|
Post by UcantBSme on May 18, 2004 18:02:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by simplycurious on May 18, 2004 20:24:14 GMT -5
This is by far the best article about Deuser's resignation that I have seen. It really goes into more details about things and explains a lot more. Agreed, the first article left me a bit 'disappointed' in Dave for how he chose to respond. However, after I read the above article, it put many of his previous comments into perspective. Thanks for posting this one UcantBSme! ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/wink.png)
|
|
|
Post by vb on May 18, 2004 21:53:28 GMT -5
Wait... The NCAA kept a student from graduating??
I would love to be the lawyer who gets this case!
|
|
|
Post by benwhipdrofn on May 18, 2004 21:58:35 GMT -5
a verizon academic all american honor roll student.
|
|
|
Post by vballmom on May 19, 2004 9:06:06 GMT -5
That doesn't seem very ethical or legal.
Deuser's remarks about the NCAA being autonomous don't make a lot of sense to me. That is the whole point of having the NCAA. They are independent, they make the rules, and they try to enforce them so that there is a level playing field for all institutions. If schools could decide independently that they wanted to give more money to a certain sport, then they would have an unfair advantage over other schools. That is why the booster situation with so many football and basketball programs has gotten so much attention. That is another source of funding, so the NCAA set guidelines on what it can be used for and what the boosters are and are not allowed to do.
|
|
|
Post by simplycurious on May 19, 2004 14:56:51 GMT -5
Deuser's remarks about the NCAA being autonomous don't make a lot of sense to me. That is the whole point of having the NCAA. They are independent, they make the rules, and they try to enforce them so that there is a level playing field for all institutions. If schools could decide independently that they wanted to give more money to a certain sport, then they would have an unfair advantage over other schools. That is why the booster situation with so many football and basketball programs has gotten so much attention. That is another source of funding, so the NCAA set guidelines on what it can be used for and what the boosters are and are not allowed to do. I believe the point is that everyone should have to answer to someone, it's simple "checks and balances". We have it in government. The President, while seemingly the definitive decision maker, still has Congress and/or the Senate to make sure he doesn't use his position/power improperly. At the university level the President still answers to The Board of Directors (who are elected by people who have an interest in that particular institution). I believe that is really the issue here: who is over the NCAA, making sure that they're not misrepresenting their constituency (or misusing their 'power')? ![::)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/eyesroll.png)
|
|
|
Post by vballguy2001 on May 19, 2004 20:14:10 GMT -5
Good for him. Seems like the NCAA is kind of overstepping their bounds here.
|
|
|
Post by vb on May 19, 2004 21:45:46 GMT -5
What MIVA team gets the preseason edge for the FF? OSU?
Final Four 2005 PSU OSU BYU ...and whoever bruises the least in the MPSF. (Pepperdine)
|
|
|
Post by midwestfan on May 19, 2004 21:53:12 GMT -5
Well ... right now IPFW only loses Dennis (big loss but it depends on who replaces him), so if they keep everyone else, I still think they have a shot at it. OSU and BS are both breaking in new setters as well but OSU's is probably the most talented from what I hear. I also like Loyola's chances, considering how they finished the year. Who the heck knows what's going to happen with Lewis. IMHO, I actually think it could be a lot like this past year ... a real toss up!
I think you have to go with UCLA as the other MPSF team, considering the FF is on their home court. Should give them added incentive, since the last time it was there they weren't in it.
|
|
|
Post by midwestfan on May 19, 2004 22:03:26 GMT -5
I believe the point is that everyone should have to answer to someone, it's simple "checks and balances". We have it in government. The President, while seemingly the definitive decision maker, still has Congress and/or the Senate to make sure he doesn't use his position/power improperly. At the university level the President still answers to The Board of Directors (who are elected by people who have an interest in that particular institution). I believe that is really the issue here: who is over the NCAA, making sure that they're not misrepresenting their constituency (or misusing their 'power')? ![::)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/eyesroll.png) Here is the NCAA Organization Chart. I know that I'm naive but in reading it, it would appear to me that there is accountability and if someone were really unhappy they would be able to submit a grievance. www1.ncaa.org/membership/governance/org_chart.html
|
|
|
Post by simplycurious on May 20, 2004 0:40:39 GMT -5
Here is the NCAA Organization Chart. I know that I'm naive but in reading it, it would appear to me that there is accountability and if someone were really unhappy they would be able to submit a grievance. www1.ncaa.org/membership/governance/org_chart.htmlIt depends upon which committee hears the appeal. If it's the Executive Committee (which I believe it is), then they don't have anyone to "answer to" when someone wishes to challenge their decision. This is what people are taking issue with and what I was addressing.
