SHINE

It is not much of a secret that I am a baseball fan, or that I worked in minor league baseball during the early part of my career. I was fortunate along the way to meet a lot of really great players, former players, and even knew a couple of Major League umpires. I worked with a future AL batting champion and a few major league pitchers during my minor league administrative career and there is one thing that everyone could agree on: it was easy to adapt to different strike zones as long as an umpire was consistent with his calls for both sides. What drove everyone crazy was inconsistency in the zones and the calls. Tonight, I have to think Oregon center N'Faly Dante must feel the same about the NCAA following their decision to deny him a sixth year of eligibility.

The NCAA's ruling on Dante's eligibility request stands in stark contrast to the decision made for former Ohio State and Harvard forward Seth Towns, who was recently granted an eighth year of eligibility. Towns, who voluntarily sat out one season, has been given the green light to extend his college career, while Dante, who played just six games as a sophomore due to a torn ACL during the 2020-2021 season, finds his request denied.

Towns' case, admittedly, is unique in its own right. He has battled numerous injuries throughout his college career, which began in the 2016-2017 season at Harvard. Despite taking a year off to recover and transfer, the NCAA ruled in favor of granting him additional time, citing his medical hardships as a justifiable reason. Towns' perseverance and the nature of his injuries were deemed significant enough to warrant extended eligibility.

In comparison, Dante's situation appears equally, if not more, deserving of leniency. The Oregon center's sophomore season was abruptly halted after just six games due to a devastating ACL injury. Like Towns, Dante's collegiate career has been marred by health issues, limiting his playing time and development. Yet, the NCAA's decision to deny Dante an additional year leaves many questioning the consistency of their rulings.

The contrasting outcomes highlight a broader issue within the NCAA's governance. The body, responsible for regulating college athletics, often finds itself under scrutiny for perceived inconsistencies in its decision-making processes. Athletes, coaches, and fans alike struggle to understand the criteria used to determine eligibility extensions, leading to frustrations similar to those felt by baseball players dealing with fluctuating strike zones.

For Dante, the denial is a significant blow. His potential for further development and showcasing his talents on the court is now cut short, impacting his future prospects in professional basketball. The decision also raises concerns about the NCAA's commitment to supporting student-athletes dealing with severe injuries and their recovery journeys.

In contrast, Towns' extended eligibility offers him a renewed opportunity to compete and succeed, a chance many believe should equally be afforded to Dante. The NCAA's role, ideally, should be to provide a level playing field and ensure fair treatment for all athletes. However, the disparate rulings in these two cases suggest a need for more transparent and consistent guidelines.

As the NCAA continues to navigate the complexities of college sports, the call for clarity and fairness grows louder. For athletes like N'Faly Dante, whose careers hinge on these critical decisions, consistency isn't just preferable — it's essential.

As I was writing this, the lyrics to the Collective Soul hit ‘Shine’ popped into my head:

Give me a word Give me a sign Show me where to look Tell me, what will I find? What will I find?

Lay me on the ground And fly me in the sky Show me where to look Tell me, what will I find? What will I find?

Words. Signs. Where to look. What to find. None of that can be deciphered when attempting to figure out the NCAA rulings. The lack of consistency, the lack of credibly portraying that their mission is to support student athletes is laughable at times. The lack of clarity is more than just frustrating – it is a clarion call that the time is now for change. The ruling was wrong and only one person will really suffer.

Does the NCAA even care? It seems not. So much for their bold mission.