Nobody ever said life was fair. UCLA’s Brian Morrison, a
highly touted basketball transfer from North Carolina, found that
out the hard way. He is only one of many recruits and athletes that
have had to put up with the Byzantine procedural processes of the
NCAA.
What if you are an athlete and decided to go to a particular
university because of its coach, and that coach leaves after
you’ve officially signed your letter of intent? This is
a decision that affects four of the most influential years of your
life.Â
Morrison was originally recruited to play basketball under the
tutelage of Bill Guthridge, a legendary assistant coach at North
Carolina who took over the reins after Dean Smith left. But just
two months before Morrison’s classes started, Guthridge
pre-emptively retired, and was replaced by the volatile Matt
Doherty.
Where did that leave Morrison and the other Tar Heel recruits
that signed under the impression they’d be playing for
Guthridge? Under NCAA rules, it left them in no man’s land,
since athletes cannot get out of their letter of intent due to a
coaching change.
“It’s definitely unfair,” said Morrison of the
rule. “When I was going through the recruiting process, the
most important thing for me was the coach. You see a lot of
schools that aren’t that attractive, but if you have a good
coach there, you’re going to get a lot of good basketball
players.”
Morrison decided to still stick it out for two years under
Doherty, but unfortunately the situation convinced Morrison a
change was in order.
“Coach Doherty came in there and did a good job and tried
his hardest,” Morrison said. “I always wanted to
go there anyway, but it just didn’t work out for two
years. My future at North Carolina was unsure, and I thought
that being in a different situation would be a better opportunity
for me in basketball and for me personally.”
Today is national signing day, the day recruits, as Morrison
once was in 1999, announce their collegiate decisions. So in the
coming days, UCLA will unveil its newest athletic recruits, and the
future of Bruin athletics will once again look rosy and
promising.
That’s good.
Here’s the bad. The process of governing national recruits
and collegiate athletes is a ridiculous one filled with loopholes,
idiotic rules, and questions of constitutionality. Under the
authoritative direction of the NCAA, recruiting is a fun process
transformed into a legal one, and uses terminology that could
confuse even the best lawyers, not to mention intelligent
coaches.Â
Last time I checked, the year was 2003. So why govern athletes
in a system that too closely resembles the one depicted in George
Orwell’s “1984”?
Keep in mind, current and prospective athletes must preserve
their eligibility by being cognizant of:
“¢bull; Whom they talk to, when they talk to certain people, and
how they talk to certain people. There are different rules
governing phone calls, face-to-face meetings and conversations over
America Online’s Instant Messenger (yes there is a rule that
governs instant messaging).
“¢bull; How they travel, with whom they travel, and where they
can go. Prospective athletes can ride in private planes, but not in
limos. Prospective athletes can visit some practice sites, but not
ones hosting actual events.
“¢bull; What objects or benefits they’re allowed to
receive, and what’s prohibited to them. Athletes enjoy some
special benefits ““Â many schools set up special
employment opportunities for athletes ““ but aren’t
allowed to receive a free key chain.
“¢bull; Whom they eat with and where they eat. An athlete
can eat a filet mignon peacefully in the home of a representative
of the athletic department, but can’t be treated by that same
official to a cheeseburger at McDonald’s.
Unfortunately, a violation of any of the rules above could
ultimately result in a loss of eligibility. Seems like a steep
price to pay for a Whopper.
Doesn’t the NCAA have better things to do than to hamper
the daily lives of these coaches and athletes?Â
“It’s definitely a long and grueling process,”
Morrison said. “You’ve got people calling you all the
time and writing letters, and you don’t know who’s
telling the truth and who’s not. As a 17-year-old kid,
it’s a difficult thing to go through. It was
tough.”
For every athlete that makes it into the spotlight, there are
hundreds that fade away into oblivion. What should these
unfortunate athletes make of those promises of grandeur and success
that lured them to a particular campus in the first place?
So instead of superficially imposing ridiculous and illogical
laws, the NCAA should be looking toward constructing a new
framework for recruiting that aids, not hampers, one of the most
important decisions in an athlete’s life. Though
it’s still possible to make the right decision in the current
system, it’s more difficult than it should be.
“You have to have good people around you to help make that
decision, Morrison said. “A 17-year-old kid might not be
able to make the best decision because they may only see one side
of it.”
Unfortunately, many 17-year-olds don’t have the proper
support system needed to make such a decision. What does the
NCAA have to say to them?
E-mail Glass at [email protected].