Big Ten responds to new NCAA rules: We have serious concerns

Also, the league leaked some nuggets on the progress of scheduling, divisions

Published: February 11 2013 | 2:09 pm - Updated: 28 March 2014 | 11:19 am in

Late last week, Ohio State coach Urban Meyer said he wanted to talk to his Big Ten counterparts about their recruiting prowess.

Today, the Big Ten essentially waves the white flag in regard to NCAA recruiting reform.

I talked to Iowa coach Kirk Ferentz and recruiting coordinator Eric Johnson about these rules. Here's a link to that post.

The Big Ten doesn't want this to run into crazy Skype time for its coaches with 15-year-olds. Then again, Michigan has offered a 15-year-old.

If you're the SEC, you've just chiseled "We have serious concerns" on the Big Ten's headstone. You're work is done here, Nick Saban.

Here are some other nuggets of info from those meetings, courtesy of ESPN.com's Adam Rittenberg:

-- The eight-game B1G football schedule is dead. The league discussed 9- and 10-game options only. A decision will come this spring (May, maybe?). This would go into effect in 2016 or '17, not when Maryland and Rutgers enter in '14.

-- Division alignment talk centered on geography. The On Iowa podcast has talked about three schools who sit on the east-west line: Michigan State, Northwestern and Purdue. We think Michigan State moves west and Northwestern stays west.

-- Coaches want more night games, and if they want them in November, they have the Big Ten's blessing. So, expect that.

-- No discussion on division names.

Here's the Big Ten's release:

Park Ridge, Ill. — The Big Ten Football Coaches and Athletic Directors met today in Park Ridge for a regularly scheduled meeting and subsequently issued the following statement with regard to pending NCAA DI legislation impacting college football:

We reviewed the 26 Rules Working Group proposals acted upon by the NCAA Board of Directors in January, some of which will become effective as early as July 1, 2013.  While we applaud the work that has been done to date, we are very concerned that the timeline proposed for implementation of the proposals does not allow sufficient time for the Football Recruiting Subcommittee of the NCAA Leadership Council to thoughtfully consider the impact of the proposals.

We are specifically concerned with the following three proposals and ask that they be tabled along with Proposal 13-2:

Proposal 11-2: Athletics Personnel – Limitations on the Number and Duties of Coaches – Elimination of Recruiting Coordination Functions

Proposal 13-3: Recruiting – Deregulation of Modes and Numerical Limitations on Communication

Proposal 13-5-A:  Recruiting – Elimination of Printed Recruiting Materials and Video/Audio Legislation

We have serious concerns whether these proposals, as currently written, are in the best interest of high school student-athletes, their families and their coaches.  We are also concerned about the adverse effect they would have on college coaches, administrators and university resources.

We look forward to working with the NCAA toward improving the game, the recruiting process and the overall college football experience for all student-athletes.

Have you found an error or omission in our reporting? Is there other feedback and/or ideas you want to share with us? Tell us here.



Featured Jobs from corridorcareers.com