Quote:I dont really care what the NCAA says their job is.  If they wanted to discourage domestic violence they could.  And they could make it part of their mission statement   It's not as though they were forced into that mission and must abide by it.  But they've chosen to hand that responsibility to the individual schools.  And instead force a somewhat severe and very black/white ruling on performance enhancing drugs... which btw is a risk that only impacts the player who decides to use them.  And affects no one else.  Unlike domestic violence.

I get the issue.  Theoretically, an athlete can face immediate suspension for merely receiving a few hamburger from a booster, yet continue playing while charged with a felony.  

 

The solution is a simple one.  In NCAA vs. Tarkanian, the courts gave the NCAA unfettered power.  Unless the Supreme Court overturns or distinguishes Tarkanian, the NCAA will continue to have free reign and unfettered power to adopt and enforce its bylaws on its member institutions.  In the past, the NCAA has shown if there is no rule, there is no violation.  If there is a rule, there is a violation.  Therefore, under its powers in NCAA vs. Tarkanian, the NCAA could adopt a new NCAA Student-Athlete Code of Conduct that applies to all its member institutions.  Violations of this new NCAA Student-Athlete Code of Conduct will result in immediate disciplinary action.  Violations would be categorized into levels.  Level One Misdemeanors, ex. buying alcohol underage, disorderly conduct, etc., would result in a suspension of 10-25% of NCAA authorized athletic contests.  Level Two Serious Misdemeanors, ex. DUIs, assault, drug possession, etc., would result in a suspension from 50% of athletic contests.  Level Three Felonies, ex. any felonies regardless of its nature, would result in an immediate suspension and immediate dismissal from the team.

 

The problem is that the NCAA, member Universities, coaches, athletes, pretty much everyone does not want the NCAA involved in these issues.

---