3 replies to this topic

[Rocketman]

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Amateur status of Olympic athletes became a moot point 20 years ago, and college athletes continue to make a compelling case for compensation, too.
Today in Ohio, almost 10 years after LeBron James got his first Hummer and free throwback jerseys while playing for St. Vincent-St. Mary, the amateur status of elite high school athletes is back in the spotlight after a curious ruling by the Ohio High School Athletic Association.
The controversy started up again thanks to that bastion of corruptness and backroom wheeling and dealing. Yes, I'm talking about cross country.
And yes, I'm kidding, sort of.
Last month, in response to an inquiry from Cincinnati-area cross-country teams headed to a national meet sponsored by Nike, the OHSAA ruled non-seniors cannot accept travel, hotel and meal reimbursement from sponsors of out-of-season competitions. Those who do risk losing their amateur status and become ineligible in that sport.
The updated interpretation of the eight-year-old bylaw could have far-reaching consequences. It could devastate AAU basketball in Ohio. Numerous Junior Olympic volleyball players, and football and baseball prospects invited to elite summer showcases are also potentially at risk.
In basketball, shoe companies frequently pay costs for summer teams that travel the country, and unless the OHSAA changes the rule, which is a possibility this year, those free rides are over for non-seniors.
"I'm sponsored by adidas, and my kids don't pay," said Michael Duncan, a longtime local AAU coach. "That rule is terrible. Kids are poor. It'll hurt them. A lot of these kids get scholarships. They can't afford to go nowhere, and that's why I do it. You go to a big tournament, it will have over 300 scouts there."
OHSAA Bylaw 4-10-2c allows athletes to accept reimbursement from their school or school booster group, as well as from family members or a national sport governing body, such as the U.S. Olympic Committee or USA Basketball. But private sponsor and donors do not fit the bill, even though they have been footing the bill for years right under the OHSAA's nose since the bylaw was added in 2004, in the wake of the James controversy.
Now, a bylaw that was being neither observed nor enforced suddenly faces a stop sign in midstream, and the OHSAA faces the prospect of rewriting a rule that had been ignored.
"At this point, it appears that violations of this particular bylaw have been happening around the state at various levels and in various sports," OHSAA spokesman Tim Stried said in an email response to Plain Dealer questions.
Stried said after the Cincinnati runners inquired, "only then did it come to light that the schools involved, and probably many other schools, had been operating with a different understanding of the bylaw."
In Chardon, junior Nick Elswick ran in a national cross country meet sponsored by Foot Locker in San Diego on Saturday. He was 30th, and more importantly, ninth among non-seniors, which will help his recruiting next year.
Chardon athletic director Doug Snyder said Foot Locker sent Elswick a plane ticket and paid for his hotel. Snyder advised the family to get an invoice from Foot Locker and reimburse the sponsors to ensure Elswick's eligibility next fall. Snyder said a Chardon booster club probably will pick up the tab, which Stried said fits in the bylaw exception.
Snyder strongly favors scrapping the rule because Elswick and others are not violating the amateur spirit of high school athletics. "It seems to me they're not paying him to participate or for winning, its covering his travel expenses, and that's two different things," Snyder said.
Seniors whose seasons have ended are not affected by the rule. Also, the rule does not cross sports. A senior who takes a free trip to play in a post-season all-star football game will be eligible for basketball or track. It's the non-seniors, such as Elswick, who risk eligibility for their upcoming seasons within the same sport.
This will be a hot topic at the next Board of Directors work session Jan. 9 in Columbus. The board will consider whether to scrap or rewrite 4-10-2c and allow private reimbursement, or it could leave the current interpretation in place. It also will look at updating Bylaw 5, which limits "awards" athletes accept to a value of $200, including free shoes and other athletic gear. Bylaw changes must be approved by member schools in a statewide referendum vote.
Leaving the reimbursement rule in place will make a lot of people unhappy, beginning with parents of kids who are trying to get their kids exposure for scholarships. I cringe writing that -- because in many cases, parents and amateur coaches often have inflated expectations about the scholarship pot of gold they think is within their kids' reach.
However, it's certainly their right to go down that road. The question is whether or not they should get free rides in the process.
"This is something we're still trying to get our arms wrapped around," Stried said.

[ADog]

Good article. Never thought about all the corporate sponsers of camps, tourneys etc. If OHSAA does start enforcing this by-law, AAU dies as we know it now as thearticle stated. Maybe that would not be a bad thing but it would be bad for the athletes who do get discovered on the AAU circut. Will be interesting to see which way this goes

[charliesheen]

Nothing wrong with this rule....though I think it needs to be modified. Any individual player in any sport who is asked to play in any "National" level event in ANY sport should be free to go. In the case of the thing that started this....Nike paying for a kid who is the number one cross country runner in Ohio traveling to a "National" meet if fine in my eyes....that kid has earned it...and can receive substantial exposure to colleges because of it. Nike funding an AAU baksetball team from Ohio....that is chosen by the coaches of the team just to win some AAU National Championship...is a bunch of BS. The kids on the AAU basketball team have "earned" nothing....they're selected by a coach, paid by Nike to play a tournament. Two completely different situations. As usual...the OHSAA shows their total lack of knowledge and understanding of the kids playing in their organization and makes a ruling that does much more harm than good to those kids

[Common Sense]

I think this is a FANTASTIC rule. It really gets to the root of what's wrong with amateur sports. We wonder how these poor kids get things??? It starts when they are 10 years old. There's no need for kids to be traveling cross country in their teen age years, so glorified coaches in the AAU ranks can make a living off the backs of these kids, and turn it into an NBA contract...you don't think this coach has their hand out when these kids make it big??
I'd like to see an estimated number on what some of the kids have "earned" in trips, clothes and other things while playing AAU ball.