NCAA Governance

NCAA Governance 

Please respond to the discussion and answer the following questions below. Also please label each question and the one discussion response It would appear to me that the vicarious liability that could potentially be incurred by a head coach is similar to that of most other employers. It is presumed that head coaches are aware of everything that goes on in their program, from players to assistants, the head honcho is just that – the ringleader – expected to oversee every action of his team, so if the second-in-command veers from the rule book, the head coach could be held responsible for those violations (Greenberg, 2012). In comparison, if a lifeguard at a pool is improperly trained and monitored by their employer and an aquatic emergency occurs, the pool would most likely have vicarious liability. The action plan that the NCAA has set forth for Division I coaches to follow to avoid any form of disciplinary action resulting from issues with employees starts with education, monitoring, communication and documentation. Clifton and Long (2018) write that, a coach must demonstrate that they adequately monitored the activities of employees under their supervision, actively engaged in rules education activities with employees under their supervision, and actively communicated compliance concerns and reported information that could constitute a NCAA compliance issue. This three-pronged process eliminates plausible deniability as an acceptable excuse for infractions by employees. Ultimately, I feel that this addition is a welcomed improvement to the rulebook. With situations in the relatively recent past such as the issues at Penn State and Ohio State, the NCAA and universities are looking to protect themselves and student-athletes from the negative consequences that come when a part of the athletics’ staff acts inappropriately. I am curious of what the class thinks about this rule. Do you feel that with its inclusion there has been a shift towards head coaches that take a much more active role with investigating potentially unacceptable behavior by their staff? Is there a better way of achieving the same goal? One current item of discussion in professional sports is the support by those leagues for integrity fees if a state legalizes sports gambling. What is an integrity fee? Without legislation requiring them in a state, why would a bookmaker ever agree to this provision?