Bleid Sports' CEO Rob Blair Responds to A Sea of Blue
by Glenn Logan on Nov 28, 2011 1:38 PM EST
in Kentucky Wildcats Basketball
Email
PrintThe other day, I wrote this article critical of Bleid Sports in general and their CEO, Rob Blair in particular regarding the high school pre-season tournament cast as the "Rumble at Rupp" which had to be moved to Lexington Christian Academy because the NCAA refused to grant a wavier of Bylaw 13.11.1.8.
Afterwards, we exchanged emails on the matter and he thoughtfully gave me permission to reproduce an email he sent to his coaches regarding the matter as a way of responding to my commentary. I have reproduced the email he sent to the coaches, complete and unedited, after the jump. The email contains information that I did not know at that time of my article. The comments he made to me were not included in that permission, so they will remain private.
Read Mr. Blair's email immediately following the jump.
Coaches,Most have you have heard, or have had to live with the quick change of game venue. I wanted to update everyone on the progress and the events that led up to Wednesday, November 24.NCAA has the rule (created in April) that says,"Any non-scholastic event cannot be held on a collegiate practice floor/playing facility." It is rule 2009 100a.What this means: That a non scholastic (i.e. school camp, AAU, all-star game) cannot be held at the Rupp Area's of the world. I understand the reasoning for the rule. It helps get rid of many of the shadiness in collegiate atheltics.There is a key word... "non-scholastic". Scholastic by definition pertains to an event in which scholastic teams (i.e. school teams) compete in a sanctioned or recognizable scholastic game. Our consulted events contain scholastic teams, state association approved, national federation of high school approved. The events have school hosts. When I found out about the ruling, I contacted the NCAA directly (as I was asked to do by a member of the NCAA focus group). In turn, they gave me the "official" ruling that the events we are involved with are considered scholastic. The ruling/case number: 185-588.We, then proceed to book venues based on this interpretation and case number. Many collegiate facilities and athletic directors received the same approval based on our case number. Rupp Arena received the same on November 21 (after the NCAA mentioned a possible violation for UK). Rupp received a case number that says that the original case number: 185-588 is indeed accurate. Clearly, the rule interpretation did not change from June.
The NCAA enforced their new interpretation that the event was non scholastic (not based on any schools present in the event) on Wednesday, November 24, at 10:05 pm.The waiver was asked for by the University of Kentucky due to the facts that the NCAA already approved the events through the case number given to Bleid Sports and Rupp Arena. The NCAA denied. As UK should, they would not allow us in Rupp Arena due to the NCAA's new decision on the event. We have zero interest in sanctioning UK, but the NCAA decision hurt many kids.
My frustration: The event is scholastic. Bleid Sports was granted approval. Rupp Arena made sure that the approval in June was still valid. AND the NCAA still (36 hours before the event) changed their decision. This is unfair to the schools, the players, the coaches, and the fans.We did our best to honor the games, by working diligently to secure another venue (albeit not Rupp), secure free food, MVP awards, Rupp Arena tours, etc. We cannot make up for the NCAA changing their decision at the last minute, a decision that we consider very poor. However, we do want to do our best to alleviate the pain suffered by countless teams. We are continuing to fight for the future events. But want it to be fair for the schools as well. If the schools still choose to participate, we will secure Freedom Hall for the Yum event. Unfortunately, the only venues comparable near Rupp Arena are Transylvania and Georgetown. Two great facilities, but not many in the country compare to Rupp Arena.We would love to honor your games, and will do our best to make sure the event makes money for your programs, and that the event is an experience for your schools. We do not hold any teams to their contracts, but will honor ours.I will answer all questions on Monday. I have an event Sunday with many wonderful coaches at LCA. I want to thank all of the coaches, fans, and players for making the event on Friday doable and enjoyable. It is their resolve and good character that make a bad weekend and a poor change of decision by the NCAA worth the effort in changing last minute.God Bless all my Kentucky coaches. I wish I had better news, but just know that I will continue to fight for you.Rob BlairPresident/CEO325 West Main St.3rd FloorLexington, KY 40507502.751.4791 (Direct)859.225.3458 (Fax)
17 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The NCAA changed its own approval at the last minue?
