I think the arguments here are good ones.
Ultimately, I don't see any of it mattering much. The NCAA exists to maximize profits to its member institutions. Cheating is becoming more acceptable, and cheating at the top is probably the norm, at least if you think as I do, that the number of scandals is probably just the tip of an iceberg.
So what will happen? I don't know. I see a few factors at play here:
1. The threat to the NCAA as a body. When a referee feels threatened, they often overreact. It wouldn't surprise me if the NCAA uses their power because the bureaucracy feels threatened.
2. Entrenchment. Neither side has backed down, and that's what the NCAA is for --to settle disputes. The NCAA probably needs to move towards a sports governance model, but they already have a history of going after academic issues that result in benefits to athletes. Given their involvement, I don't see how they can back out gracefully.
3. The facts of the case. To a certain extent, they're going to have to deal with the facts. When the stakes are high, it can go to court, where everyone loses $ fighting and paying lawyers.
As someone who doesn't know the NCAA rules in any detail, I see this more as a power struggle than anything else. There's always a balancing act between powerhouse schools not wanting interference, and less competitive programs needing a more level playing field. The NCAA represents a lot of institutions, and more broadly, the business model of college sports.
opcorn: