NCAA reviewing agent-athlete restrictions
In the words of ESPN’s Gene Wojciechowski “There is a new world of college sports. It would be nice if the NCAA were a part of it.”
The jab, echoed in recent years by many involved in college athletics, comes on the heels of the NCAA Amateurism Cabinet announcing that they are considering the ways athletes may have contact with agents without compromising their eligibility.
In a statement released last Thursday, NCAA interim President Jim Isch said that “the NCAA routinely reviews current trends and how they could impact our rules. As part of this on-going effort, (we have begun) preliminary discussions about our current agent and adviser legislation […] how advisers might assist in providing information to student-athletes who are weighing their options.”
Isch has said that he wants to ensure that athletes with professional opportunities available to them are well informed of their options before committing to any specific program.
The issue has been on the NCAA’s back burner for some time; with many of the leagues top-tier players moving quickly through their college programs and into the professional ranks, NCAA members at all levels have questioned whether the association offers the same level of career guidance to their athletes as a student moving into the business world might receive.
"The entire system needs to be re-evaluated,” said Georgetown basketball coach John Thompson III. “We're operating under a system where little Billy sits down with his parents and his high school and decides where he's going to college. That's not the world we live in, so we need to figure out how to adjust how we operate."
“The (college sports) world in constantly evolving,” added Rachel Newman-Baker, director of the Agents, Gambling and Amateurism division of the NCAA. “Agents are always trying to find new ways of doing business, so it’s always a good thing to find a way to keep on top of it, to look at the rules and see how they fit or don’t fit in the real world.”
Under current NCAA provisions, an athlete is not barred from receiving advice from an agent so long as there in no financial exchange or contract between the two parties.
The agent, the athlete and the coach
The issue of agent-athlete relations came to the forefront in recent months after the NCAA’s $750k settlement with Oklahoma State pitcher Andrew Oliver. Oliver was deemed ineligible in the 2008 season having acquired legal representation to weigh his options of going pro out of high school. The courts ruled that the NCAA’s decision infringed on Oliver’s right to legal council, forcing the governing body to reconsider whether their policies were unfair to athletes unsure of their futures.
Despite the ruling, coaches around the league are divided in their opinions as to whether agents are the best solution to the problem.
“This is about as bad an idea as I can think of off the top of my head,” said Syracuse basketball coach Jim Boheim, one of many who have voiced their opinion on the subject. “It’s putting the wolves in the sheep’s den.”
Their concerns are two-fold: are agents, given the ultra-competitive nature of their own profession, the best resource for athletes looking for an unbiased opinion and secondly, where do you draw the line in terms of agent interference?
Saint Joseph’s coach Phil Martelli understands the competitive nature of the business and warns that it’s a dog-eat-dog world.
"It's a natural phenomenon for the family or mentor to not trust the coach (who is trying to build a successful program). In our case, for example, Jameer (Nelson's) decision dramatically impacts our team. John Wall's decision dramatically impacts Kentucky. So I understand that. But everyone has an agenda. What's an agent's motivation? What's his interest? And where does the kid fit in?"
"I think the NCAA has to be very careful going down this road," said Duke coach Mike Krzyzewski. "Because you know if the NCAA says agents can be involved with an athlete at this point, they'll get involved even earlier […] If you give them an inch, they’ll take a mile.”
Still others are concerned that allowing agents into the amateur forum will invite more of what is already becoming one the NCAA’s biggest problems, illegal player payments.
"You sign a kid and someone else is trying to get him," explains Duke law professor Paul Haagen, who has been offering free counseling services at Duke for years. "Now that kid has a bad game, he's playing out of position, the coach is yelling at him. He's mad at you. He wants to go with someone else, so you have to intervene inappropriately -- even though you know it's inappropriate -- or you're going to lose a competitive position to another agent."
Illegal payments are not the only thing on the coaches’ minds either.
"We have situations where, when the season is over, agents are advising their players not to play in all-star games," said National Basketball Association of Coaches president Jim Haney. "Kids say all the time, 'my agent won't let me play. He's afraid I might get hurt.' Well what's to stop an agent from telling a kid he can't play in a real game? Or to tell a coach he needs to get his player more shots or more playing time? How do we stop that from happening?"
While their concerns are plentiful – if not valid – proponents for the introduction of agents into the NCAA say that with the right limitations, agents could prove to a valuable resource to athletes.
"Let agents have contracts with players and the schools," said Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe. "Those clauses would have a liquidated damages clause, where it would cost the agent $1 million or $2 million if they did anything that made the player ineligible. … The ethical guys will come out of it in better shape by putting sunshine on this. You'll promote the agents who want to do it the right way."
“Our intent is not to eliminate NCAA oversight into agent issues,” SEC commissioner Mike Silve, another supporter of introducing agents, said during the conferences media days. “(We want to) change the philosophical basis for these rules from enforcement to an assistance based model.”
A mountain out of a molehill?
Despite the flurry of opinion that has emerged, the NCAA says that this is not a definite thing one way or the other.
"There's so much to talk about -- from student-athlete welfare helping them make informed decisions, to benefits from an agent, to oral and written agreements and the timing of the access," said Newman-Baker. "I really don't know quite frankly where this will go. There are a lot of opinions and the first step is to vet through them and figure out where everyone stands on this issue and get honest feedback."
Given what’s been said so far, honesty and feedback shouldn’t be a problem.
Tags: