Caulton Tudor

Rule-breaking athletes need to be accountable

Posted November 4, 2013
Updated November 5, 2013

— While NC State fans are no doubt uneasy about news that a former football player Eric Leak continues to be a concern for the school, there seems to be little question that campus leaders are taking measures to maintain institutional control.

A report by WRAL Investigates makes it clear that while the Leak situation will continue to create anxiety on both the rules and image fronts, there’s no evidence that State has been inattentive to the potential lurking damage.

Barred booster shared townhouse, cars with former Pack players Browder: Barred booster shared townhouse, cars with former Pack players

As this story continues to unfold, Wolfpack fans and officials will ask themselves some of the same questions that have been posed at North Carolina, Ohio State, Southern Cal and any other school that has had to deal with agent/player contacts.

That question: How do you stop it?

The answer, unfortunately, is you probably can’t.

Shift Accountability to Athletes?

There are some radical cures being floated, the most popular of which is finding a way to put more of the onus on rules-breaking players.

One possibility in that regard is to completely revamp the scholarship agreement model, which essentially is a year-to-year casual contract between the school and the player (or player’s guardian in some cases).

If the scholarship agreement included a clause that made a player financially responsible for monetary and/or image damage that he or she knowingly brought upon the school, there’s little doubt that the extent of such rules violations would be decreased many times over.

But is it possible to incorporate such a clause into scholarship contracts? There’s much disagreement in the legal community. For one thing, the athlete would need to hire a lawyer before signing. Otherwise, such a contract almost certainly would be spiked by judges.

That said, the vast majority of the players who break the rules with agents understand what they’re doing when they’re doing it. In some cases, the athlete even initiates contact.

If UNC’s Marvin Austin or Southern Cal’s Reggie Bush knew they could have been sued for damages by their schools when they deliberately accepted illegal goods and money, there’s good reason to think they would have abided by the rules.

A more feasible solution might be to allow any college athlete to turn pro at any time regardless of the situation.

Here’s an example: After a great performance, let’s say an agent offered the athlete a $1 million signing bonus on the spot if he would quit the team immediately to avoid any injury risk during the remainder of the season.

Fans would be outraged, of course, but having the option to cash in on his accomplishments immediately might eliminate temptation for the athlete to break rules that would endanger the reputation of the rest of his team and the school.

Agents give college basketball and football players money and gifts for only one reason  - to land future clients. But that business model doesn’t work well in most other sports. In tennis, golf, baseball, soccer, etc., the athlete can go pro straight out of high school. College golfers and tennis players can turn pro when they chose, even in the middle of a college season.

A third route is the one the state of North Carolina is pursuing by aggressively going after rules-breaking agents and agent intermediaries. If the legal consequences are severe enough, there’s reason to assume at least some agents will abide by the statues.

But under-the-table payments are almost impossible to stop, whether the donor is an agent or overzealous fan. That practice has been going for decades and no doubt will continue to some extent regardless of state or even federal laws. And paying athletes a salary will not stop illicit money from changing hands.

For now, NCSU seems to be doing its best to protect both its borders and reputation. But ultimately, the first and last lines of defense are the athletes. That aspect of the equation may never change.



26 Comments

Please with your WRAL.com account to comment on this story. You also will need a Facebook account to comment.

Oldest First
View all
  • Objective Scientist Nov 8, 2013

    Read this article, made a comment, then failed to look at it for several days. Just "scanned" through all of them... and there are some good comments. I'll add some additional thoughts;

    Whoever "writes the rules' - be it the NCAA or the Conference or the University - the rules should be simply and unequivocally stated - clear and 'to the point' - with no more rules than are absolutely necessary. All - ALL - to whom the rules apply - the Universities if the rule is from the NCAA or Conference, the athletic program administrators and every member of a coaching staff, and the PLAYERS/ATHLETES are all held responsible for KNOWING THE RULES and are accountable when they are broken! ESPECIALLY including the players/athletes. For the players/athletes... there MUST be clear consequences of a rule violation... including LOSS of SCHOLARSHIP, and REPAYMENT of scholarship costs and services/materials/equipment, etc. supplied to the athlete, etc., etc., etc. I could go on and on with examples. Bottom line - those INDIVIDUALS who violate rules should suffer significant consequences.

  • StunGunn Nov 7, 2013

    View quoted thread


    Ken, like you said in another post, if the NCAA closes a loophole, somebody will develop another, and that is probably true as far as academics go as well. Look at what happened at Carolina. I'm OK with easy classes like "Rocks for Jocks", but I don't condone grades being changed, no-show classes, and things like that. There are young people who are very gifted athletically, but not academically. Where would these people go? The NCAA has dictated players be one year removed from HS to play in the NBA and (I think) three years removed from HS to play in the NFL. Other than playing in Europe, college provides the avenue for these kids to satisfy NCAA requirements.

    Tough situation, with no obvious answer. I agree with you: I'd rather see things done over the table instead of under it.

  • BISHOP5 Nov 6, 2013

    View quoted thread


    Translation - it's not the athlete's fault for breaking the rules. Now then, anybody here willing to man up & take responsibility for the actions of others?
    Anybody will do. lol

  • Jewelry-EricLeak Nov 5, 2013

    View quoted thread


    LMFAO at a fanbase that worships the NCAA's KING of cheaters, Jim Valvano

  • jmcdow2792 Nov 5, 2013

    View quoted thread


    I think you have hit the nail on the head. The rules are way to complicated and way to extensive. For example; if I as a minimal contributor (defined as booster) to State happen to meet a high school player, say working at the local McDonald's, and I casually say to him that he should think about attending State, then I have broken the NCAA rules. A lot of these rules are ridiculous. I don't pretend to know what the rules should be. However, I would think that a small committee of in the know people could come up with a complete rewrite given the guidance that the rules need to be simplified and made less restrictive on many fronts.

  • uncsuckz Nov 5, 2013

    View quoted thread


    ...exactly WHEN did unc "open their doors?" LMFAO They stone-walled with every fiber in their bank account....and still are.

  • Ken D. Nov 5, 2013

    View quoted thread


    And it wouldn't make the agents and runners any less sleazy. It would just allow them to slither out from underneath their rocks and operate in the open.

    My point is that there isn't anything inherently unethical or tawdry about players being rewarded for being good at what they do. The only thing that makes them (the players) "guilty" is that there are unreasonable rules in the first place.

  • uBnice Nov 5, 2013

    View quoted thread


    The Olympics had this exact problem. They solved it by letting the athletes receive compensation. Ending prohibition did not solve the alcohol addiction problem but it sure took the violent culture surrounding illegal alcohol away.

  • JPack Nov 5, 2013

    View quoted thread



    Hey that's right up there with making drugs legal to eliminate the drug problem, or giving amnesty to illegals who sneak into our country so they are no longer law breakers. That's the best idea I've heard yet. While we are at it, let's make sure we create as many rules as possible to penalize the players who follow the rules. Then we can change the name from NCAA to department of collegiate sports oversight. The government doesn't have control of that yet.

  • Ken D. Nov 5, 2013

    View quoted thread


    Another option in dealing with impermissible benefits is to make them permissible. I would much rather have NCAA enforcement efforts directed to making sure athletes are legitimate students making satisfactory progress toward a degree.

    I don't care all that much if the star athlete is getting rewarded for his performance. So are star lawyers, and musicians, and doctors, etc.

    As fast as the NCAA finds a way to close one loophole, somebody will develop another. This is a war the NCAA can't win.

More...

 

 

  • CBB: Texas A&M at LSU

    Saturday at 1:00 pm on WRAL-TV

  • PGA: AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am

    Saturday at 3:00 pm on WRAL-TV

  • CIAA: Winston Salem State @ Fayetteville State

    Saturday at 4:00 pm on METV 50.2

  • Nascar Sprint Cup Series: Sprint Unlimited

    Saturday at 8:00 pm on FOX50

  • Nascar Sprint Cup Series: Daytona 500 Qualifying

    Sunday at 1:00 pm on FOX50

  • CBB: UNC vs. Pittsburgh

    Sunday at 1:00 pm on WRAL-TV

  • PGA: AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am

    Sunday at 3:00 pm on WRAL-TV

  • CBB: Oregon at Cal

    Tonight at 9:00 on 99.9 The Fan

  • NHL: Hurricanes vs. Pittsburgh

    Tomorrow at 7:00 pm on 99.9 The Fan

  • CBB: NC State vs. Wake Forest

    Saturday at 12:00 pm on WRAL-FM

  • CBB: Kansas at Oklahoma

    Saturday at 2:30 pm on 99.9 The Fan

Men's College Basketball
4
6:00 PT7:00 MT8:00 CT9:00 ET2:00 GMT10:00 北京时间7:00 MST9:00 EST
Preview
 
