OrangeBalls
Raise a lil hell...
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2011
- Messages
- 9,880
- Likes
- 873
It was empty PR speak. It's the boardroom equivalent of coachspeak. It's detestable from an Orwellian "Politics and the English Language" sort of viewpoint, but I don't see how it rises to the level of actual lying when there is no serious attempt to deceive. If I get up in front of a room and say something that's BS, and everybody in the room knows that it's BS, then while I may fail as a communicator and an ethical human being, it isn't exactly lying.
I would imagine that all that is a result of the behind-the-scenes negotiating between the NCAA and the university. It's like plea bargaining -- except that unlike a prosecutor, the NCAA has to pretend that the negotiations don't actually exist, because it would compromise their act as impartial arbiters of justice. This is what happens with the prosecution and judge/jury functions are all performed by the same agent.
If they explain too much -- or anything, really -- then the public will get enough of a foothold to start demanding consistency. And the NCAA is too political an organization to be able to be consistent. They depend on the flexibility that public inscrutability provides.
(I am not saying that it isn't an embarrassing, terrible system. I am just saying why that teleconference today was so inevitably unsatisfying.)
I'm not disagreeing with you here. I know it's a PR bs move, but at some point, some of the higher ups need to hold them accountable just like they hold the universities and college coaches accountable when they dish out horsesh*t responses and call them on it and make them wiggle.
They're inconsistent because their committees continue to evolve and change and the rule book is ever changing. I'd just like to see someone stand up to them and challenge them (Tarkanian did, but that's another story). They have no peer and do as they please.