Kevin Lennon response

[cstrunk]

Hi everyone, I wrote to Mr. Lennon today and I received a response from him. It wasn't an automated response.


"Mr. Lennon,

Not only do I find your ruling on the Lucca Staiger case at Iowa State
University to be ridiculous, I find the entire new rule to be appalling.
You are single handedly changing the minds some of the bright student
athletes coming from Europe for them. Why would they want to sit out a year when
they could receive an education at home and play professionally (and actually
get paid, not just play without compensation)?

The fact that Lucca did nothing wrong and is getting punished seriously
irritates me. How can you punish a kid for being a "professional" when
hedidn't even get paid? Your rule should not be so complicated! It
should state "if you get paid to play, you can not play." End of story, no further
explanation needed. The "better than you" mentality that your
organization has shown even most recently with your headine to "reinstate" Lucca when you
are actually upholding a suspension is just further proof that some serious
restructuring is needed in college athletics, with or without the
"NCAA".

Even if you are going to uphold this suspension no matter what, why are
only some players such as Lucca being targeted? Why not target all players
who are in the exact same situation including many who are playing RIGHT NOW at
many college institutions? Is the NCAA afraid to hand out true punishments
to "big name schools"? When I hear about cheating at other schools like USC,
Texas, Oklahoma, I think "great, they are getting caught and punished and
should learn a lesson" only to realize that the only punishment they are receiving is
a slap on the wrist instead of true punishments like suspensions. If the NCAA
is to be taken seriously, it needs to truly be fair and just. Right now the NCAA
is neither fair, nor just.

I hope Iowa State University aggressively brings to light this situation
to the mass media. Everyone deserves to know how unfairly you are treating
Lucca Staiger and how much of a joke the NCAA really is.

Thanks for your time and I truly hope the NCAA changes its current views
and protocols."

Response:

"Thanks for writing. The rules of the NCAA are adopted by our schools- noone in the national office adopts a single rule.
To date, no school or conference has even introduced a rule change over
the last five years. You may be interested to know that an attempt was
made to change the rules in the way you suggest, but the NCAA membership
voted it down. In fact, the current standard has been reviewed twice
over the last two years and the committees overseeing this area ( again,
made up of individuals from our schools and not NCAA staff) and elected
to make no changes.

If Iowa State or any other school wants to change the rule, they can
introduce legislation, and we would help them through this process. The
NCAA is a membership organization- our schools make the rules.

Thanks for writing.

Kevin"

[nickwc]

thats about the biggest load of crap i have ever heard

[rahtotheames]

Bad idea to do a legistlation. Not only would it give the University the "whiny baby" rep (dont take that the wrong way), but it would be a great way to get Pollard fired, which is something we DONT want, IMHO.

[ianoconnor]

These guys are just going to keep skirting around the issue...

[whirlybirds]

i say lets keep our school out of the spot light in fear that we may be breaking other rules that the NCAA could nail us with

[ripvdub]

Good write up by you. I would've just said "**** YOU!!!"

[Kyle]

He does have a bit of a point. In doing some research it looks like this was a big issue in 2001 or so and the rule was never changed. Some of the stuff i found is posted in this thread:
http://www.cyclonefanatic.com/forum/...hat-now-2.html

[MJAnderson]

I'll just bet the some of the schools involved in the legislation include: Oaklahoma, USC, Texas,etc...

[DaddyMac]

Does anybody have the specific rule that Lucca "violated".

In anycase, I like how he states that it's not the NCAA's rule - they just are at the discrescion of how to enforce it. Member schools have the option to repeal it.

There's also a law on the books in Iowa that says a man with a moustache may never kiss a woman in public. You don't see many men going up the river for that one, do you?

He needs to explain the logic behind the guilt by association? If Lucca wanted to play for a week with the Bulls, yet took no compensation, how is he any less of an amateur? What does this rule solve? Who does it protect? Why is college athletics better for it?

[ISUAlum2002]

This reminds me of the trash I heard from David Stern after he suspended Amare Stoudemire and Boris Diaw (I believe) after they stood up and walked a few paces away from the bench after Steve Nash got hip checked into the scorer's table in the playoff game this past season.

"I didn't want to suspend them, but I had to, because that's what the rules that the owners have agreed upon say. If they want to change the rules, that's fine, they can elect to do that, but until then, there is no gray area."

It's a bunch of trash and they know it. There just isn't much more to say about it other than its the NCAA out arbitrarily enforcing rules ex post facto, idiotic rules that they just seem to pull out of thin air.

[Seth]

Nice Avatar ISUAlum2002...

[CycloneDaddy]

Can someone explain to me how the Texas player is able to play why Lucca is suspended for the year? I guess I don't know enough about it but it seems like the Texas kid played for a professional team as well. Help me understand because the more I think about it the more I want to go Chuck Norris on someone.

[dinger]

Good write up by you. I would've just said "**** YOU!!!"

This is why i havent written yet...i need to calm down first.

[Steve]

He does have a bit of a point. In doing some research it looks like this was a big issue in 2001 or so and the rule was never changed. Some of the stuff i found is posted in this thread:
http://www.cyclonefanatic.com/forum/...hat-now-2.html

There are probably two groups of member schools who don't want the rule changed because of self interests. There are a few schools who have learned to work the system and have established pipelines to foreign talent. They have a competitive advantage that they don't want to give up.

A much larger group rarely, if ever, targets foreign athletes. They could be located in talent-rich areas. Another possibility is that they could have limited budgets or resources to identify foreign players. These groups see it in their best interests to severely limit the opportunities for their rivals to recruit foreign athletes. It's not about fairness, it's about what's in it for them.

Sucks for Lucca and schools like ISU who are stuck in the middle of this. Sadly, I'm getting the feeling that Lucca's best chance was for the NCAA staff to grant him an exception rather than the appeals committee. With the appeals committee, we are hoping that member representatives make a decision that would benefit one of their competitors. I don't see this happening.