SHOCKING. /sarcasm.
Where have we seen this before. . .
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
--O.W.
Not exactly.
You see, we don’t know that anything changed. The NCAA made a ruling, which I haven’t seen and Mr. Blair didn’t provide. He claims it allowed him to proceed, but from what I’ve seen in the past, I’m unwilling to take that on faith.
Second, the NCAA did not rule on anything except UK’s request for a wavier of the rule. Obviously, UK would not need a wavier if the rule were being complied with, especially if there were a previous ruling explicitly allowing the tournament. So something in this matter smells ever so slightly of cheese to me.
If UK had received the earlier okay as Blair says, there was no reason whatsoever why they should have requested a wavier of the rule — the tournament had already been explicitly approved, according to my reading of Mr. Blair’s email, and a waiver not only wouldn’t be necessary, it would be counterproductive. Why waive a rule that doesn’t affect the tournament in question?
So I think there is more to this than he’s telling me, but I have no reason to believe he is making anything up, and I’m not saying he is. I suspect that there is a misunderstanding somewhere, either on his part or on UK’s part. It is also entirely possible that the NCAA just changed its mind at the last minute – that wouldn’t shock me.
Sadly, we really don’t know enough to make an informed judgment. But I felt Mr. Blair deserved the opportunity to tell his side, but remember — this is only his side, and there is another.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
The difference I see
is that UK asked the question. Same question, asked by three different entities, gets two different answers? I don’t know. Very interesting.
It says Bleid had the earlier approval, then Rupp had an approval (or confirmantion fo the earlier approval), but not UK. If UK was not (is not) involved, they would not have had an earlier approval. So it was not until UK asked for clarification that the NCAA changed their minds. At least that is what I get from the letter above.
Kentucky Basketball - The Reason for Living
*confirmation of
SB Nation continues to screw up my typing and then posts it before it can be edited.
Kentucky Basketball - The Reason for Living
My comment
was mostly hyperbole (mostly).
I know little to nothing about the situation, but if the letter reflects a true statement of the facts, it’s just another example of inconsistent and whimsical decision making by the NCAA.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
--O.W.
by blbskue on Nov 28, 2011 9:03 PM EST via iPhone app up reply actions
Maybe I am reading this wrong but
my interpretation of the timeline based on that letter was:
June – Bleid Sports is given NCAA approval their events are scholastic
Unknown Date – NCAA says their is a possible rule violation for UK
November 21 – Rupp gets NCAA confirmation the event is scholastic
November 24 @10:05pm – NCAA changes ruling, event is non-scholastic
November 24-26(?) – UK requests a waiver which is denied
From my reading the waiver was requested after the rule change: Rupp requested NCAA confirmation the event was scholastic because the NCAA said that UK had a possible rules violation; Rupp received that confirmation so no waiver was necessary at that time. Which makes sense, why would UK need a waiver for something ruled as a scholastic event? Again, this is just based on my reading of the letter and I could have read it wrong.
If the NCAA did indeed rule on 11.21 that the event was scholastic and then re-rule on 11.24 @10:05 pm that it was non-scholastic then that sounds pretty shady. I would like to know what happened or possibly came to light between Monday and Wednesday or if someone higher up on the food chain suddenly decided to step in.
..only two sides?
Seems like the NCAA can come up with two sides to any ruling,… and once again they did.
Does UK own “Rupp Arena” or are they just the main tenant? the reason I asked is there was a reference in there to using the YUM, which I thought I heard UL was a tenant, not the owner.
UK is just the main tenant.
