PDA

View Full Version : North Carolina (the state) to lose NCAA games?



Olympic Fan
04-28-2016, 01:01 PM
I may have missed this ... if so, please fold into the old thread.

But the NCAA issued new guidelines for NCAA hosting criteria that could keep the NCAA from holding tournament games in the state because of HB2, which prevents municipalities in the state from passing or enforcing anti-discrimination legislation:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2636236-ncaa-announces-anti-discrimination-process-for-potential-championship-hosts?utm_campaign=tsiphone&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=facebook.com

Mark Emmert has met with Governor Pat McCrory to express the NCAA's concern about HB2.

We all know how South Carolina's refusal to part with the Confederate battle flag cost that state NCAA sites for more than a decade, so this is a real threat. Greensboro is currently slated to host the 2017 first and second round men's basketball tournament games. Charlotte is a first/second round site in 2018.

The story says that the NCAA is not yet ready to move any games that have been already awarded, but is "monitoring the situation". The new guidelines will definitely impact future site selections.

I don't want this to turn into a debate about the merits of HB2 (that would clearly be PPB territory), but just to bring up the impact the NCAA's reaction could have on Duke's future paths to the national championship.

davekay1971
04-28-2016, 01:31 PM
So, agreeing to avoid HB2, and focusing on the NCAA.

As far as I can understand the NCAA, it is their business to determine if athletes have received improper benefits not available to other students. Check.

It is not, however, the business of the NCAA to determine if student-athletes have been kept eligible for over 20 years by a system of sham classes.

It is the business of the NCAA to sanction a school because an assistant coach engaged in pedophilia and the coach and athletic director covered it up.

It is not, however, the business of the NCAA to vacate wins of a men's basketball team that played entire seasons with rosters full of players who were ineligible by the university's own rules.

It is the business of the NCAA to determine which states warrant tournament games based on the various discrimination/anti-discrimination laws of that state.

It is not, however, the business of the NCAA to punish a university's sports programs where players in sham independent study courses, playing despite taking many more independent study courses than the university rules allow for eligibility (even if those courses were not, actually, shams), had the paper required by the sham independent study course written by a tutor.

I'm totally clear now on the purpose of the NCAA.

crdaul
04-28-2016, 01:35 PM
So, agreeing to avoid HB2, and focusing on the NCAA.

As far as I can understand the NCAA, it is their business to determine if athletes have received improper benefits not available to other students. Check.

It is not, however, the business of the NCAA to determine if student-athletes have been kept eligible for over 20 years by a system of sham classes.

It is the business of the NCAA to sanction a school because an assistant coach engaged in pedophilia and the coach and athletic director covered it up.

It is not, however, the business of the NCAA to vacate wins of a men's basketball team that played entire seasons with rosters full of players who were ineligible by the university's own rules.

It is the business of the NCAA to determine which states warrant tournament games based on the various discrimination/anti-discrimination laws of that state.

It is not, however, the business of the NCAA to punish a university's sports programs where players in sham independent study courses, playing despite taking many more independent study courses than the university rules allow for eligibility (even if those courses were not, actually, shams), had the paper required by the sham independent study course written by a tutor.

I'm totally clear now on the purpose of the NCAA.
AMEN!!!

duke2x
04-28-2016, 03:38 PM
Politics aside, I hope not. I already bought my tickets for Greensboro next year.

Doria
04-28-2016, 03:51 PM
I read a very interesting article the other day about how the NCAA deals with the rights issues of diversity and non-discrimination versus religious rights of their member schools. I'm not sure that this can be applied directly to this specific case, since it entails legislation that has nothing to do with their member institutions (beyond potentially penalizing some of their institutions, which might reasonably expect a regional advantage, due to said legislation).

But still, it was an interesting perspective as to how they juggle these issues, for better or worse, regardless of what one's personal views are on the issues. I cannot recall exactly where I read it, but it may have been in the NYT or one of the major network's site (NBC, CBS, ABC). If I run across it again, I'll post a link, but you can probably Google for it.

Devilwin
04-28-2016, 05:58 PM
So, agreeing to avoid HB2, and focusing on the NCAA.

