NUance Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 If a recruiting or scouting service, such as Rivals.com, provides nonscholastic video that is not available for free to the general public, then an institution may not subscribe to the service per Bylaw 13.14.3. All recruiting/scouting services are held to the same legislated standard and we consider Rivals.com to be a recruiting/scouting service. The staff has issued a staff interpretation (4/29/09) and two educational columns (3/10/2009 and 5/4/2010) that discuss this issue generally that I have included below. The league coaches were instructed to immediately cancel any subscriptions to Rivals.com and to report a secondary recruiting violation if they were or ever have been subscribed (paid or complimentary). LINK This is pretty huge for Rivals. And not in a good way. Quote Link to comment
mitch7 Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 If a recruiting or scouting service, such as Rivals.com, provides nonscholastic video that is not available for free to the general public, then an institution may not subscribe to the service per Bylaw 13.14.3. All recruiting/scouting services are held to the same legislated standard and we consider Rivals.com to be a recruiting/scouting service. The staff has issued a staff interpretation (4/29/09) and two educational columns (3/10/2009 and 5/4/2010) that discuss this issue generally that I have included below. The league coaches were instructed to immediately cancel any subscriptions to Rivals.com and to report a secondary recruiting violation if they were or ever have been subscribed (paid or complimentary). LINK This is pretty huge for Rivals. And not in a good way. That is ridiculous that a school would have to report it as a secondary recruiting violation for a new rule that was just instituted. Are the coaches supposed to read the NCAA's mind or what? The NCAA is so screwed up in my opinion, it seems like everyday a school is getting slapped with sanctions. College sports are becoming tainted. Quote Link to comment
zoogs Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 Seems like BS that you would apply this retroactively. "This is henceforth illegal, so please report yourself if you've EVER done it." For a moment I thought this would help force Rivals, etc, into compliance and give us free videos. Then I thought...probably not. This does hit these websites hard though. They gotta find a way to make money. Quote Link to comment
bbeerma2 Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 No, they are just clarifying that this was always the case but making sure it is known that this WAS an infraction based on previous rules I believe. Hence, it is an issue of violations which were unreported. Quote Link to comment
NUance Posted April 11, 2011 Author Share Posted April 11, 2011 Not sure if it's related to this ncaa decision, but almost all of the Rivals articles are free right now. It used to be the other way around, with almost none of them being free. Quote Link to comment
zoogs Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 No, they are just clarifying that this was always the case but making sure it is known that this WAS an infraction based on previous rules I believe. Hence, it is an issue of violations which were unreported. Ah - you are right. Thanks for clarifying. Quote Link to comment
Parl Celini Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Not sure if it's related to this ncaa decision, but almost all of the Rivals articles are free right now. It used to be the other way around, with almost none of them being free. I would still like to have the highlight videos to be free rather than the articles. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.