11
6:00 PT7:00 MT8:00 CT9:00 ET2:00 GMT10:00 北京时间7:00 MST9:00 EST
Preview
 
NHL Scoreboard
Los Angeles12nd Int
NY Islanders4
 
Buffalo02nd Int
Philadelphia4
 
Anaheim22nd Int
Columbus1
 
Colorado214:50
2nd Pd
Ottawa0
 
Washington02:40
1st Pd
Minnesota0
 
Boston23:00
1st Pd
Winnipeg1
 
Dallas018:10
1st Pd
Chicago0
 
Toronto 6:00 PT7:00 MT8:00 CT9:00 ET2:00 GMT10:00 北京时间7:00 MST9:00 EST6:00 UAE (+1)21:00 ET
Preview
Edmonton 
 
Calgary 7:30 PT8:30 MT9:30 CT10:30 ET3:30 GMT11:30 北京时间8:30 MST10:30 EST7:30 UAE (+1)22:30 ET
Preview
San Jose 
 
Pebble Beach (PGA)
PosNameScoreThru
1C. Reavie-818
2tB. Burgoon-718
2tF. Jacobson-718
2tC. Smith-718
5tR. Barnes-618
5tS. Bertsch-618
5tR. Castro-618
5tJ. Holmes-618
5tS. Levin-618
5tJ. Rose-618
View Full Leaderboard
 
Allianz Champ (CHMP)
PosNameScoreThru
1E. Toledo - z-11F
2B. Andrade - y-11F
3tT. Byrum-10F
3tJ. Sluman-10F
5T. Lehman-9F
6tB. Bryant-8F
6tC. Montgomerie-8F
6tD. Garwood-8F
6tJ. Huston-8F
10tJ. Maggert-7F
View Full Leaderboard
z = Won in Playoff   y = Lost in Playoff
 
ATP Scoreboard
Thursday, Feb. 11
Memphis Open (ATP)
Second Round
(8) D. Dzumhur3 4    
R. Berankis6 6    
(3) D. Young6 77    
M. Granollers1 62    
(7) J. Millman2 68    
B. Becker6 710    
(2) S. Johnson 
T. Fritz 
 
World Tennis Tournament (ATP)
Second Round
J. Chardy5 2    
N. Mahut7 6    
(8) V. Troicki77 6    
H. Chung65 2    
(6) R. Bautista A4 6 6   
J. Vesely6 2 4   
M. Baghdatis3 2    
M. Klizan6 6    
(3) G. Simon5 6 64   
A. Zverev7 3 77   
 
Argentina Open (ATP)
Second Round
(8) P. Cuevas6 6    
S. Giraldo4 2    
(2) D. Ferrer6 6    
R. Olivo2 2    
P. Lorenzi4 6 6   
D. Schwartzma6 3 1   
(1) R. Nadal6 2    
J. Monaco4 3    
 
WTA Scoreboard
Thursday, Feb. 11
St. Petersburg Ladies (WTA)
Second Round
E. Vesnina6 3 2   
K. Kozlova2 6 6   
(9) M. Niculescu6 1 3   
T. Babos4 6 6   
D. Kasatkina6 6    
L. Siegemund3 4    
(1) B. Bencic77 6    
A. Beck63 3    
(3) C. Wozniacki4 5    
D. Cibulkova6 7    
(5) A. Pavlyuchen6 7    
C. Witthoeft1 5    
 
Taiwan Open (WTA)
Second Round
(2) M. Doi6 6    
M. Linette2 3    
(1) V. Williams6 6    
U. Radwanska4 2    
(6) S. Hsieh6 4 6   
M. Minella4 6 2   
Quarterfinals
(2) M. Doi 
(7) K. Nara 
(3) Y. Putintseva 
S. Voegele