As far as I can understand the NCAA, it is their business to determine if athletes have received improper benefits not available to other students. Check.

It is not, however, the business of the NCAA to determine if student-athletes have been kept eligible for over 20 years by a system of sham classes.

It is the business of the NCAA to sanction a school because an assistant coach engaged in pedophilia and the coach and athletic director covered it up.

It is not, however, the business of the NCAA to vacate wins of a men's basketball team that played entire seasons with rosters full of players who were ineligible by the university's own rules.

It is the business of the NCAA to determine which states warrant tournament games based on the various discrimination/anti-discrimination laws of that state.

It is not, however, the business of the NCAA to punish a university's sports programs where players in sham independent study courses, playing despite taking many more independent study courses than the university rules allow for eligibility (even if those courses were not, actually, shams), had the paper required by the sham independent study course written by a tutor.

I'm totally clear now on the purpose of the NCAA.

Double Amen!!

Ima Facultiwyfe
04-28-2016, 07:35 PM
I have to live here. I have to come in contact with overbearing, holier than thou heels daily. I have to try and get along in spite of being flipped the bird because my license plate says "TRUEBLUE" and the Iron Duke's sticker above it makes it clear which blue that means; or in spite of going to funeral after funeral where the deceased heel is quoted in the eulogy as having hated us because UNC's standards and morals are higher and because they are the "University of the People'; or in spite of their obsession with pointing out any pimple on Duke's butt for my edification while claiming the moral high ground for themselves.

My problem is that whenever I fall victim to one of these ignoramuses I turn into a blithering idiot blabbing something emotional in return, bless my heart. Please, could you guys give me some suggestions for one-liners, zingers or satisfying exit lines? Just short quips please. Anything longer just gets me embroiled. I want to stay cool, happy, and above the fray while leaving them in their place.
Love, Ima

dukelifer
04-28-2016, 08:02 PM
I may have missed this ... if so, please fold into the old thread.

But the NCAA issued new guidelines for NCAA hosting criteria that could keep the NCAA from holding tournament games in the state because of HB2, which prevents municipalities in the state from passing or enforcing anti-discrimination legislation:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2636236-ncaa-announces-anti-discrimination-process-for-potential-championship-hosts?utm_campaign=tsiphone&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=facebook.com

Mark Emmert has met with Governor Pat McCrory to express the NCAA's concern about HB2.

We all know how South Carolina's refusal to part with the Confederate battle flag cost that state NCAA sites for more than a decade, so this is a real threat. Greensboro is currently slated to host the 2017 first and second round men's basketball tournament games. Charlotte is a first/second round site in 2018.

The story says that the NCAA is not yet ready to move any games that have been already awarded, but is "monitoring the situation". The new guidelines will definitely impact future site selections.

I don't want this to turn into a debate about the merits of HB2 (that would clearly be PPB territory), but just to bring up the impact the NCAA's reaction could have on Duke's future paths to the national championship.
Why don't they prohibit UNC and other state schools in NC from hosting any event- that is, ban home games.

Furniture
04-28-2016, 08:28 PM
Keep calm. It's only a toilet!

moonpie23
04-28-2016, 09:23 PM
I have to live here. I have to come in contact with overbearing, holier than thou heels daily. I have to try and get along in spite of being flipped the bird because my license plate says "TRUEBLUE" and the Iron Duke's sticker above it makes it clear which blue that means; or in spite of going to funeral after funeral where the deceased heel is quoted in the eulogy as having hated us because UNC's standards and morals are higher and because they are the "University of the People'; or in spite of their obsession with pointing out any pimple on Duke's butt for my edification while claiming the moral high ground for themselves.

My problem is that whenever I fall victim to one of these ignoramuses I turn into a blithering idiot blabbing something emotional in return, bless my heart. Please, could you guys give me some suggestions for one-liners, zingers or satisfying exit lines? Just short quips please. Anything longer just gets me embroiled. I want to stay cool, happy, and above the fray while leaving them in their place.
Love, Ima

"the plumlee kids have more rings than dean smith"

(make sure you call them "kids"...)

