| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
baseballismygame
14 Posts |
 Posted - 12/18/2011 : 20:32:13
|
| Heard a rumor that colleges are now testing prospects. is this true/legal? |
|
|
jacjacatk
154 Posts |
|
|
Gwinnett
791 Posts |
Posted - 12/18/2011 : 22:30:24
|
| Honestly they should start it in high school. |
 |
|
|
baseballismygame
14 Posts |
Posted - 12/18/2011 : 23:23:56
|
| This says nothing about PROSPECTS, just student athletes, but it does say incoming freshman aren't subject to testing. If the rumor is true it means an ncaa rule change. |
|
|
|
jacjacatk
154 Posts |
Posted - 12/19/2011 : 11:07:41
|
I'm not seeing where incoming freshmen are exempt, except from the summer testing program, but maybe I'm missing it. In any event, doesn't look like the most thorough program since at the Div I level they test 18 football players and 8 athletes from another sport in each testing round, with fewer players tested at Div II and III, and even fewer depending on the nature of the football program at the school.
From a brief Google search, it appears that there's nothing stopping schools from testing athletes at the HS level, so I can't see what would prevent the NCAA from doing so, at least as soon as the individual has actually become a student (not sure how that would be determined, but presumably the moment they start taking classes would at least work if they're already on a team). Also, it appears most of the law on the subject has to do with public institutions. There are at least some private HS that drug-test all students, which wouldn't fly at a public HS currently (though Linn State Technical College in MO is trying to get an all-student policy in place, and is currently being sued, so who knows what may eventually come of that). |
|
|
|
baseballismygame
14 Posts |
Posted - 12/19/2011 : 14:46:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by jacjacatk
I'm not seeing where incoming freshmen are exempt, except from the summer testing program, but maybe I'm missing it. In any event, doesn't look like the most thorough program since at the Div I level they test 18 football players and 8 athletes from another sport in each testing round, with fewer players tested at Div II and III, and even fewer depending on the nature of the football program at the school.
From a brief Google search, it appears that there's nothing stopping schools from testing athletes at the HS level, so I can't see what would prevent the NCAA from doing so, at least as soon as the individual has actually become a student (not sure how that would be determined, but presumably the moment they start taking classes would at least work if they're already on a team). Also, it appears most of the law on the subject has to do with public institutions. There are at least some private HS that drug-test all students, which wouldn't fly at a public HS currently (though Linn State Technical College in MO is trying to get an all-student policy in place, and is currently being sued, so who knows what may eventually come of that).
Yes, private HS are allowed to test their students, but can a college coach test a player he is recruiting in order to determine whether the player is fit for his school. If the student does not attend the school, does the coach/program have the right to do so? |
|
|
|
baseballparentof2
22 Posts |
Posted - 12/19/2011 : 15:46:28
|
| My son plays college baseball and yes they have randomly drug tested the athletes. |
|
|
|
jacjacatk
154 Posts |
Posted - 12/19/2011 : 15:53:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by baseballismygameYes, private HS are allowed to test their students, but can a college coach test a player he is recruiting in order to determine whether the player is fit for his school. If the student does not attend the school, does the coach/program have the right to do so?
FWIW, public HS can test athletes (I think the legal requirement is that the student be involved in a competitive extracurricular activity). I don't think there's anything preventing a private NCAA institution from testing all incoming students as a part of the admissions process, but it appears that a public institution would have a tougher time doing so as things currently stand. The distinction between public and private universities/colleges may be grayer than HS as well, given the variety of ways in which Federal funding gets used for higher education.
The existing NCAA testing guidelines don't appear to have anything to say about testing prospective student-athletes, but I likewise don't see any reason why the NCAA couldn't decide to do so if they wanted to. Given the relative laxity of their current testing regime, I'm guessing cost is a significant factor, so I wouldn't be expecting them to start testing prospective student-athletes any time soon. It's not clear to me whether the existing NCAA testing guidelines prohibit member institutions from more broadly testing on their own, though. If they don't, and a school wanted to test incoming student athletes as a requirement for admission, I can't see anything legally stopping from them doing so (since HS can already do this). I suppose at that point, the student would be free to refuse and have his admission judged solely on the academic merits (assuming the school in question didn't test non-athletes). |
|
|
|
baseballismygame
14 Posts |
Posted - 12/19/2011 : 16:48:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by baseballparentof2
My son plays college baseball and yes they have randomly drug tested the athletes.
I'm more than well aware that the players are tested. My question concerns the prospects (i.e. high school players being recruited). |
|
|
|
baseballismygame
14 Posts |
Posted - 12/20/2011 : 16:42:40
|
| If incoming freshman are not allowed to be tested, how is it legal to test prospects? I heard an ivy league school did this and was wondering if its a violation. |
|
|
|
jacjacatk
154 Posts |
Posted - 12/21/2011 : 00:22:01
|
FWIW, the NCAA regs just say that they don't test incoming freshman, not that they can't (in other words, they've decided not to, not been prohibited from doing so).
As I said above, I don't see anything in the NCAA materials that would prohibit a member school from implementing more comprehensive testing on their own, and legal precedent would appear to be on the side of both public and private institutions to freely test all student-athletes (and quite possibly for private institutions to test all applicants). If the NCAA regs don't in fact prohibit schools from more thorough testing, there's no reason I can see that they couldn't require prospective recruits to submit to testing as a condition of being admitted, at least to the extent that the admission process requires acceptance into the athletic program (so in the case of scholarship athletes or athletes who might not meet normal admission requirements).
For a definitive answer, you'd have to ask the NCAA directly, of course, but I can't imagine someone somewhere wouldn't be suing them if this is going on and wasn't kosher. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
ncaa drug testing
