coldweatherfan Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 While I think this is a great jesture on the part of Kansas. -It is contrary to many things that have happened in the past. I remember Dale Brown getting in big trouble at LSU for giving money to a couple of his players to go to a mother's funeral. -It is by definition an extra benefit to a student athlete. Can't see any way this kind of benefit would go to a non-athlete student. However, I wouldn't be surprized now to see it happen somewhere, so that a school could say, "We did it for a regular student." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobaar Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 While I think this is a great jesture on the part of Kansas. -It is contrary to many things that have happened in the past. I remember Dale Brown getting in big trouble at LSU for giving money to a couple of his players to go to a mother's funeral. -It is by definition an extra benefit to a student athlete. Can't see any way this kind of benefit would go to a non-athlete student. However, I wouldn't be surprized now to see it happen somewhere, so that a school could say, "We did it for a regular student." I agree. I don't have any problem with this specific ruling. Its always good to see people in tough situations get some help. However, its just one more example of the NCAA enforcing their rules as they see fit. They're supposed to be rules, not vague suggestions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockmom Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 I agree. I don't have any problem with this specific ruling. Its always good to see people in tough situations get some help. However, its just one more example of the NCAA enforcing their rules as they see fit. They're supposed to be rules, not vague suggestions. Of course, there are exceptions to all rules. Frankly, I don't know why everyone is so gung ho about hard and fast rules with no exceptions. Life doesn't work that way. I like that each individual situation is examined on it's own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 I've approached this thread asking the question about the impact of what seems to be a precedent. This picture humanizes it for me. http://www.fanfeedr.com/ncaa-basketball/2011/01/27/kansas-basketball-player-thomas-robinson-and-his-9-year-old-sist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobaar Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 Of course, there are exceptions to all rules. Frankly, I don't know why everyone is so gung ho about hard and fast rules with no exceptions. Life doesn't work that way. I like that each individual situation is examined on it's own. That's fine if they make consistently logical rulings. I am totally FOR this decision. Its the fact that they randomly choose who and when to apply the rules to that is annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockmom Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 That's fine if they make consistently logical rulings. I am totally FOR this decision. Its the fact that they randomly choose who and when to apply the rules to that is annoying. No...they take each case individually and weigh the merits. That's not illogical, nor random. Remember, many times we don't have all of the details they use to make their decision. Even more frequently, we zone in on a detail we disagree with and ignore the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts