Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
General Topics
College & Pro Sports
Mutts
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Northeast Stinger" data-source="post: 993184" data-attributes="member: 1640"><p>Forgive me but you are over explaining the obvious. My point is simply that if the role of the NCAA is to protect student athletes (I’m not saying that is their role) then anything that causes a student athlete harm while they are under the care of a school’s athletic department would fall into this category. Being raped by a coach in a shower, being driven by a drunk staff member in a company car, and any number of egregious criminal actions that were known by, or ignored by, the athletic program would be covered. If protecting the student athlete from harm by the program is the objective.</p><p></p><p>Again, I’m not arguing your point. The concern of the NCAA is much more narrowly defined than simply protecting student athletes. Thus a T-shirt is a problem because it may harm an athlete by teaching him false values about athletic privilege, open him to extortion, get him in the habit of accepting bribes, the list of harms goes on. And these are important to the NCAA even though the football program did not direct this action or have knowledge of it. Yeah, still feels like hypocrisy even though I see why the NCAA would not want to deal with more serious issues of criminal harm that were tacitly condoned by athletic departments.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Northeast Stinger, post: 993184, member: 1640"] Forgive me but you are over explaining the obvious. My point is simply that if the role of the NCAA is to protect student athletes (I’m not saying that is their role) then anything that causes a student athlete harm while they are under the care of a school’s athletic department would fall into this category. Being raped by a coach in a shower, being driven by a drunk staff member in a company car, and any number of egregious criminal actions that were known by, or ignored by, the athletic program would be covered. If protecting the student athlete from harm by the program is the objective. Again, I’m not arguing your point. The concern of the NCAA is much more narrowly defined than simply protecting student athletes. Thus a T-shirt is a problem because it may harm an athlete by teaching him false values about athletic privilege, open him to extortion, get him in the habit of accepting bribes, the list of harms goes on. And these are important to the NCAA even though the football program did not direct this action or have knowledge of it. Yeah, still feels like hypocrisy even though I see why the NCAA would not want to deal with more serious issues of criminal harm that were tacitly condoned by athletic departments. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
How many points did Georgia Tech score against Cumberland in 1916?
Post reply
Home
Forums
General Topics
College & Pro Sports
Mutts
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top