As if we needed another reason to love Charles Robinson...

No assumption. From his <a href="http://deadspin.com/5832365/my-correspondence-with-charles-robinson">e-mails with Deadspin's Tommy Craggs</a>:

I'll grant you Robinson believes the system is "completely rotten", as you put it. But he also clearly has two other views: 1.) he doesn't think we should " blow up the system"; and 2.) he thinks the systemic problem is bad actors that corrupt the "pure" rules, rather than rules that create a corrupt system. He has the cause-and-effect mixed up, in my opinion--it's the rules that create incentives for these bad actors to exploit (as any economist from across the political spectrum would tell you occurs when you place an artificial cap on price).

His story choice clearly reflects these views. A story about a booster providing cocaine, hookers and abortions at Miami--a football program that doesn't exactly have a sterling reputation--sends the message that the "systemic" problem is bad actors. A story rounding up the all the "bullshit violations" they know about--which he believes would be frivolous--sends the message about, as you put it, "how silly it is to have such arbitrary rules and standards." He's writing exactly the opposite types of stories he should, in my view.

Robinson claims he does it because no one has offered "real" solutions, so he might as well keep "holding people accountable for the rules that are on the books." There is at one clear solution, though--pay the players. Robinson doesn't do so because he says "there is also an overriding laziness to the argument of many critics, because they fail to actually promote any kind of realistic theories of how to change. Saying "pay them" or "it's an economics issue" just isn't good enough." " Fine, then write a story about why those solutions are not viable. It seems far more useful to start a substantive debate on refining potential solutions to the problem then to continue to waste resources writing stories that just continue to point out a problem exists when, as you acknowledge, "[a]ny reasonable, intelligent person understands the system is corrupt and fucked."

 

Huh? No one thinks the rules are unfair to the schools; they're unfair to the players. The schools love the rules--they let them legitimize their labor cartel through the guise of promoting "scholar-athletes".

 

You really need to make this your life's work, because ... dayum.

 

By the way you chose to write that post, I can see your agenda. You might as well have posted about someone peeing in bed.

 

Excellent riposte. Sorry for trying to have a meaningless debate about journalism on this message board. I'll try to confine myself to posting in threads debating the sartorial requirements of the press box, bitching about readers, and contemplating the truly important issues of our field--such as whether to report from the press box or stand on the sidelines (which has no doubt vexed scholars for decades).

 

Another great take from Tommy Craggs on Robinson's latest:

http://deadspin.com/5890991/the-scandal-is-what-the-medias-ncaa-scandal-cops-think-is-a-scandal

 

That's a pretty solid takedown.