Josh,

First, let me say, thanks for addressing this topic.

Second, let me just say this -- a blog is not in any sense a rebroadcast. I think you and I both know this. I have blogged NCAA championship events before and our site has blogged NCAA baseball championship events in the past three weeks. (That is, when there was internet access in Fox Cities Stadium, which was rare.)

If this is the wave of the future, the NCAA is going way off base here. Where was ESPN's competing blog? I didn't see it.

I agree with Josh. Live blogging does not deprive ESPN of revenue or, for that matter, any other outlet that pays the NCAA for broadcast rights. What sports fan would opt to read a live blog rather than attend a game, view it on TV or listen to it on the radio? Broadcasters have the ability to instantly describe events as they're happening and unfolding. Bloggers do not.

Besides that, "live blogging" is a misnomer because even the best writer/typist will always be behind a live broadcast and can't begin to compete in terms of immediacy and detailed information.

"Live" blogs give fans who can't attend, watch or listen to a game the opportunity to track what's happening. For those who can watch a game on TV or listen to it on the radio, a "live" blog can enhance the experience by providing an additional point of view. Why ESPN or any broadcaster should feel threatened by that is beyond me. The NCAA is being overzealous in its enforcement of an unnecessary policy.

Kudos to you finding fault with the policy, Josh.

This is a foolish policy from an organization that has a history of failing to evolve in concert with the communities it serves. Meanwhile, the NBA and MLB have embraced live blogging (even live wikis).

Does anybody think David Stern will snuff out the San Antonio Express-News' live blog on tonight's NBA Finals (after all, the game is broadcast via ESPN on ABC). That'll never happen, nor should it

ESPN paid for these rights. Accordingly, they have discretion to choose whether or not to enforce them. I doubt anyone completely understands the complexity of their motivations for removing a blogger.

However, in the end, if the NCAA had integrity, they would have refused the inclusion of this policy in the contract. You can't possibly blame ESPN for enforcing a contractual provision. The NCAA agreed to this and now they have to live with it. It's a shame they cared more about money than anything else. ESPN is a business and I expect as much from them. The NCAA, however, continued to disappoint on every level, every day.

Isn't the point that this is a contractual agreement? Not really the NCAA's decision but a written agreement between two parties. To gain access into a press box certain rules must be followed. Could in the future contracts between two parties be changed so bloggers could report? Sure but at this event it is not allowed. Maybe in the future bloggers should have to pay for rights to send out information as it happens live. Not to hurt anyone, it's hard for me to consider bloggers journalists. Anyone has access to get online and post whatever they like that doesn't make them a journalist. I have friends who fill the internet with information but are in no way journalists. Bloggers are loose cannons that have no filter. Not all blogs out there are run like this one where there are filters run by a much larger organization. The NCAA & ESPN have every right to toss him out and in fact to never credential him again for not doing what he was asked to do. It's simple he made a choice to do something so he paid the consequences. And all we are doing right now is giving him more attention than he deserves.

I agree totally with you, Josh. Shame on the NCAA for blocking an outlet to bring more exposure to a quality product such as college baseball.

The fact that you maintain a great blog about the NCAA is a testament to the Association's commitment to keeping up with new media. It's a shame that money has reached its hands into press boxes and blog posts alike on this issue.

JM's missing the point. At the sporting events I cover, the people in the press box are members of the working press. They are journalists. You don't get to start a blog and then go sit in the press box because you're suddenly a journalist. It doesn't work that way.

If the NCAA and ESPN have a contractual agreement that bans live blogging at a particular event, then obviously it must be enforced. But, again, that's not the point. Some attorney came up with the provision believing that live blogging represents a threat to the potential revenue stream generated from broadcasting an event live.

That's just silly. There's no way a live blog can replace or even compete with a live radio or TV broadcast in terms of detail and immediacy of information. Nobody who has the option of watching a game on TV or listening to it on the radio is going to choose a live blog instead.

People invent these policies. People can get rid of them and should get rid of them when they're unnecessary, unreasonable and violate First Amendment rights.

PCM, you just hit the nail on the head, NCAA and Silly seems logical to me but I digress. I just hope Josh doesn't get slapped for his disagreeing with the overstretching NCAA. Where have we seen this before? OHHH, yeah their policy on nicknames...

I think the NCAA is overstepping its bounds in a lot of areas. Wait till they get sued for kicking a blogger out of a press box.

LOL JM: Bloggers are loose cannons that have no filter...

Good point, Goon. I expect the blogger here will be out of job tomorrow considering how the NCAA is run. They are the master of the "cover up" after all.

I am glad that others see the NCAA for what they are. I remember watching an Oklahoma game as a kid and one of the players was wearing a shirt that says NCAA, National Communists Against Athletes. I didn't understand it at the time, but now I do.

I am also glad to see that others see the ridiculousness and pettiness of the now infamous and much maligned mascot policy.