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
04-29-2016, 09:33 AM
Look, I'm deadset against UNC and deadset against this HB2, but I think lobbing the two concepts in together is actually unfair to UNC. Rare for me to say something is beneath the baby blue, but despite their malfeasance, there are actually some good things and good people at that university. It just so happens that none of them are affiliated with their athletic programs.

On the bigger issue at hand - as an NC native and resident, while my own personal issues with NC politics are pretty straight-forward, I agree that it's an odd quagmire for the NCAA to put their "heels" into. My opinion is that I encourage private corporations to take whatever stand they like on any social issue (at their own expense or profit) if they feel so moved. It's a version of free speech, and the public can vote with their dollars for or against your stance. We're a free country, and if you want to align yourself with a cause/movement/party, you do so at your own risk.

Personally, as a small business owner, I elect to stay away from ANYTHING social or political as a business. There have been several times over the years that I have been tempted to enter the fray, but cooler heads have prevailed. I'm happy to discuss politics or issues with anyone who wants to bring it up, but I don't see that my store has a role to play that wouldn't potentially offend the greater public.

Now, the NCAA has put itself in a weird situation. If you go to their website, they say they support seven core values, (http://www.ncaa.org/about/ncaa-core-values) one of which is "An inclusive culture that fosters equitable participation for student-athletes and career opportunities for coaches and administrators from diverse backgrounds." Of course, several of the other core values are particularly laughable this week, but that would be my rationale for their actions as an organization.

There's just lots of different ways to look at it. Bruce Springsteen cancelled his show and brought a lot of attention to the issue nationally. That same week, I saw a show here in Asheville, and the performer said she got lots of questions about why she didn't cancel her show... she explained that as an NC native, she didn't feel right about abandoning her fellow North Carolinian's over some BS politics, and spent about ten minutes discussing her opinion of HB2 to a largely similarly minded crowd. (By the way, don't pass up a chance to see Rhiannon Giddens, (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kl64j0-fieY) she (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nliiRDmBbEQ) is a STUNNING musician (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MV6Xs-0jmeQ)).

Anyway, the bigger question of the last two weeks is "what is the role of the NCAA?" And I think there's no simple answers to that right now. I said from the outset that this entire UNC debacle was a sort of "darned if you do, darned if you don't" for them, and it seems like they's neatly carved out a third option of "darned if you waffle and find some crappy compromise that disappoints everyone."

From a Duke fan perspective, I have no particular issue with the threat/move. I don't think it is likely to greatly impact the outcome of any of our games in the next year, supposing that the NCAA follows through and the NC legislature stands their ground. And, at the end of the day, if it did seem to have some sort of impact, this sort of thing falls into the "real world" category that is much bigger than college sports. At least, in my opinion. Your mileage may vary.

swood1000
04-29-2016, 09:44 AM
Tough issue for businesses to negotiate. Go one way and they're targeted (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-13/lgbt-bias-charges-increase-28-in-u-s-as-state-protections-lag) by the LGBT crowd. Go the other way, like Target, and they're targeted (http://www.businessinsider.com/the-target-boycott-is-spiraling-out-of-control-2016-4) by an opposing crowd. Both sides claim constitutional support for their position. I know we can't get into the substance of the debate here, but big businesses likely wish that they could just be left alone.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
04-29-2016, 09:50 AM
Tough issue for businesses to negotiate. Go one way and they're targeted (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-13/lgbt-bias-charges-increase-28-in-u-s-as-state-protections-lag) by the LGBT crowd. Go the other way, like Target, and they're targeted (http://www.businessinsider.com/the-target-boycott-is-spiraling-out-of-control-2016-4) by an opposing crowd. Both sides claim constitutional support for their position. I know we can't get into the substance of the debate here, but big businesses likely wish that they could just be left alone.

I don't know of any businesses that have been forced into the fray on any of these issues. Most who draw attention seem quite eager to insert themselves, with varying results, which is certainly their own right. Who I really feel sympathy for is the employees of businesses that have to be associated with decisions made WAY above their pay grade that they may or may not agree with.

Indoor66
04-29-2016, 10:09 AM
I don't know of any businesses that have been forced into the fray on any of these issues. Most who draw attention seem quite eager to insert themselves, with varying results, which is certainly their own right. Who I really feel sympathy for is the employees of businesses that have to be associated with decisions made WAY above their pay grade that they may or may not agree with.

