Women's Major National Championship

Women's Major National Championship

Post by VinceDen » Sat, 24 Aug 1996 04:00:00




Quote:
>Vince, you are correct in the fact that the rule does exist, but there is
>a problem with what you are saying...Miss Williams and Miss Nuveman are
>not UCLA students yet.

This would be a matter for NCAA interpreters to decide, eh? Doesn't mean
we can't discuss it here, though, so here goes.

I believe the intent of the rule was to keep coaches from forcing their
players to play on the coaches' travel teams year-around, which
technically would violate the NCAA's maximum-games rule and give an unfair
advantage to those colleges that can afford to sponsor travel ball.

Since the two women were signed last November, which means a commitment
was made to that particular softball program nine months ago and letters
of intent signed, I really don't think there is any difference. Sue
Enquist or Sharron Backus *could* (note emphasis) instruct Christa and
Stacey to go play for a certain team with other UCLA team members or
assistant coaches.

If I were an NCAA official, would I think this is a big deal? On the
surface, no I would not. I don't believe either Christa or Stacey were
instructed to play for Commotion by their UCLA coaches, including
Fernandez. If they were, so what? And I couldn't care less if they're on
the same team with Lisa ~ unless they had not yet signed with UCLA, in
which case I'd throw a fit.

But if the NCAA coaches who protest this feel otherwise, they most
certainly know better than you or your close UCLA relatives (#32) what the
rules are and how they should be interpreted and enforced. Perhaps they
feel that Lisa is coaching the two incoming freshmen...I doubt it, though.

Obviously, these coaches have a lot to gain, too. Put Christa on a good
team and she is probably one of the top 10 pitchers in the country. And
Cloud-Killer has the potential to surpass Laura Espinoza's season and
career HR and RBI records. I'd weigh that if I were NCAA. If the players
in question sucked, no one would protest. I also would take into
consideration the fact that I might be taking away a kid's education. I
would have to think hard about that before I penalized the school, because
the school will remain standing after the penalty. Get my drift?

As far as UCLA being under a microscope, it is my feeling that all eight
teams that make the NCAA World Series each year should have their books
audited for inequities. Bet you'd find more than what was admitted to by
UCLA and Fresno State...when the NCAA sets down its standards, ideally the
playing field should be level for every school in the nation, with the
scales tipped only by:

a) the quality of the school, what majors it offers and the education the
student-athlete will receive
b) the ability and integrity of the coaching staff
c) how well the administrators bend the rules, find loopholes and kiss
***

Speaking of that, now that the Olympics are over, has Tanya Harding
re-enrolled at UCLA to finish her education there? How about Brooke at U
Hawaii?

Vince

 
 
 

Women's Major National Championship

Post by MBrun51 » Sat, 24 Aug 1996 04:00:00



Rumor has it?  A clever imposter?  Is someone posing as me?  I sure hope
not....on the other hand, if they ar, they sound intelligent and I agree
with what they are saying. ;)

Michael

 
 
 

Women's Major National Championship

Post by RAYFOST » Sun, 25 Aug 1996 04:00:00

"Bet you'd find more than what was admitted to by
UCLA and Fresno State..."

Concerning what issue at Fresno State?  Ok Vince, I accept your bet
concerning any violations in Fresno State's softball program.  Loser
PERMANENTLY closes all internet accounts and removes his homepage from the
net.  Now, call the NCAA.

Ray Foster