COLLEGE BASKETBALL / GENE WOJCIECHOWSKI : Why Did They Make a Federal Case Out of It?

The world, former Marquette Coach Al McGuire once observed, is run by C students. Of course, given the continuing fiasco involving the NCAA, the Black Coaches Assn., the National Assn. of Basketball Coaches, the university presidents, the Justice Department and the Congressional Black Caucus, it appears McGuire might have erred on the high side.

What a collection of strange bedfellows this is. Forget about these people being on the same page, most of them aren’t even in the same book.

The thumbnail sketches:

--The NCAA: Bureaucrat central. An organization composed partly of well-meaning professionals who care deeply about college athletics and partly of arrogant nimrods who don’t have a clue.

--The NABC: If you own a whistle and can diagram an inbounds play, you can join the NABC. Lots of members, lots of position papers, zero clout. In recent years the NABC has tried to assert itself, but without much success. It has all the bite of an old man who forgot his dentures on the bedside table.

--The Black Coaches Assn.: Passionate, but clumsy, the BCA has become the new power broker. Tired of watching the NABC get nowhere with the NCAA and university presidents, the BCA decided to take the initiative, threatened to boycott, and look where it got it: involved with the Feds, which is never a good thing.

--The university presidents: The grand poohbahs of college athletics. Some of them have actually seen a basketball game, while others think the Atlantic Coast Conference is a four-day seminar on seaweed management. They currently own a stranglehold on the NCAA cost-containment legislation that counts, including the controversial 13-scholarship limit for men’s basketball.

--The Justice Department: A nice place to visit on a Washington field trip, but you don’t want any of its officials involved in your business. The department’s Community Relations Service has been designated as the mediator and arbitrator between the coaches and NCAA. Good luck.

--The Congressional Black Caucus: Politicians. Need we say more?

A FINE MESS--PART II

Until the Justice Department intervened last weekend, the BCA was set to call for a widespread boycott of games. Rudy Washington, the executive director of the BCA, described the situation as “nuclear.” USC Coach George Raveling, one of the BCA’s more prominent members, invoked images of slavery. Temple Coach John Chaney, another BCA spokesman, accused everyone of not caring about the issues.

The problem is, no one knew what the issues were.

Was it the presidents’ refusal to restore the number of available scholarships from 13 to 14? Was it the alleged betrayal of the coaches by the presidents during the recent NCAA convention? Was it the BCA’s concerns involving issues related to minorities? Was it a question of economics? Was it a question of ethics? Of being left out of the decision-making loop? Was it all of the above?

Even now, nearly a week removed from the planned boycott, there remains an obvious lack of unity among the coaches and an equally embarrassing lack of understanding and compassion among some NCAA administrators and university presidents.

This from Rhode Island Coach Al Skinner, a BCA member: “When the 14th scholarship was not reinstated, you kind of threw your hands up and said, ‘What else do we have to do in order to be listened to, in order to be taken seriously?’ ”

The BCA’s answer was to essentially ditch the NABC and threaten to boycott games. Thus, began the debate.

“I’m not exactly sure what the (BCA’s) tactics are,” said St. Joseph’s Coach John Griffin, whose school helped sponsor the legislation that called for a return to 14 scholarships. “I appreciate the calling of the attention to the issue. (The threatened boycott) was courageous and somewhat risky.

“I think it may be better if it was a united front with all coaches. Both black and white coaches have concerns about minority players.”

The bottom line is this: The talk of BCA-sponsored boycotts isn’t the result of failed legislation concerning the 14th scholarship. The coaches are smarter than that--we think.

For the BCA to walk out because of one fewer scholarship would have been a public relations disaster. According to the NCAA, only 122 of 288 Division I teams (the NCAA doesn’t include Ivy League members) had the then-allowable 14 scholarship players on their rosters last season. In fact, the national average was 12.54. The season before, it was 13.0.

“Personally, I don’t think 14 (scholarship players) is necessary,” Louisiana State Coach Dale Brown said.

Of course, that doesn’t stop some coaches (i.e. Louisville’s Denny Crum) from complaining about not having enough players to conduct practice or overcome injuries or illness. Our suggestion: Someone needs to explain to Crum the value of walk-ons, America’s practice fodder.

And please, enough with the speeches about how the scholarship reduction lessens the number of opportunities for players, especially minority players.

First of all, since when was an athletic scholarship an inalienable right? Second, the reduction wasn’t limited to basketball. All Division I men’s sports underwent a 10% across-the-board cut. Third, statistics show that teams survive quite nicely with 13 scholarship players. Fourth, it could have been worse. At some schools, scholarships for minor sports were eliminated altogether. Fifth, this idea of precious opportunities loses a little steam when you consider how many scholarships are given to foreign players. For instance, eight of the nine teams in the Atlantic 10 Conference have players from foreign countries. So, if a coach has to choose between a star foreign prospect or an inner-city recruit of lesser talent, whom do you think he’ll pick?

Exactly.

A FINE MESS--PART III

St. Joseph’s Griffin insists that the main issue isn’t about money. And he’s right.

“In the context of an athletic department budget, one scholarship is a drop in a bucket,” he said.

