At your service

The NCAA just cannot get out of its own way, and the most recent example of this phenomenon was last week's revelation that college coaches are barred from subscribing to "recruiting services."

This comes about in the wake of the Willie Lyles pay-for-play scandal. Lyles is some shady agent-type figure who was allegedly auctioning off high-profile prospects to high-profile schools.

Lyles ran a "scouting service" and solicited thousands of dollars from schools for videos and other information about players with whom he had relationships (for a deeper look at this, check out this article from the Portland Oregonian newspaper.)

The NCAA has a legitimate interest in keeping college football recruiting from becoming a facsimile of college basketball recruiting, which is dominated by back-channel AAU types and relationships that are far outside the purview of parents and high school coaches.

The desire go achieve a tighter rein is a worthwhile effort, because in recent years it's become apparent that college football recruiting is rapidly headed in that direction.

But then the NCAA decides to go after team-specific web sites that cover various aspects of these programs, including recruiting, and it becomes obvious that it's yet another laughable and almost astonishing case of ignorant over-correction from the four-letter outfit in Indianapolis.

Most people who seriously follow college sports know there's a vast distinction between team-specific web sites and the "recruiting services" offered by Lyles and his ilk.

Most people are aware that coaching staffs aren't paying web sites like Tigerillustrated.com thousands of dollars for videos and other inside information on prospects.

As I've acknowledged here before, there's still a ways to go in this industry. Still plenty of folks running these sites who give the business a bad name. But over the last five or so years, major gains have been made in the areas of credibility and professionalism. The momentum remains strong.

It should also be noted that our business model is being mimicked by a growing number of newspapers who are desperately trying to stay afloat by finally acknowledging that it's not 1985 anymore.

And that brings us to one of the blatant contradictions of this new condemnation from the NCAA. A number of newspaper outlets have taken the plunge into recruiting coverage, and some even have opted to charge money for that recruiting coverage.

So is there another rule coming that will bar coaches from reading the morning paper with their coffee and cereal?

What of the sprawling entity that is ESPN, which is delving into recruiting coverage? Will college coaches be prohibited from purchasing the network's "Insider" coverage that provides subscribers deeper analysis across the board?

These are questions, and there are many, that come from a thoughtful and diligent appraisal of the situation.

But that's not the way the NCAA rolls. It shoots first and asks questions later.

LW