Oh, that should help shut up the haters that want GVSU to move up to D1 because their team just can't beat the Lakers.

I have read the new legislation and justification for the ban on the text messaging of recruits and am in complete agreement with the ban on this form of communication. However, I am concerned that the legislators, by limiting electronic communication to email and faxes, have outlawed a form of communication that is radically different from text messaging. Over the years, I have become a big fan of instant messaging and have used it very effectively to recruit student athletes from all over the United States and the world at no cost to me or the students. With the newly imposed blanket ban, instant messaging, though very different from text messaging, is now illegal.

The major argument condemning text messaging is the cost to the recruit. Unless one has unlimited text messaging, one is charged for every text message received. In addition, it is impossible to stop someone from sending you a text message, or to stop your phone from accepting it. This cost can add up very easily over the course of a month thus driving up one’s bill to unacceptable sums. On the other hand, instant messages are cost free. I have received literally tens of thousands of instant messages and am yet to be charged a dime!

I submit that instant messaging saves the student athlete money. Faxing can often cost money. Unless the student athlete has a personal fax machine in their home, to send or receive a fax they have to go to a store like Kinko’s where they have to pay. Instant messaging also cuts down on the cost of phone calls. A prospect may initiate a call with a coach an unlimited number of times per week but these calls cost a lot of money especially if they are international calls. With instant messaging, the student athlete may initiate unlimited instant messages to the coach at no cost. In the case where the student athlete has to go to an internet café to do so, it is still initiated by him or her and at an insignificant cost when compared to a phone call.

The next argument against text messages is that they are intrusive. At any given time while the prospect's phone is on, he or she can be disturbed by a text message. There are reports of students being bothered while in class or on the practice field or while doing homework. My question would be why a serious student athlete has a cell phone in any of these situations but that is for another discussion. With instant messaging, your phone has to be specially set up by you to notify you of the receipt of an instant message. Also, in the case of doing homework on the computer, the student can easily turn off his or her instant messenger or make himself or herself 'invisible' to other users thus making it impossible to receive instant messages.

You can receive a text message, without giving your permission, from anyone who has your cell phone number. Conversely, for someone to send you an instant message, they must first have your email address, then receive your permission to be accepted on your messaging list. Without your permission, no one can be accepted into your accepted list and you will not receive instant messages from them.

In summary, I would like the NCAA Legislative Committee to revisit its new ban on electronic communication and include instant messing with email and faxes as an acceptable form of communication between coaches and prospective student athletes.

Stephen is obviously a coach that feels strongly about this ban. The thing I find interesting is how many coaches have come out against this rule but I haven't seen a list of prospective student-athletes coming out and complaining. Coaches see the problem like this is that with text and im they can generate a personal relationship before they are even allowed to talk with the recruit on the phone. Phone calls cannot be made to recruits before their senior year but texts and im can start as juniors. That is where the problem is for coaches. It's not about the technology; they aren't texting all of the AAU coaches to talk about kids they are calling. Coaches want that contact - they would call if they were allowed, trust me. I coached for over 10 years and that is the fact. Text and im opens the relationship up to be friends, not coach and student-athlete. The lines get blurred in these informal exchanges. That is not an appropriate relationship when basically coaches are parents away from home. I would just warn to make sure this isn't just a group of coaches complaining about the rule. The student-athletes proposed the change and they are the ones that know the best.

The first thing I noticed and absolutely loved, is how the NCAA is committed to staying tough when it comes to academics. It’s good to see a commitment to a higher graduation rates. It also is nice to see that coaches are involved because it shows that they don't just want the kids to succeed in the field, but also in the classroom. The NCAA, in my opinion, is making great strides in student-athlete academics.

The next thing I wanted to touch base on, was the text messaging of coaches to prospective student athletes. I think that text messaging is a bit overboard to student-athletes because there are just so many other ways for it to get done. They can contact the athlete through e-mail. By text messaging, I think they can try to be sneaky and hide things from the NCAA like making promises and such. I just don't see this as something that needs to happen especially when current ways have been working all along.