Remember a few weeks back when I urged caution in regards to off-field issues surrounding teams?

My arguments centered around off-field misconduct, but the larger argument was that controversial things are going on at literally every school in the NCAA. USC's ascent to the top of the college football heap was predictably met at some point with various off-field allegations and criticism.

A Rose Bowl loss and several months of bad headlines later, the critics are sated and now Notre Dame has emerged as college football's media star, inheriting the giant target that had been placed on USC's backs.

Aaaaaand of course, that means bad news was certain to follow.

Enter today's gossip from Narcissus Nitpick, King Sanctimonious---Pro Football Talk:

A league source with intimate knowledge of the applicable NCAA regulations tells us that Notre Dame coach Charlie Weis might have rendered quarterback Brady Quinn and other incoming seniors ineligible if, as we previously have reported, Weis has directed the seniors with designs on pro football to pick their agents before the start of the 2006 season.

Rule 12.3.1 of the NCAA bylaws states that "[a]n individual shall be ineligible for participation in an intercollegiate sport if he or she ever has agreed (orally or in writing) to be represented by an agent for the purpose of marketing his or her athletics ability or reputation in that sport." Rule 12.3.1.1 elaborates on the general principle set forth in Rule 12.3.1: "An individual shall be ineligible per Bylaw 12.3.1 if he or she enters into a verbal or written agreement with an agent for representation in future professional sports negotiations that are to take place after the individual has completed his or her eligibility in that sport."

Based on the NCAA bylaw, Notre Dame quarterback Brady Quinn has violated an NCAA rule and is ineligible if he in fact had a representation agreement in place.

Excuse me for a moment if I'm not all that alarmed or hopped up about the possible violation. Reading the bylaw, I don't understand how it addresses any actual violation of one's amateur status.

It is one thing to have contact with agents and discuss representation, and another to accept money or other benefits from one prior to expiration of eligibility. Nobody is alleging that Quinn is receiving any kind of benefit from any represention agreement he's made, so what's the issue here?

By the letter of the law, it's clear that allegations suggest Quinn is probably in violation of the rule. But I'm a spirit of the law guy so this strikes me as an absurb rule. My interpretation is that it's written to strike down at even the hint of impropriety. How equitable and fair of the NCAA.

Several stories have been published this offseason documenting Quinn's agent search. Personally, I don't see the damage in a star player having his ducks lined up before the start of the season. So long as he didn't derive some absurb benefit from securing representation, there is no tangible violation of one's amateur status.

I'll have more later today or later this week about the whole NCAA "amateurism" thing and how so many of us (and the NCAA) get it wrong.  Partisan rancor often gets in the way of coherent reactions to bad NCAA legislation and its effect on athletes and programs and I'm sure we'll see plenty of that this week on the various message boards and blogs.

More to come...