NCAA to bloggers: Don't post too often

The NCAA this week announced a formal program limiting how often bloggers with media credentials can update their blog while attending championship college events.

The sports governing body set blogging limits for each sport. For example, those at football games can update their blogs three times per quarter and once at halftime. For basketball, bloggers can post five times per half, once at halftime and twice per overtime period.

The policy even sets rules for water polo (three per quarter, once at halftime), bowling (10 blog posts per session) and fencing (10 per session).

The move is already garnering the predicted outrage. It reminds me of the music industry trying to hold on desperately to old business models in a fundamentally new era.

This isn't the first time the NCAA has butted heads with the blogosphere. In June, a sportswriter from the Louisville, Ky. Courier-Journal was ejected from a college baseball game for, you guessed it, blogging. Indeed, I'm sure there are folks at the NCAA that see its latest efforts as a reasoned compromise, but I think it just shows how out of touch they are.

If I were the NCAA and there was someone passionate enough to deliver a blow-by-blow account of a college fencing match, I'd want to encourage that, maybe even buy them a non-alcoholic beer.

For those who want to check out the guidelines for themselves, the rules are posted in a PDF file on the NCAA's Web site.

[syberghost]

Non-alcoholic?

Even better; give them free alcoholic beer. Then they'll be too drunk to blog after a while, but still think you did them a favor.

[dmm]

Most college bloggers under 21

and therefore not eligible for regular beer.

[menotbug]

retarded

So the NAACAA or whatever wants to 'retard' the voice of the
people?

Stupid.

[insacron]

by or buy?

Just curious if the writer of this article was really going to "by"
someone a non-alcoholic beer, or if by chance they were going to
"buy" a blogger one?

[georgiarat]

Problem is the President!

I have read that since Miles Brand became President of the
NCAA he has assumed he is a dictator. Many believe the
organization has done nothing but decline under his leadership
and will continue to decline in the values that should be
important to the institutions as long as he is head of the
organization. It no longer is really concerned with Athletics but
with protecting the major conferences (no playoff system!) and
pushing for social causes (not part of the NCAA by-laws) etc.

Get a competent leader and you will get a competent
organization. Keep what many feel is an incompetent leader
and the organization will continue to decline.

[gerrrg]

Violation of free speech?

Well, that depends on what sort of institution the NCAA is. The NFL has absolute control over what the public can see and hear. A public institution doesn't enjoy that sort of control.

What IS the NCAA? Is it a mutually accepted agreement between all schools, or is it a mandated, monopolistic entity? I think Congress needs to pull the reins on this one.

[td001]

Yes, a violation of free speech

No the NFL doesnt; it is a free speech issue and their attempt to own "descriptions" of the game is a clear first amendment violation. I suppose they can kick whomever they want out of the game itself, but so long as my description is transformative in some way (Ie not verbatum repeating the play by play) they will fail in any attempt to stop you.

[Brushbeater]

What does one expect from those knuckleheads?

Remember, the NCAA is the same bunch that says "just fine" to a
Native American mascot, dressed in full regalia, jamming a flaming
spear into the ground at FSU while at the same time stating that
two little feathers attached to a W&M logo is "hostile and offensive"
at William and Mary. And to effect their misguided social agenda,
they hold the student athlete hostage. Amen to the comment that
the President of the NCAA is at fault!

[Ina Fried]

It's fixed

Thanks for spotting. -Ina

[Mergatroid Mania]

Morons

Sometimes I have to wonder if it's really true that the people who put a man on the moon, and probes on mars are actually members of the same species as people who do things like this.

How can it be?