But the rule explicitly defines the relationship it affects. Check my earlier post for discussion of the rule.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
For me, it's a bit easier
the fact that there is a promoter involved in a “scholastic” event, non-state tourney, nor just a group of HS coaches getting together; makes the whole thing shady. Bottom line, I trust Sandy Bell. Whatever she says, as far as I’m concerned, goes.
Also, I will say this....
I don’t care what reason the NCAA has, they damn sure shouldn’t be allowed to make a decision like this that effects a local economy or the chance for local businesses to make money. Rupp Arena, surrounding shops and restaurants, etc.
By that reasoning ...
… they can never make a decision, like placing teams off limits for the NCAA tournament, that affects economic activity.
Are you sure that’s what you meant?
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Glenn Logan on Nov 29, 2011 12:18 PM EST up reply actions
No, that's the exception
The NCAA should have the power to do with NCAA schools what is in their purview. This is a high school event. Or per-collegiate, so they should keep their nose out of it. Now, if they want to keep UK coaches and the like from attending, and/or the HS kids from visiting campus, as well as UK involvment then that is all fine and dandy. But none of these HS kids are college athletes. UK is (or should not be) involved. So then it is a question of Rupp Arena is a business, they are renting their space, local businesses benefit and the NCAA should keep out of it.
Now, the NCAA also has a certain amount of say in AAU and recruiting and all of that and that is also fine. And, as I said earlier, for me, the fact that there is a promoter involved fails the smell test for me. That said, this seems more of a situation where the main issue is that the NCAA has made a decision that effects the local economy rather than anything else.
NCAA≈NLRB
Further evidence of the bureaucratic nature of the NCAA and their tendency to capricious decisions; not unlike the NLRB decision to ban Boeing from constructing a plant in South Carolina. The argument can be and has been made that the bureaucrats are only exercising the power granted them by their patrons but as we all know that frequently isn’t the case. Far too often the primary purpose is to further ingrain the power of the bureaucrats, or as Balzac so succinctly put it:
"Bureaucracy is a giant mechanism operated by pygmies."
"In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
So....
does this change anything in regards to your original article?
Any change in terms of bullet points or tone?
(I spent a few minutes trying to figure this out for myself, but couldn’t…)
Not really.
Most of these facts were known to me. About the only things that I didn’t know (assuming Blair’s email is accurate) was that the original ruling was issued in June, and I had heard it was April. What I also did not know at the time was that UK had asked for a wavier and been denied, and I assumed that they had simply talked with the NCAA and the NCAA had told them that the tournament could run afoul of the rule. That may be essentially the same thing, but not quite.
Here’s the part that perplexes me:
The waiver was asked for by the University of Kentucky due to the facts that the NCAA already approved the events through the case number given to Bleid Sports and Rupp Arena. The NCAA denied.
Why would UK need to ask for a wavier for a rule that it was patently not breaking? Normally, you wouldn’t — no need, the matter is settled. But for some reason, UK did that, which tells me that there is probably a lot more to this than perhaps even Blair knows. Why would UK ask for a wavier it clearly didn’t need?
Another thing — if the event had been ruled “scholastic,” as Blair claims, it clearly isn’t captured by the rule, so UK could simply ignore the wavier denial with relative comfort — after all, the NCAA may have simply decided a wavier wasn’t necessary, so why grant one? The NCAA could not rationally claim a rules violation without a clear reversal of its prior ruling, something which, despite Blair’s claims to the contrary, isn’t obvious from anything we’ve seen.
Blair claimed the NCAA changed their decision, but nowhere does he specifically say the event was ruled “nonsholastic,” or describe that the wavier denial to UK was based on anything specific. He implies that, but I don’t think that’s necessarily a fair assumption, especially not having seen the original ruling.
My suspicion is the original ruling was sufficiently ambiguous (as the NCAA is wont to be), and not at all as clear cut as Blair suggests. UK understandably didn’t feel comfortable with going ahead without and explicit wavier.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
[UPDATED 01/18/2012]
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
