junglehusky
Molotov Cocktail of Ugliness
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 7,157
- Reaction Score
- 15,475
N.C.A.A.'s 'Justice System
More N.C.A.A. 'Justice' - Joe Nocera
After practice one day early in the 2010 season, Ramsay was brought in for questioning by North Carolina officials and confronted with e-mails between himself and a university athletic tutor. The e-mails showed that she had made a series of minor suggestions to improve a three-page sociology paper. The university’s Honor Court would later conclude that the tutoring was so within the bounds of normalcy that it declined to hear a case against Ramsay.
The N.C.A.A., however, came to a rather different conclusion. After being shown the e-mail “evidence” by North Carolina officials, it told the school that Ramsay was guilty of academic fraud. Fearing that the N.C.A.A. would punish the university if it continued to play Ramsay, North Carolina declared him ineligible. When it then asked the N.C.A.A. to restore his eligibility — as it must do to get a player back on the field — the N.C.A.A. refused. Thus, without so much as a hearing, much less any due process, Ramsay’s college career appeared to be over, along with his hope of one day playing pro football.
More N.C.A.A. 'Justice' - Joe Nocera
And which it then reinforces with its own iron fist. Unable to persuade St. Joe’s to change its mind, O’Brien appealed to the N.C.A.A. Did the N.C.A.A., which purports to care about the welfare of its “student-athletes,” take stern action against St. Joe’s? Of course not.
In response to O’Brien’s appeal, St. Joe’s submitted a letter complaining, among other things, that his transfer was done for “athletic reasons” rather than academic ones. Though that clearly is untrue, so what if it had been? Why should his reason matter? Nevertheless, the N.C.A.A. sided with the school. An N.C.A.A. spokeswoman sent me a statement saying, “St. Joseph’s opposition was an important factor” in denying O’Brien’s request. Which only makes sense, since coaches, not athletes, are the N.C.A.A.’s real constituency. (She also said that the N.C.A.A. would review the case again this week.) For its part, St. Joe’s has refused to discuss the situation, citing “privacy laws.”