school, to her. It was a call cleared by UCONN compliance. Once on the air talking with the coverage team and they say, "Wait, she is here do you want to talk to her directly?" What is he supposed to do, be impolite and come off as a pompous jackass saying, "No, I can't talk to her." Sorry that doesn't cut it.