About This Site
By Richard Linde, Posted March 1, 2005
For months now, we’ve pointed out that the NCAA violated at least one of its
Bylaws when it blindsided Rick Neuheisel. Rick’s attorney, Bob Sulkin, noted
those violations in a couple of his documents written months ago, the effect of
which gave us courage to read the updated Bylaws manual, fortuitously not the
old version, and pursue that Bylaw in our articles.
Apparently, no one was listening, especially the Seattle media and the NCAA, which erroneously introduced the outdated version of the bylaw into
discovery. Prior to the trial, not one local columnist, to my knowledge, when
the Neuheisel gambling imbroglio mentioned that the NCAA may have violated at
least one of its own bylaws when it blindsided Neuheisel. Maybe they were
reading the wrong version of the bylaw. Perhaps partly buoyed by
media and public support, the UW overreacted to the so-called “lies” in the
morning session, and then hilariously claimed it was firing Neuheisel for just lying.
Not to mention or question this alleged violation by the NCAA prior to the trial is arguably a case of media
bias, whether unintentional or intentional, against Neuheisel. But that’s
another matter. Bias runs willy-nilly in much of the media; most of the
columnists in Seattle had made up their minds about Rick when he first game to
town in 1999 and never budged an inch off their obvious dislike. Rick was a
“big-time” coach, being paid a “big-time” salary, all in a “big-time” college
football milieu, which by their definition is corrupt.
Likewise, the vagueness of the Bylaw on gambling (10.3) was never mentioned
by anyone in the Seattle print media as far as I know. If the media fail to
present all the facts in their stories, how do they expect the public to make
informed opinions when they poll them? Hence, the reason for our publishing the
Neuheisel Chronicles, which appears on this website.
I have a copy of the current NCAA Bylaws Manual in my library, as every loyal UW
supporter should have in his/her own. “Woo, they’re out to get us,” the Seattle
media will contemptuously say of us, while wringing their hands – so hide your copy well.
When I told former coach Keith Gilbertson I had recently purchased a copy of
the NCAA Bylaws Manual, he looked dumbfounded, then lugubriously at me. Are all
of our fans nuts, he might
have thought; or, maybe, for God's sake, what have we done to them? Of course, you can get it on the web for free, but that's a lot of
printing and hole punching if you want the whole nuanced tome.
Specifically, Bylaw 32.3.7 (shaded in gray), states, “…Prior to an interview
arranged, or initiated by the enforcement staff, a student-athlete or staff
member shall be advised that if the individual has violated the NCAA ethical
legislation such an allegation may be forthcoming…(Revised: 4/24/03)
According to an article written by Bud Withers of the Seattle Times, “Sulkin
argued in his written motion, ‘Neuheisel has lost the opportunity to prepare and
present his case against the university by showing that one of its central
themes — that subjects of investigations should be fully forthcoming even when
surprised with allegations relating to potential criminal conduct — is flawed.’”
Apparently, Rick Neuheisel should have been given advance notice of the topic.
The Bylaw, 32.3.6, preceding the one in question, states that Neuheisel was entitled to
“representation by legal council.”
I wish to thank DP for cc’ing me the following e-mail, which is an open letter
he sent to Bob Sulkin, Neuheisel’s attorney.
“Dear Mr. Sulkin,
“I am a longtime UW Husky fan and want to express my support for Rick Neuheisel
in his struggle, both against the UW and NCAA.
“It was clear to intelligent Dawgfans, well before Rick’s arrival, that Barbara
Hedges had the ethics of a virus and that the same could be said for the NCAA as
an institution. I am tempted to digress here with diatribes in both those
directions, but I suspect I would be preaching to the choir.
“I met Rick in the stands right before his initial Spring Game and expressed a
kind of ambivalence (‘we’ll get used to you’) that, I think, surprised, and
disappointed him. At the time, Rick was the ‘Barbara Hedges wunderkind’. We had
just seen the second wave of destruction Barbara had wreaked on the program; the
second of the four coaches she would destroy, the first three of whom are now,
despite her, on the top ten list for winning percentage in the schools history.
Rick, of course, would eventually become the third. Barbara inherited a national
championship machine that went 11-0, totally dominating West Coast football and
left, in its place, a legacy of decimation that reduced Husky football to a 1-10
season last year. Perhaps Rick could now understand the initial reticence in
“In any case, I would like to express my admiration to Rick for standing up to
the (alleged) corruption in the program and wish him the best of luck in the lawsuit. I
would also like the opportunity to do so personally, if he is available in some
“It is only through the success of lawsuits like Rick’s that the raw, corrupt
power of the NCAA cartel can be reigned in and bureaucrats of baser motive
Richard Linde (a.k.a., Malamute) can be reached at