I'm with you on this issue. If you are a business, obey and follow the law - Period, end of discussion. Let the social and political mavens fight it out. For my business, I have no opinions except to follow the law and treat my customers with respect and dignity. End of story, for me.

swood1000
04-29-2016, 10:24 AM
I'm with you on this issue. If you are a business, obey and follow the law - Period, end of discussion. Let the social and political mavens fight it out. For my business, I have no opinions except to follow the law and treat my customers with respect and dignity. End of story, for me.
Well, there are two sides to the question, though each side deprecates the position of the other. One side claims that the First Amendment is also the law, and that it gives them legal rights that conflict with laws protecting LGBT rights. Of course entering into a discussion as to the merits of each side is the quickest way to get this thread shut down. But both sides claim that their legal rights trump those of the other side. Where people come down on their evaluation of the strength of each side often seems to depend on their political persuasion.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
04-29-2016, 10:43 AM
I'm with you on this issue. If you are a business, obey and follow the law - Period, end of discussion. Let the social and political mavens fight it out. For my business, I have no opinions except to follow the law and treat my customers with respect and dignity. End of story, for me.

To clarify, I don't think you are with me. I don't have a problem with someone who wants to stick their neck out in that way as as business. I just don't feel that way about MY business.

There are certainly businesses and organizations that I have avoided over the years due to their public stances, but I don't recall any of them going under as a result of my avoidance.

swood1000
04-29-2016, 10:47 AM
I don't know of any businesses that have been forced into the fray on any of these issues. Most who draw attention seem quite eager to insert themselves, with varying results, which is certainly their own right. Who I really feel sympathy for is the employees of businesses that have to be associated with decisions made WAY above their pay grade that they may or may not agree with.
Aren't all businesses forced into the fray? When the press calls and asks what their policy is they have to come down on one side or the other. And the press is eager to canvass them, in the hope that they will get a response that will create controversy and increase circulation, with the largest businesses being the first target since controversy involving them will draw the most attention.

DBFAN
04-29-2016, 10:56 AM
I will care what the NCAA thinks about this when they decide to eliminate single sex sports. Not saying I'm for that, but the rationale seems a bit hypocritical. NCAA wouldn't be saying anything if they didn't think they might lose a tiny fraction of the money they make. But one would think they would be fine with that check Bubba wrote them 😎

DBFAN
04-29-2016, 11:02 AM
Aren't all businesses forced into the fray? When the press calls and asks what their policy is they have to come down on one side or the other. And the press is eager to canvass them, in the hope that they will get a response that will create controversy and increase circulation, with the largest businesses being the first target since controversy involving them will draw the most attention.

This right here is spot on. Media and entertainment outlets do this over and over to create controversy. I am in support of the new law, but I have found that when I discuss this with friends who are against it, and we have a civil conversation, that neither side is as irrational as the media wants us to be.

“All the exaggerations are right, if they exaggerate the right thing.” – “On Gargoyles,” Alarms and Discursions

brevity
04-29-2016, 11:10 AM
Don't really want to discuss the substance of the North Carolina law, but some legislative intent would be appreciated. So I'm trying to look at this from a cold, monetary perspective.

I must admit I don't really understand the motivation for a law that has predictably resulted in a significant loss of revenue from large out-of-state sources. It's a little bit like how Hollywood fails to cast Asians in traditionally Asian roles while simultaneously coveting the Asian market. The lesson seems to be the same: they like money, but they like exclusion more...?

It would be different if someone were saying, "Yes, there may be short-term unpopularity and financial losses from boycotts, but in the long term we believe these losses will be offset by gains from ____." But I don't know what would fill in that blank. Constituents generally want a lot of things, and almost all state action comes at some sort of cost. So why this issue? Where's the gain, political or financial?

(As for the NCAA, at this point discussing them feels like the more perilous minefield. Short answer: moving tournament sites out of state is inconvenient for native fans, especially for non-revenue sports, but probably not so bad for Duke teams.)

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
04-29-2016, 11:10 AM
This right here is spot on. Media and entertainment outlets do this over and over to create controversy. I am in support of the new law, but I have found that when I discuss this with friends who are against it, and we have a civil conversation, that neither side is as irrational as the media wants us to be.

“All the exaggerations are right, if they exaggerate the right thing.” – “On Gargoyles,” Alarms and Discursions

My business has been contacted by neither the media nor entertainment outlets in regards to this issue.

Henderson
04-29-2016, 11:12 AM
My problem is that whenever I fall victim to one of these ignoramuses I turn into a blithering idiot blabbing something emotional in return, bless my heart. Please, could you guys give me some suggestions for one-liners, zingers or satisfying exit lines? Just short quips please. Anything longer just gets me embroiled. I want to stay cool, happy, and above the fray while leaving them in their place.
Love, Ima

You could also try one of George Costanza's best lines:

"Well the jerk store just called and they're running out of you."

or:

"Yeah, well I slept with your wife."

Those both seem complicated. I'd go with my first suggestion above.

DBFAN
04-29-2016, 11:18 AM
My business has been contacted by neither the media nor entertainment outlets in regards to this issue.

Ok
Didn't know I was inferring that anyone had contacted anyone. Was merely stating that they tend to make people respond in sarcastic and demeaning ways....see above for example

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
04-29-2016, 11:21 AM
Ok
Didn't know I was inferring that anyone had contacted anyone. Was merely stating that they tend to make people respond in sarcastic and demeaning ways...see above for example

Oh, I know, I was just being a bit difficult.

Personally, I know lots of people who are quite passionate on the issue. And actually, I agree with you that for large businesses, many might be put in the position of "why aren't you doing something" if they do nothing, which certainly creates a tough spot. I'm fortunate enough to be a small operation where absolutely no one cares about my personal stance on things from a business point of view. If I were forced into a position of making some sort of blanket statement that the people who work for me were in an uncomfortable position of defending, that would be pretty crappy.

Anyway, we're wandering a bit far afield from the NCAA's position I suppose. Threads like this walk a slippery line.

As I say, the rationale for the NCAA's position is that it is directly in line with their stated core values. If you want a laugh, read them all.

DBFAN
04-29-2016, 11:23 AM
Oh, I know, I was just being a bit difficult.

Personally, I know lots of people who are quite passionate on the issue. And actually, I agree with you that for large businesses, many might be put in the position of "why aren't you doing something" if they do nothing, which certainly creates a tough spot. I'm fortunate enough to be a small operation where absolutely no one cares about my personal stance on things from a business point of view. If I were forced into a position of making some sort of blanket statement that the people who work for me were in an uncomfortable position of defending, that would be pretty crappy.

Anyway, we're wandering a bit far afield from the NCAA's position I suppose. Threads like this walk a slippery line.

As I say, the rationale for the NCAA's position is that it is directly in line with their stated core values. If you want a laugh, read them all.

My bad I prob jumped the gun on that one

Olympic Fan
04-29-2016, 07:16 PM
I agree that we have wandered perilously close to PPB territory on this thread.

But I started the thread here and think it does belong here because the original link was to the NCAA threatening to withdraw NCAA postseason events from North Carolina because of the law.

I think that DOES have relevance to Duke basketball.

Indoor66
04-29-2016, 07:23 PM
I agree that we have wandered perilously close to PPB territory on this thread.

But I started the thread here and think it does belong here because the original link was to the NCAA threatening to withdraw NCAA postseason events from North Carolina because of the law.

I think that DOES have relevance to Duke basketball.

I think that relevance is remote, tangential and very speculative. All scheduled Duke games taking place in NC will be played. Anything else is absolutely uncertain for about 9 or 10 months. Then it might be relevant.

JBDuke
04-30-2016, 03:37 PM
The moderators have closed this thread for now due to the inability of participants to stay away from Public Policy discussions. As stated in our guidelines, we don't allow such discussions due to the tendency to degrade into uncivil, partisan bickering. While this topic has potential relevance to Duke basketball, there has been no further news to merit keeping this thread open for such discussion. If there is more news related to this topic, we will consider reopening this thread.