Rice Commission's report no recipe for successful change

Author Photo
Condoleeza Rice FTR .jpg

INDIANAPOLIS — When NCAA president Mark Emmert met with the media last month and discussed the subject of the Commission on College Basketball he had formed as a response to the FBI’s investigation of the basketball talent game, he promised its recommendations would be adopted in short order because “you don’t waste Condoleezza Rice’s time.”

Apparently, though, it’s OK if Secretary Rice wastes ours.

SN EXCLUSIVE: Coaches told to support Rice Commission recommendations — whether or not they're good

The commission did compose an attractive 52-page report following its months of meetings, but the recommendations to address issues in college sports generally — and college basketball particularly — create few precedents and generally roll over the same tired and disproven theories about what is wrong with the game.

That’s right, we all heard the former U.S. secretary of state lecture us about the perils of “one-and-done.” It was among the first items she addressed, and underscored the misconception that cheating in college basketball accelerated when the age limit rule was introduced in advance of the 2006-07 seasons (there is no evidence of this) and that more chicanery goes on with such prospects than others (there is evidence that’s untrue).

Rice said it is necessary to “separate the collegiate track from the professional track” through the elimination of the NBA’s age limit rule, which requires those who enter the draft to be a year removed from the completion of their high school graduation. Rice acknowledged that adopting such a change would require the agreement of the NBA and its players association.

Her remark about the problem that those players “are the focus of agents, apparel companies, investment advisors, college coaches and others seeking to profit from their skills” is not incorrect, but that attention is not exclusive to them. In the documents seized by the FBI from an agency office that were reported by Yahoo! Sports in late February, nine of 15 players who allegedly received loans were multiyear college players.

MORE: NCAA asks for lengthy delay in athletes' case challenging amateurism rules

The idea that removing the future John Walls and Mohammed Bambas from college basketball would separate the collegiate track from the professional track seems laughable in light of the fact more than 180 underclassmen have entered this June’s NBA Draft, with more than 60 already committed to agency representation that makes them ineligible to withdraw.

It’s as universal that basketball players want to play in the NBA as it is that college graduates want to get jobs. There’s nothing wrong with this.

What was actually new and useful in the report?

• Allowing players to return to college if they enter the NBA Draft and go unselected.

• The recommendation to open up the NCAA Board of Governors to outside membership. The commission called for five positions on the NCAA board, the highest governance panel in the organization, to be reserved for “independent public members with voting rights." It was not clear whether those were to be additional positions or replacements but in her remarks Wednesday morning Rice said they should have “the experience, stature and objectivity to assist the NCAA in reestablishing itself as an effective leader and regulator of college sports.”

• The formation of an “independent investigative and adjudicative arm” to handle more complex and contentious NCAA rules cases. Rice specifically addressed the all-volunteer aspect of the Committee on Infractions, those representatives of member schools who agree to essentially serve as judge and jury on cases compiled by the NCAA’s enforcement staff.

• Enhancing penalties for rules violators, including an increase in postseason bans to as long as five years.

• Requesting the NCAA establish a fund that would pay for degree completion of those players who depart college after completing at least two years toward a degree.

The NCAA released the following statement on the commission's recommendations:

FERNANDEZ: John Calipari pushing to end one-and-done; asks for help from NBPA

The commission recommended athletes be permitted to retain agency representation while in high school, which could remove some complication from the process athletes and their families of sorting through myriad would-be agents. However, there is no language in the report that suggests allowing athletes to receive loans from their agents, which could be construed as the primary benefit for the athlete of agency representation at that stage of his career.

The commission’s answer to the rogue agent’s incentive to recruit athletes by offering money is to develop a certification program for agencies wishing to represent NCAA athletes. The report said the NCAA should “incentivize better behavior from agents … through making clear the benefits of certification and the cost of the loss of certification.” If an athlete or family member of an athlete were to sign with a non-certified agent, the athlete would lose his eligibility.

The commission examined the possibility of recommending a structure similar to the “baseball rule,” which would allow athletes to enter the NBA Draft directly out of high school but deny draft eligibility to anyone who enters college until after his sophomore or junior year. Wisely, the members agreed that such a restriction, as Rice said, “would keep collegiate players ready for the NBA in school against their will, where they will be potentially disgruntled magnets for corrupt money and the undermining of the collegiate model.”

The commission chose not to issue a recommendation on one of the most conspicuous issues in revenue-producing college sports: whether athletes should be permitted to profit from their name, image and likeness. Rice said the committee discussed the matter at length but opted to table the discussion because there are current court cases that focus on NIL rights.

“We don’t believe that the NCAA can legislate in this area until the legal parameters become clearer,” she said, although she did allow that she hopes there will be movement in this area.

MORE: Kansas, NC State named in updated FBI case on corruption in college basketball

The commission will push for greater financial transparency involving summer events that are certified by the NCAA from owners, event operators and sponsors — but also coaches. How much privacy must a person be willing to sacrifice just to coach a summer basketball team?

By 2019, the commission asked that the NCAA work with USA Basketball, the NBA and the players association to establish new youth basketball programs that would supplant the July events where evaluation by college coaches currently is transacted.

The commission clearly does not understand the scope of this undertaking; there were more than 100 certified events last summer for coaches to evaluate players. And there were parents desperate for their sons to be seen at every one. Creating an alternative structure to supplant this apparatus is quixotic, and is likely to invite legal action from those parents whose children do not wind up on the NCAA’s invitation lists.

The commission also promised to send letters to the boards of directors of major apparel companies requesting “financial transparency and accountability for all of their employees.” How much privacy must a person be willing to sacrifice to work in marketing track shoes?

It was interesting to hear from Georgia Tech president Bud Peterson, chairman of the NCAA board of directors, say he “would be a little careful about throwing the apparel companies under the bus. We’ve got some bad actors in every organization.”

It was the truest statement made all morning.

Author(s)
Mike DeCourcy Photo

Mike DeCourcy is a Senior Writer at The Sporting News