June 5, 2009

Its defense ready, Memphis set to face NCAA charges

By Gary Parrish | CBSSports.com Senior Writer
Follow Gary

The University of Memphis will make its defense against NCAA allegations this weekend.

What's the plan?

Maybe Derrick Rose didn't take the SAT with his name on it, but good luck proving it. (Getty Images)

Let's take a look in layman's terms, shall we?

NCAA charge: Derrick Rose had somebody else take his SAT. Thus, Memphis played an ineligible player.

Memphis defense: You can't prove it. And even if you're correct, it's not our fault, anyway.

Explanation: Let me start by telling you that I've talked with many people connected to Memphis and Rose over the past week, and not one of them has tried to convince me that the NCAA is wrong, that Rose really did take that SAT.

Not. A. One.

So that -- combined with the fact that a forensic specialist who examined the handwriting doesn't think Rose took the SAT, combined with the fact that Rose declined to validate his score with a follow-up test, combined with the fact that Rose hasn't publicly defended his name -- leaves me feeling pretty good about the theory that Derrick Rose didn't take that SAT.

Still, can the NCAA prove it?

Memphis officials don't believe so.

And beyond that, Memphis will basically tell the NCAA that even if it can now prove that Rose didn't take the questionable SAT, the governing body cleared the one-and-done star before his freshman year, at which point Memphis did what any other university would do, i.e., ride him all the way to the national title game.

Seriously, that's the defense, and it's a good one.

When the NCAA told Memphis not to play Angel Garcia, Memphis didn't play Angel Garcia. When the NCAA told Memphis not to play Matt Simpkins, Memphis didn't play Matt Simpkins. But then the NCAA came back and told Memphis it could play Matt Simpkins, so Memphis played Matt Simpkins. And this is the way it works. Schools provide standardized test scores and transcripts and anything else the NCAA wants, then the NCAA rules on the eligibility of every player. If the NCAA rules a player ineligible, that player doesn't play. But it seems to me that when the NCAA tells a school that a player is qualified academically and free to play, a school should not be at risk after the fact, even if the NCAA later learns that an SAT is fraudulent (provided the NCAA doesn't tie the school to the allegation).

On this charge, the NCAA isn't accusing Memphis of any wrongdoing.

It's simply stating that it no longer believes Rose took the questionable SAT.

Again, I don't doubt that the NCAA is correct in its allegation, but to penalize Memphis for only doing what it was told it could do -- which is play Rose -- seems like a bad precedent. Imagine, North Carolina enrolls John Henson this year, and he leads the Tar Heels to the Final Four after the NCAA tells North Carolina he is qualified and free of issues. Then a month after the season, the NCAA claims that it made a mistake, that it never should've cleared Henson and that everything UNC accomplished in that one season will consequently be forfeited.

That's a tough spot.

So while it's unfortunate the NCAA might've made a mistake to clear Rose, it should not forget that it was an NCAA mistake, not a Memphis mistake. Memphis did what it was told. I'm not sure how the school can reasonably be punished for that.

NCAA charge: Derrick Rose's brother, Reggie Rose, traveled for free to some road games.

Memphis defense: It was a billing error and nothing more.

Explanation: Reggie Rose is accused of receiving two flights on the team's chartered plane and three hotel stays at no charge (despite the NCAA claiming it should've cost $2,260) during the one season his brother played for the Tigers, and Memphis does not deny this (although it claims that Reggie Rose actually made five trips that were "properly handled" at a charge of $4,978). Put another way, Memphis is claiming that approximately 32 percent of the expenses Reggie Rose accrued in university travel during that one season simply "fell through the cracks."

Does that seem possible?

At the very least, my experiences tell me it's not normal.

Before moving to CBSSports.com, I was the Memphis beat writer at the Commercial Appeal for four years, and I often traveled on the team charters and almost always stayed at the team hotel. Though it might've happened, I do not remember seeing family members of players on chartered flights during those four years, and I know for a fact that none of my bills ever "fell through the cracks." In four years, it never happened. And yet it happened to Reggie Rose on two flights and three hotel stays in one year?

Now maybe I'm just unlucky and Reggie Rose is incredibly fortunate.

Perhaps that's the explanation.

But I suspect the NCAA is going to tell Memphis that it was begging for problems by putting the brother of a high-profile player on team flights, and that the "extra benefits" were "extra benefits" regardless of why they happened.

In other words, that charge will almost certainly stick. And then Memphis will likely put into place some new travel restrictions, ones that will, with any luck, keep the school from dealing with these embarrassing allegations again.