Soapbox | Compliance Corner

Fear Not

Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:15:33 -0800

Okay, so if you've been, um, following along you know that we signed on to Twitter as Pac-10 Compliance the other day. And, as I write this, a total of 18 followers (some of whom I do not know) have signed on in a little under 48 hours.

We joined the World of Twitter partly to gain a little self-education and, frankly, to see what all the fuss was about.

You can learn more about Twitter yourself. And what you'll probably find is that this is probably not something worth losing a lot of sleep over, at least from a compliance point of view. If you personally become addicted to Twitter and spend all night, every night tweeting, well, that's another story.

In its purest sense, Twitter is a way to post messages ("tweets") for people who are interested in what you might have to say. Those "followers" have to opt-in. These tweets are not necessarily directed to someone, but rather to all your followers or (via the Public Timeline) the Twitter community at large.

So in that sense, the AMA's current position--that we should treat tweets as we do messages posted on a web page or via an RSS feed or on a Facebook page--seems spot on to me.

Twitter has other features, including one that allows for messages to be sent privately to other Twitter users--something that more closely resembles instant messaging than anything else.

The messages come in two flavors (and Twitter's help page has the details about them):

1. @Replies. An @reply is a public message sent from one person to another.

2. Direct Messages. Direct messages are private messages sent from one Twitter user to another. You can only send a direct message to a person who follows you.

It's the Direct Messages that may need some monitoring to ensure coaches aren't evading NCAA 13.4.1.2.

I'll admit there aren't very many good strategies to try to get out in front of this one. (Hint: Following coaches on Twitter might be a good start). Frankly, if a coach wants to make an end run around this rule it's just as easy to do so with any of the various instant messaging services we've all come to know and love as it is with Twitter.

But the real point of this essay is to reinforce the idea that the reaction to Twitter and its potential use in recruiting is just another verse in the same old song that we've all been singing for lo these many years.

This on-going problem happened again today. I understand why the interp is correct. But it's another example of a rule (NCAA 13.14.3.2) and a succeeding interp left in technology's dust.

The rule limiting the use of video for scouting purposes was put in place long before things like combines, tryout camps, institutional camps, and personal websites with video became such a big deal in the recruiting process.

But now, the barrier to entry for watching video is essentially nonexistent. And it shouldn't really matter what the content of the video is that coaches want to watch in order to perform an evaluation.

We can never hope to write enough rules that can keep pace with changes in technology. And even if we try, monitoring and enforcing them is often very difficult/costly/impossible.

So perhaps we should take the approach of trying to make technology work for us, rather than us working so hard against it.

Technology has sped up all our worlds, no doubt about it. And we have to be mindful of work/life balance issues and too much intrusion into the lives of prospects and their families in the recruiting process.

But embracing technology rather than running away in fear of it can make us more efficient and allow us to direct resources where they can be most effective, rather than, say, worrying about monitoring Twitter usage.

Here's a pretty well-written summary of where we are today:

"Despite the frequent changes in legislation in this area, it has become clear that the changes in technology outpace the changes in legislation which often makes new legislation outdated or unable to address technological advances. Because technology often increases effectiveness, reduces cost and is becoming increasingly user-generated, it may be inappropriate for the membership to consider amending the legislation in this area to be less specific and more flexible to the dynamic technological environment while still adhering to the Association's principles of recruiting."

Exactly. And by "less specific and more flexible" we mean something more like fewer, simpler rules.

The good news is that the Recruiting Cabinet reviewed this summary at its February meeting. It has on its radar screen a pending review of recruiting legislation and the impact of technology, including videos of prospects.

Now if we can just get them to sign up for Twitter accounts. You never know who they might end up following.

A Rose By Any Other Name

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:55:55 -0800

"Sherman, fire up the WABAC machine!"

Back in the 1990s, a time of cost containment, the NCAA Division I membership adopted a series of proposals over a multi-year period designed to limit coaches salaries (uh-oh) and stop the "proliferation of personnel". More...

Homeless?

Mon, 08 Jan 2007 12:28:21 -0800

Roommate Wanted. Flexible 43-year old N/S seeks new home after 12 years in Birmingham. Being evicted August 1, but won't make trouble because I don't like lawyers. Will relocate. More...

Einstein Was Right

Sun, 10 May 1998 17:04:47 -0700

"Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts."

--Albert Einstein

I made a quick run through the NCAA Manual the other day. I probably missed a few, but here are a few of the things we count, in no particular order.

Epilogue

Thu, 07 Dec 2006 17:58:59 -0800

If the Almighty Ran the NCAA

(Read the first two acts)

Epilogue

It is several years later.

God is seated at a large wooden desk. He looks at a huge celestial map affixed magically to a billowy, white cloud. He scratches his head, then opens an enormous cabinet and takes out a huge multi-color object with 34 sides. With two hands, he rolls it slowly across the floor until it stops, teal-side up. More...

Feel Good

Sun, 20 May 2001 09:27:56 -0700

Welcome to our first multi-media soapbox.

In early April 2001, the Pac-10 compliance gurus got together and talked about a lot of topics, including deregulation.

(Be patient; it's a 27.1 MB movie, but it's worth every second to download.)

You'll need QuickTime.

It Can Be Done

Thu, 23 Sep 1999 15:21:38 -0700

Along with a few of my cohorts in the Division I CCA Compliance Administrators group, I attended a meeting-of-the-minds at the NCAA the other day in Indianapolis to discuss one of my favorite controversies: deregulation.

Brush Up Your Latin

Mon, 24 Nov 1997 17:26:17 -0800

In October, the Management Council approved changes amending the Committee on Infractions' procedures for handling selected routine secondary violations. As of January 1, this selection of violations will generally be handled at the conference level with predetermined penalties--"PP" for short. These changes will eventually show up in Bylaw 32.2.

If you're like me, you try to keep your NCAA Manual up to date with all the newly adopted legislation, no easy feat in these dynamic times. Sometimes it's easy. Sometimes it's hard.

If the Almighty Ran the NCAA

Sat, 03 May 1997 17:35:00 -0700

A play in two acts

By Mike Matthews

The time: Present day, Sunday afternoon, about dusk.

The place: An ornate, airy chamber in the clouds, somewhere above Iowa.

Shut the Water Off

Thu, 02 Oct 1997 17:30:07 -0700

Restructuring of the NCAA in 1997 was designed to allow each division to more easily conduct its business and follow its own path. And when it comes to legislative proposals, there has been a path less traveled by, and indeed that has made all the difference.