• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

Colleges no longer will be able to use private jets, resort hotels or extravagant meals to attract recruits if new rules are passed by the NCAA board of directors.

The proposed provisions were designed to take the celebrity out of the recruiting race and were recommended this week by both the NCAA Management Council and the National Association of Basketball Coaches, according to The Associated Press.

“(The rules are) intended to do away with the celebrity, the sense of entitlement, for a prospect,” said David Berst, NCAA vice president and chair of the recruiting task force, to the AP.

These rules are great ideas, but I’m skeptical as to why these rules were made and whether they will do much good.

Recruiting has become a huge national phenomenon in the last few years. Where a 17-year-old athlete wants to go to school is now national news.

There are numerous Web sites devoted to recruiting news, and major media outlets have gotten in on the craze, too.

Star football recruits have made their announcements live on ESPN’s SportsCenter. Stories have been written devoted to analyzing whether the weather of Oregon on the day of Malik Hairston’s official visit would have an impact on his decision.

Though private jets and resort hotels commonly are used for recruiting, I don’t see how banning these luxuries will stop the celebrity of recruiting.

The recruits always will be told and promised good things about them by every coach, giving them a higher sense of self-worth. There always will be recruiting news services to analyze everything recruits say and do. And there always will be donors looking to help the recruit make his decision, using some methods that may be against the rules.

The new rules mean, in theory, no coach can get a recruit by outspending another school. In other words, coaches won’t be able to buy a recruit.

But the money schools save on recruiting likely will go to other things to make the school look good – more advertising or upgrades to facilities. The schools that want to spend money on recruits will find ways and loopholes in NCAA rules.

Parity will not be a result of the new rules, either – the star athletes will continue to go to the same schools every year.

I will give the NCAA and NABC some credit – even though these rules won’t help much, they went against a stereotype and are proposing ideas that wouldn’t help the money or exposure of college sports. If anything, this rule would lower the publicity college sports get by a little.

In this day and age, this type of rule proposal is rare.

For example, the Big 12 Conference proposed last week to expand the college football schedule from 11 to 12 games – a move that clearly helps revenue but hurts the student-athletes (one fewer week of prime study time).

There is one very good thing the new rules provide, though: more accountability. The new rules will require each school to adopt a written policy outlining the guidelines for official visits, prohibiting the use of alcohol, drugs, sex and gambling in recruiting.

Even though these rules won’t be approved in the near future, this type of progress is a sign of things to come.

In the wake of the Colorado scandal, collegiate recruiting needs some changes, and this is a start.

E-mail Quiñonez at gquinonez@media.ucla.edu

Comments

Post a comment