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.
During the meeting we learned that Divisions II and III were also looking into deregulation, a topic later covered in an NCAA News story about the Division II experience to date. Indeed, there are a fair number of deregulation proposals for those segments of the membership to consider at the January 2000 NCAA Convention.
One of the Division II proposals, No. 9, has the following intent statement:
- To eliminate the list of permissible recruiting materials that a Division II institution may provide to a prospect.
Let me repeat that in case you don't believe your eyes:
- To eliminate the list of permissible recruiting materials that a Division II institution may provide to a prospect.
Wow....
Shifting the Responsibility
Now let's just ponder this development for a second.
Do you mean to tell me that Division II institutions might be willing to take it upon themselves to decide which recruiting materials are appropriate and which ones are not? That institutions will have the chance--and responsibility--to exhibit a little common sense, creative thinking, and self-imposed budgetary restraint without continuing to walk lock-step on the path to Armageddon?
In a word: Yes.
If the proposal passes, think of all the questions those lucky stiffs in Division II will no longer have to answer, including:
• Is it a problem if a season ticket brochure folds out into a poster?
• When our student-athletes go out and speak to youth groups, can they give out schedule cards?
• Can we print out part of our website and send it to a prospect?
These are real questions. And I got all of them in just the last two weeks.
If Division II removes its list of permissible recruiting materials will this set the stage for the final battle between good and evil?
I doubt it.
Still, there will be nay-sayers, and I can hear their wailing now:
• "What are they thinking? I can't operate without someone telling me what to do!"
• "Here we go--it's everybody keep up with the Joneses."
• "Repent! Repent! The End is Near!"
Life Imitates Art
You might remember the closing scene from Dr. Strangelove: Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb, written by Stanley Kubrick, Terry Southern, and Peter George.
The US and Soviet Union have entered into a full-fledged nuclear war. Dr. Strangelove, one of the President's advisors, suggests that 200,000 Americans--including top government and military men--be housed in the country's deepest mine shafts until the nuclear fallout dissipates. About a hundred years later, the survivors would emerge as a nation of well over a hundred million people.
So, with a tip of the helmet to George
C. Scott as General O'Connor, here's how the final moments play
out:
GENERAL O'CONNOR (thoughtfully): Mister President, I think we've got to look into this thing from a military point of view. I mean, if the Ruskies stashed away some big bombs and we didn't, when they come out in a hundred years they could take over.
GENERAL FACELYN: I agree, Mister President. In fact they might even try an immediate sneak attack so they could take over our mine-shaft space.
GENERAL O'CONNOR: I think we would be extremely naive Mister President, to imagine that those new developments will affect the Soviet expansionist policy. We must be increasingly on the alert for their moves to take over other mine-shaft space in order to breed more prodigiously than we, and to knock us out through superior numbers when we emerge.
CLOSE UP on O'CONNOR
GENERAL O'CONNOR (with tremendous authority): Mister President! WE MUST NOT ALLOW A MINE-SHAFT GAP!
The Courage to Change
The recruiting materials rules were adopted in a different time and place as an attempt to control costs and level the playing field. They simply do not scale well in their application to the high-tech recruiting that exists today. In fact, the growth and pervasiveness of the Internet probably provides the best, cheapest, and fastest way to level the playing field. And our rules often prevent that from happening.
Rather than falling into an infinite loop of writing, interpreting, and amending the rules to try to stay current, it's probably better to remove the rules and allow institutions to adapt to changing times.
If institutions want to recruit with atoms--fine. If they want to recruit with bits--fine. Wanna spend your money on both a recruiting brochure and a media guide? If your budget allows it, be my guest. Eliminating the recruiting materials list gives institutions those choices--and those responsibilities.
I'm afraid, very afraid
If you can't buy the argument that we can trust administrators and coaches to use their own good judgment in this area (is there anyone in the room who'd like to raise their hand and admit they lack good judgment?), then let's try another angle.
Over the years, we've all seen plenty of examples of one division (or subdivision) of the NCAA adopting legislation in reaction to adoption of the same legislation by another division. Often, it's a defense mechanism.
Can it work the other way around?
Perhaps we've got to look into this thing from a recruiting point of view. We would be extremely naive to imagine that these new developments won't affect Division II's recruiting policies. We must be increasingly on the alert for their moves to recruit more effectively than we, and to knock us out through superior execution. We must not allow a recruiting-materials gap!