Duke Coach Mike Krzyzewski insists that the main issue isn’t about race. And he’s right.

“The main ingredient in this whole thing is the student-athlete,” he said. “We need to take care of the student-athlete.”

And if they don’t? LSU’s Brown made this prediction: “I think someday, and this is looking into the crystal ball, it would not surprise me . . . that somebody’s (going to be) getting ready for a Final Four game, the stadium is filled, the television cameras are on and the kids say, ‘Hey, it’s time we quit going under the sham of amateurism. We’re not going out until we negotiate.’

“I think then you’re going to see some quick-moving (NCAA) people.”

In the meantime, the coaches and the university presidents need to kiss and make up. The sooner, the better, too.

“There’s an undercurrent here of a bigger issue,” Griffin said. “It’s unfortunate that it got to that point of who’s running college athletics. Let’s concede that college presidents are running college athletics. Let’s agree to that.

“But the whole point of this was to help the college presidents make informed decisions. And they interpreted this information in such a personal, kind of attacking way, that it degenerated into this Tarzan-like beating of the chest and ‘We’re calling the shots.’ ”

Added North Carolina Coach Dean Smith, who offered this suggestion to the presidents: “Just talk with the (coaches) like they would in the history department. If they had a problem, they’d talk to the faculty people in history.”

The coaches--both in the BCA and NABC--thought they had a deal with the presidents at the NCAA convention. According to Krzyzewski, the coaches were given “an assurance” that the powerful Presidents Commission, which was headed by Greg O’Brien, “would look favorably” at reinstating the 14 scholarships.

“What happened at the convention,” said Krzyzewski, “was that Greg O’Brien spoke passionately against the 14 scholarships. So whether a promise was made, I doubt that could happen. But an assurance of support was made.”

Or as Kansas Coach Roy Williams said: “They took all the things they wanted from us and gave us nothing in return. I think we did our normal bloodbath.”

A FINE MESS--THE FINAL CHAPTER

If nothing else, at least a boycott was averted. A boycott would have made for great headlines, but like all movements, there would have been a price to pay.

In all likelihood, it wouldn’t have been a unified effort. Worse yet, there would have been further division between the BCA and the NABC, as well as the coaches and presidents.

Oklahoma’s Billy Tubbs said he wouldn’t have joined the boycott. “I’m not going to walk off the court and leave my players on the court all alone,” he said. “I have to fulfill their needs first.”

In fact, who knows how many prominent white coaches would have stiffed the BCA? UCLA’s Jim Harrick sounded relieved that he didn’t have to make that decision. The same goes for Williams and also Krzyzewski, who later instructed his Duke players not to discuss the boycott with reporters. The reason: He didn’t fully understand the inner workings of the planned action, so how could they?

Then again, that could be posturing. Despite his public proclamations, Tubbs supposedly contacted the BCA about joining the organization. And while they might do so reluctantly, it wouldn’t surprise us if Williams, Krzyzewski, Smith and other high-profile white coaches joined a BCA boycott. According to a BCA official, that walkout will take place within three weeks if Justice Department intervention doesn’t produce satisfactory progress with the NCAA and university presidents.

There is a danger to all of this. The boycott repercussions could be swift and painful.

“What you have here is the presidents of the universities run the NCAA,” said McGuire, who moonlights as a college basketball analyst for CBS. “The NCAA works--and this is a utopia I’m talking about--at the convenience of the presidents of the universities. So, it becomes the coaches taking on their bosses. What are you, crazy? You don’t take on your boss.

“You can take on your boss if you’re John (Thompson of Georgetown), if you’re Mike (Krzyzewski), if you’re Dean (Smith)--if you have one word. You know one word? Like a real pro, an NBA star: Michael, Larry, Shaq. It’s beautiful if you’re a one-name person. But if you’re two names, be careful. Solidarity’s beautiful at the union hall. It’s not too nice at home because you’ve got to pay the rent.”

USC’s Raveling would survive the fallout, McGuire said. So would have fellow BCA members Nolan Richardson of Arkansas and Chaney of Temple. But what about less-established black coaches such as Wyoming’s Joby Wright or Air Force’s Reggie Minton?

“Raveling, Thompson, Richardson, Chaney . . . they’ve cleared the trees,” McGuire said. “But can you imagine Reggie Minton going in and telling the general he’s going to boycott? They’d send him to Wiesbaden, Germany. They’d just move him out.”

Here’s hoping it never comes to that. Here’s hoping for some A students.

The Top 10

As selected by staff writer Gene Wojciechowski.

No.Team Record 1. UCLA 11-0 2. Duke 11-1 3. Kansas 16-2 4. Arkansas 12-2 5. North Carolina 13-3 6. Purdue 15-1 7. Connecticut 16-1 8. Louisville 12-2 9. Arizona 13-2 10. Indiana 10-3

Waiting list: Kentucky (13-3), Massachusetts (13-2), Wisconsin (12-2), St. Louis (14-0), Temple (9-2).

* RANK NO PRIVILEGE: Six members of the top 25 were defeated Wednesday night, including No. 3 Arkansas and No. 4 North Carolina. C4