A change in the letter-of-intent

The following is certainly an interesting subject but the article is not as enlightening as we would like. We disagree that players have the option of heading to Europe -- this is viable for maybe one or two kids per year. Plus, where is the NCAA on this -- you know -- looking out for the best interests of its student-athlete (sarcasm dripping)? Is the National Letter of Intent Policy and Review Committee truly acting on its own and, if so, what spurred the change?

New letter of intent could be bad for the NCAA, too
Eamonn Brennan
October 2, 2009

If you pay close attention to the college sports world, then you already know: Yesterday, the NCAA put the kibosh on "any advance conditions" in the letters of intent athletes sign with universities. These letters typically end the recruitment process -- unless, say, the coach in question changes schools after an athlete has signed his letter. Before, an athlete could add an addendum in his letter that stated he was free to leave the school if the coach also left. No more.

I'm not going to rant about this, because it's almost not worth it. Why this is a bad thing is entirely self-evident: Under the new rule, while coaches may run from school to school at will (and get paid large sums of money to do so), athletes (who are paid nothing for the entertainment they provide) are bound to their school no matter what. How is this fair? Answer: It's not.

Go here for the remainder.