That is a perfectly legal practice under NCAA bylaws; the rules flap arises over the fact that Missouri allowed the mothers of the two recruits to accompany them on the charter flight, and then each mother reimbursed the university for the cost of a commercial airline ticket. According to preliminary statements from the NCAA, that is not legal under the rules and may be ruled a secondary infraction.

On its face, the rule does not make any sense. The entire purpose of the NCAA rules is to attempt to provide a "level playing field" in recruiting and in competition.

An examination of the rules reveals no clear interpretation to guide coaches and compliance personnel. The most relevant rule at issue is bylaw 13.6.2.33 (the number of subparagraphs in the NCAA rules is astounding), which speaks to the use of non-commercial airplanes. The rule does not speak to whether it is permissible to have a parent or guardian accompany a recruit on a charter flight if the cost of travel is reimbursed.

For those who have not dared to brave the NCAA Rules manual (which is second only to the United States Tax Code in its complexity), often a written interpretation accompanies the straight text of a given rule. In this case, no such interpretation exists. There is also nothing on the NCAA Interpretations Database to indicate that this scenario is illegal. (That there is an entire database dedicated to interpretations of the rules, which are supposed to be clear in the first place, is yet another indication that the NCAA rules need to be simplified.)

That being said, there is also nothing in the rules to directly indicate that the practice is permitted. It is unclear, but according to the NCAA, it is not permissible when the four different rules are read together.

On its face, the rule does not make any sense. The entire purpose of the NCAA rules is to attempt to provide a "level playing field" in recruiting and in competition. Consider this: According to NCAA rules, an institution cannot purchase a recruit a first-class commercial airline ticket to transport him to his official on-campus recruiting visit, but the school can charter him a private airplane. While the NCAA seems to say that the current scenario faced by Missouri is illegal, Missouri has indicated in published reports that the inverse situation is perfectly legal, and the NCAA has said so on prior occasions.

If the parents of a recruit charter an airplane themselves for an official visit, they may legally accompany the recruit, and the NCAA has stated that the school may then reimburse the cost of the recruit's commercial airline fare, even though the kid was on a chartered plane with his parents. That, by itself, is ammunition for Missouri to declare that the cost of commercial airline fare is the relevant standard to be applied, and that the stated interpretation of the NCAA is ambiguous.

There is a simple solution to this issue. It's clear that the NCAA desires a system of rules to level the playing field wherever possible. Since precious few institutions have the ability to charter a jet for an on-campus visit by a recruit, the NCAA should eliminate the practice entirely.

The NCAA should mandate that all recruits travel via commercial means for on-campus visits. Why should Duke or Kentucky fly a recruit in luxury on a private charter, while East Carolina and Murray State cannot afford to do so and make their recruits fly coach? Once they sign with a school, all student-athletes have to make their own way to and from school without the possibility of using a chartered plane, so there seems no legitimate reason that a chartered jet should be used in the recruiting process. It would be illegal for an institution to charter a jet to fly a student-athlete to and from school for any reason, whether it be for Christmas break or summer vacation, so why should it be done for an on-campus recruiting visit?

Aside from the legality, the whole idea of flying a kid on a chartered plane gives the impression of priorities being totally out of whack. Many very important people accomplish many lofty things while flying commercial. It does not make any sense for the NCAA to place its stamp of approval on recruits flying on chartered jets for routine on-campus visits. Elimination of the practice will bring some sanity and perspective to the process, not to mention eliminating several pages from the oversized NCAA manual.