|
|
|
Post by vballmom on May 20, 2004 6:54:02 GMT -5
Who does the Supreme Court answer to? They are appointed for life and are not elected. Come on people.
Yes, the NCAA has its problems and yes, they need to be fair. It sounds like they were very aggressive with Deuser, but I doubt we are getting the whole story.
|
|
|
Post by VBbeast on May 20, 2004 11:36:40 GMT -5
I guess I fail to see what was different about that article and the others I have seen to this point. The only new information was about Martins and the holding of his diploma. Dave is blaming the NCAA for that, but it is the school not the NCAA that is holding the diploma. The NCAA has no governing power over the academic side of the collegiate experience. A diploma falls into that category.
Is the NCAA being aggressive with Dave? Sure. Why are they taking that attitude? Maybe because Dave is treating it as such an inconsequential thing. Dave was used to his initial time at Lewis where compliance was more of a guideline than an actual rule. That approach has cost them big time, and he still just doesn't get it. The NCAA does have a lot of power, and when they get the feeling you aren't cooperating, might be misleading them, or aren't taking the situation seriously you piss them off , and they can choose to excercise that power. They are not without checks and balances. The power of the NCAA comes from its institutional membership. The NCAA as an entity does not make the rules. The rules come from the membership. The NCAA simply facilitates the legislation its membership passes.
Now lets get to the part of Dave making a big deal out of the NCAA announcing the stripping of the title after the final four. What Dave may or may not be aware of is the NCAA already has its money with the guarantee they sign with the host institution. They will get their money regardless of the number of people that show up. They were actually doing UH a favor by postponing that announcement as UH is the only one with anything to gain financially with better attendance. Just one more example of Dave having an incorrectly skewed impression on a situation.
|
|
|
Post by midwestfan on May 20, 2004 13:06:34 GMT -5
I guess I fail to see what was different about that article and the others I have seen to this point. The only new information was about Martins and the holding of his diploma. Dave is blaming the NCAA for that, but it is the school not the NCAA that is holding the diploma. The NCAA has no governing power over the academic side of the collegiate experience. A diploma falls into that category. Is the NCAA being aggressive with Dave? Sure. Why are they taking that attitude? Maybe because Dave is treating it as such an inconsequential thing. Dave was used to his initial time at Lewis where compliance was more of a guideline than an actual rule. That approach has cost them big time, and he still just doesn't get it. The NCAA does have a lot of power, and when they get the feeling you aren't cooperating, might be misleading them, or aren't taking the situation seriously you piss them off , and they can choose to excercise that power. They are not without checks and balances. The power of the NCAA comes from its institutional membership. The NCAA as an entity does not make the rules. The rules come from the membership. The NCAA simply facilitates the legislation its membership passes. Now lets get to the part of Dave making a big deal out of the NCAA announcing the stripping of the title after the final four. What Dave may or may not be aware of is the NCAA already has its money with the guarantee they sign with the host institution. They will get their money regardless of the number of people that show up. They were actually doing UH a favor by postponing that announcement as UH is the only one with anything to gain financially with better attendance. Just one more example of Dave having an incorrectly skewed impression on a situation. Interesting points on the diploma and the Hawaii final four issue. Makes sense to me.
|
|
|
Post by Roofan on May 21, 2004 18:09:57 GMT -5
Vbeast
Thank You!!! Thank You!!! Thank You!!!!
Nice to see some people actually get what is really going on!!!!
Roofan
|
|