yeah, so I was an athlete and later worked in the athletic department. All I can say is that your view is arrogant. It is a view many, if not most, people have, but it is still arrogant.

I understand why many people don't like them, after all they are there to self enforce the rules that are pushed by the NCAA. These NCAA rules are generally broad in nature which leaves room for different interpretations. On top of that, the NCAA (much like our fed government) picks rules in which to enforce and not enforce. With broad rules and the ncaa enforcement the way it is, it makes it very hard for all compliance departments.

What the compliance department does is take a RISK BASED approach in order to make sure that we are compliant. Meaning that they try to follow and enforce the rules on everyone, but some people are under the microscope more than others because it is more risky and we as a school have more to lose if something were to happen. Never having worked in compliance myself, I would assume that the major risks they are taking into consideration include 1. Revenue (the more money a sport brings in the more important it is to make sure everything is above the water) 2. Title IX compliance (this is because LSU has already in the past had a major problem with this) 3. Recruiting (because the rules are changing so much and violations happen so easily in this area). 4. Booster interaction (again this is one of the easiest ways to get a violation, and usually the sports that have the most booster involvement also have the most revenue generation, making it very risky).

I will say that LSU does error on the side of caution, which I think is a good thing. I think it should be a point of pride that we had not had a single major violations until 2011. The reason why LSU didn't get burned by it was because we self reported and put a strict penalty on ourselves. In comparison, look at OSU, they didn't self report when they found out and they didnt put in place strick penalties. NCAA came down on them hard.