Tuesday, 20 March 2012 4,787 Views / 206 Comments
It began on December 2011, wherein a slugfest of sorts ignited a whole string of sanctions to those involved, considered by many as draconian.
And a rule which has been deemed controversial, written since the league’s inception, exploited by an institution after 28 years of failure to win a crown, as a means to assert its mastery over its fellow members.
I asked my partners to weigh-in on the issues.
Were the imposed sanctions on both teams – San Beda College and San Sebastian College-Recoletos fair?
Coach Jude Roque, NCAA Game Analyst- The sanctions on both coaches are too harsh. They are taking away 2 years of livelihood from these coaches. Perhaps 1 Round would have been enough. The suspensions on SBC players are absolutely unfair, especially those on Adeogun and Armon. Why suspend them for 1 year? Were they involved in the brawl? If yes, how was their involvement? did they throw a punch or kick? And if the NCAA investigating team says “yes”, they have to show evidence or name their witnesses.
If they can’t, then their decisions are truly filled with malice. It becomes an obvious conspiracy to weaken the chances of SBC by the other NCAA schools. Therefore, unfair. Now, if they say that Adeogun is being suspended because it all started when he mistook the chants as a racial slur against him, this is again clearly ridiculous as there was no way he would have known that it would eventually cause a brawl.
Charlie Cuna, PBA Anchor-I believe it is more than just the Coach Gorayeb incident, but what the committee may have deemed as a pattern of misbehaviour on the part of Coach Lim and SBC. Top of my head reaction though, is that two (2) years is too much. One season perhaps could have been enough to make the point, hooliganism cannot be tolerated.
Assuming appeals were not granted, how much do the other NCAA teams benefit from a weakened San Beda squad?
Coach Jude Roque, NCAA Game Analyst- Of course all teams would benefit greatly without Adeogun and Armon, and the graduation of Marcelo, Lanete and Villahermosa. But especially SSC and Letran. Without all these guys, plus Frankie, the Red Lions would probably land at No. 3 at best. This would mean having to beat the top 2 teams twice in the semis.
Charlie Cuna, PBA Anchor- All teams benefit immensely. Remember, SBC is number 1, so if they are not as powerful, the top ranking is up for grabs, especially for top tier teams like SSC and Letran. For the others, it’s a chance to upset SBC, which has dominated them in the past. The field is more level, so to speak. But, the question that must first be answered is, “Is SBC really weakened?” In any case, a weakened Lion’s bite can still hurt.
Do you agree with the proposed move by the NCAA to ban foreign players?
Coach Jude Roque, NCAA Game Analyst – The ban on foreign players again has motives written all over it. Obviously, this is being cooked to prevent SBC from further recruiting dominant imports, like Ekwe, Daniel and Adeogun. They think the only way to stop the Red Lions from winning titles is to ban imports. They say the ban will level the playing fields. I say the exact opposite. This ban may affect SBC’s chances shortly after it takes effect.
But in the long run, SBC will benefit more. It has the best resources and funding among all NCAA teams, and the strongest backing of the alumni. This means that SBC has the best chance of recruiting the best local players. If all NCAA teams are eyeing a particular player, chances are, he would prioritize SBC over other schools in the same league.
So how does this make it a level playing field? Whereas, if a school with a meager budget that can’t recruit top players suddenly gets lucky to recruit a tall and skillful foreign student, whose only desire is to get a free college education, it has a chance of beating the better funded teams.
Having foreign recruits can level the playing field, not the other way around. Besides, it would be racial to prevent foreign students from playing in the NCAA. All students, whether local or foreign, must be extended the same privileges.
Why change now when it has been the rule of the NCAA from the very beginning to allow foreign athletes? In fact, for many years, the NCAA allowed a team to have up to 40% of its roster with foreign students. It only changed after Sam Ekwe dominated the league for 3 years.
Charlie Cuna, PBA Anchor- I wrote in one of my articles before that if a foreigner is a student in good standing, then he should be able to play. Refer to http://www.inboundpass.com/2010/11/19/ban-this/ please.