Now back to our regular programming...
Hello,
I echo Chuck nearly verbatim as to my primary concern with SMART.
Problem #2 with SMART: Mistakes. That is not meant to insult them, it's a fact of business life. I would say that maybe 10% of our bowlers report to me significant, long-lasting problems with the proper claiming, totals of, and application of SMART funds. Granted, that means that 90% of them have no problem, but 10% is an awful lot. I fully understand that mistakes will be made, especially in an organization as huge as SMART. JBT SW makes mistakes, too, we're not perfect by any means- but here's the difference: if we make a mistake, our records are right there and we can fix them instantly. To fix records with SMART requires a huge buearaucratic process that can be a nightmare for all involved. If we are sending in our money to SMART on a weekly basis, that only adds another step where problems can develop- it's the old "telephone" game every time.
Also along the mistake front-- I am required to send USBC my tournament results and scholarship winners on a monthly basis. Every season, some of these results get lost. USBC has agreed to disagree with me on the semantics of the word "lost" in reference to this. I am forced to resend them, sometimes multiple times. My results have, for years, come with a cover sheet that says "if anything is missing, please contact me immediately". Each of the last two years, my certification has been delayed because they had lost results that I had sent in, and failed to tell me about it until I applied for next year's sanction. To top it off, just last month USBC called me, and the very polite woman informed me they were missing virtually every result from September through December. This is laughable negligence on their part in my opinion, though I again think they would not call it so. BUT- here's the kicker-- that really isn't a big deal. Results are easy to re-send, we keep accurate and complete archives on our end. BUUUUUTTTT- what if these were SCHOLARSHIPS that I was sending in, with the same results? What an unbelievebale nightmare! How could I explain to my bowlers that this move would be for the BETTER? USBC has reminded me that the results department is separate from SMART. Yet, how am I supposed to take that risk, given the track record I have described above? If 10% of the $150,000 or so I would send in next year is lost, as is my estimate of 'mistakes' among our bowlers currently, that is a MAJOR problem. USBC has given me assurances that they have improved their systems greatly, and that our numbers would put a statistically insignificant strain on their new system. I remain unconvinced, yet not without hope.
I know it seems like it, but USBC is not saying non-SMART groups do a bad job. If it is to be believed at face value, it is, through all these moves, ONLY trying to protect potential eligibility of potential NCAA athletes in any sport. NCAA has informed USBC that in order to do this, all USBC scholarships must be held by a National Governing Body (NGB)- and that awards must be of only intrinsic value (more later). Thus, everything that USBC-YABA-AJBC etc. have done in the past up to right now is in violation. That $5 bowling trophy? Forget it, no college football for you (extreme, but...).
If you are among the many who do NOT take USBC at face value on this issue, that believe that the entire NCAA issue is a convenient facade for the much discussed elsewhere "money grab", then to even discusss solutions to teh SMART-or-Goodbye issue is pointless. What side of that fence you fall on is at the crux of this discussion, and I urge people to withold too much judgment until a LOT MORE INFORMATION REACHES THE GENERAL PUBLIC. For the sake of this thread, I will assume USBC is of noble intentions here (I have no offical comment to the contrary):
The other problems and emotions are well documented at this point. Here's three stages of a potential solution:
1) A Uniform Scholarship Claiming Code is constructed for all non-SMART organizations. Fixing small variations in each group's claiming rules may make non-SMART organizations a more direct arm of the NGB, satisfying NCAA's rules. We feel this is not likely to solve the problem, however- even if it would.
2) It has been suggested in a conference call with USBC and Tour directors that perhaps a stronger case for non-SMART groups as arms of a NGB could be made if, when a bowler claims their non-SMART money, that money is first sent to SMART, and then actually distributed by SMART. This makes SMART a middleman yet still allows non-SMART managament of funds, provides a "check and balance", and also adds a second step, but according to SMART's own statements, they are fully equipped to handle the MUCH higher volume this would cause. This sure seems to me to satisfy NGB requirements, but we are not optimistic that USBC will agree.
3) If a viable solution is not found and the wording reamins as is, and the issues Chuck brings up are not addressed satisfactorily, ours and many other Tours, events, associations, etc. etc. will be forced not to certify. Let me stress that this does NOT by any means mean we do NOT care about the eligibility of JBT bowlers. Far from it. A potentially uncertfied JBT event would have a disclaimer for all bowlers who receive scholarships, rings, awards, etc. with the current NCAA eligibility concerns, so a bowler would fully realize that accepting our gorgeous JBT 300 ring, for example, could potentially violate NCAA eligibility rules should they become the next Michael Vick. We would have the most politically aware bowlers on the PLANET, hee hee. The ones who may be affected do not accept awards and are thus NOT affected. The vast majority who do NOT have to worry about this can STILL GET WHAT THEY DESERVE.... maybe I'm not thinking well, but what the living heck is so hard about that???
Well kids, I'm tired and have a JUNIOR TOURNAMENT to run tomorrow, and a bunch of scholarships and awards to hand out- which I think is supposed to be the point of what I do, not spend many hours on each day dealing with this strange series of proclamations USBC is hansding down!!!
This is like .00000001% of what can be discussed about this. I appreciate the many respectful and thoughtful responses on here, even those with different viewpoints. I hope a constructive dialogue can continue.
Thanks,
Jeff Hemer, JBT SW
www.jbtsw.com
