Blog Entry

The NCAA is so hypocritical

Posted on: August 20, 2009 8:55 am
So the NCAA is about to vacate Memphis' Final Four from 2008, presumably because -- while he was in high school -- 2008 Memphis star Derrick Rose used a fraudulent test score to get into college in the first place.


But what about the program that made it to a Final Four with a player who, the NCAA later found out, had accepted more than $2,000 from his AAU coach while still in high school? That player also should have been ineligible. That school also should have vacated the Final Four.

But that player was Corey Maggette. And that team was Duke. The year was 1999.

So nothing happened. To anyone. To this day. Nothing has happened, and it never will.

My point? My point is that the NCAA, even with as much progress as it has made under Myles Brand, still uses selective justice when crashing down onto various schools or coaches. Then-Memphis coach John Calipari is on the NCAA's hit list, and so the NCAA ostensibly holds him responsible for Marcus Camby's dalliance with an agent in 1995, and for whatever Derrick Rose did while he was in high school hundreds of miles away in Chicago.

But Mike Krzyzewski is not on the NCAA's hit list, so Maggette is fine, Duke is fine, 1999 is fine, the world is a happy place full of seashells and balloons.

Forgive me if I vomit up a conch.

I said conch.
Category: NCAAB

Since: Aug 20, 2009
Posted on: August 20, 2009 2:02 pm

The NCAA is so hypocritical

They've already been involved in too many to name. Ignorance is bliss. 
The NCAA prohibits colleges athletes from using their status to gain 'extra benefits' -- such as the use of a car or jobs for family members
Would you care to explain how Duhon got a new car while his mom got an overpaying job and a new car? Or how Boozer's dad got a job from a Dukie owned company only to lose it about 6 months after his son went on to the NBA. It's no mystery certain schools are untouchable for whatever reason. Just because they haven't officially been reprimanded doesn't mean they haven't violated rules. They aren't the only school that seems untouchable. Roy Williams and Kansas never got anything for the "rewards" basketball players received from boosters. The list goes on and on. 

Since: Aug 20, 2009
Posted on: August 20, 2009 2:01 pm

The NCAA is so hypocritical

No vendetta against Duke, but he is just stating the facts.  I am not a Memphis fan, but they were the BEST team in the country and with a couple of free throws this would have all been moot.  The NCAA wont take down a national champ. Duke, UCONN and Kansas are immune from inspection, but they are as guilty as anyone.  They are too big and too powerful to attack.  I am still shocked Kentucky got nailed 15 years ago, but with Cal at Kentucky maybe that is why the NCAA is suddenly interested in Rose. 

These kids are spoiled athletes that are made to fit the "student" athlete mold.  They will look and take handouts.  Rose needed help to pass SAT and he got it.  Magette needed $2000 and he got it.   Camby needs funds and he goes to an agent.  Bush and OJ Mayo look for a booster to help them and they can find it. What is the school supposed to do? The players are often poor and the NCAA does not allow them to work or make any money during the season.  Free room and board are nice, but what if you want to take a girl out on a date?  Tough to impress them at the school cafeterria.  As for the schools, they police the kids, they must have players cleared to play by NCAA.   THey have compliance officers.  They have staff to make sure kids are going to class.  They do every thing they can but fanatics of their program will look to aide the athletes. 

Since: Mar 20, 2008
Posted on: August 20, 2009 1:59 pm

The NCAA is so hypocritical

Here is my problem with the NCAA's ruling.  Calapari is gone, Rose is gone, yet the kids who will be wearing the uniform for the next 4 years are going to deal with the stigma.  So the 2 main participants get off scott free, but the future of the school pays the price.  There has to be a better way

Since: Aug 18, 2006
Posted on: August 20, 2009 1:45 pm

The NCAA is so hypocritical

This is Calipari's second Final Four team to be disgraced. How about punishing him?

However, the NCAA has nothing on the Catholic Church as the Archdiocese of Louisville has embraced their
scumbag coach, Rick Pitino, who cheated on his wife and killed his kid. Did they look the other way
because he wasn't hammering alter boys or was it because Slick Rick wins? 

Since: Jul 2, 2008
Posted on: August 20, 2009 1:37 pm

The NCAA is so hypocritical

The NCAA would have to give itself the Death Penalty if it wasnt so blind

Since: Aug 5, 2009
Posted on: August 20, 2009 1:34 pm

The NCAA is so hypocritical

Gee - what a suprise - the NCAA has multiple standards for multiple schools. Its' the same with eligibility. For example - A player that is not eligible to play at Cincinnati but another player with the same or similar circumstances is allowed to play at another school. That has happened often.

At least you had the guts to write this. Thank You!

Since: Jan 23, 2008
Posted on: August 20, 2009 1:33 pm

The NCAA is so hypocritical

Calm down.    KU was up 40-12 at one point on Carolina.  You guys were no match for us.    KU had nothing to do with Arthur in high school.   They had no way of knowing.   Memphis isnt being punished just for Rose and his ACT, they also gave his family traveling money.   

KU = 2008 National Champs!!

Since: Aug 20, 2009
Posted on: August 20, 2009 1:21 pm

The NCAA is so hypocritical

Arthur's H.S. administrators were ultimately found by the Dallas School District to have inappropriately changed his semester grade for one of his math classes.  The school was forced to forfeit the games in which Arthur played while he was ineligible.  That included a state championship.  The grade change was found to have occurred his Jr. season of high school.

Yet, all of this had no bearing on his NCAA eligibility requirements.  The Dallas School District's investigation concluded that the academic fraud did not affect Arthur's H.S. graduation requirements.  Therefore, it also did not affect his NCAA eligibility requirements (H.S. graduation being one).  So the whole issue had no bearing on Darrell Arthur's NCAA eligibility.

The Dallas School District looked into the matter and determined that Arthur would have been ineligible to play for his High School team for the second semester of his Junior year.  They then determined that even without the changed grade he still qualified for High School graduation.  There was nothing for the NCAA to investigate.

The difference between the Darrell Arthur and Derrick Rose cases is that Arthur's academic problems were limited to H.S. athletics and had no bearing on NCAA requirements.  In contrast, Rose's academic problems had direct bearing on his NCAA eligiblitiy (the SAT score that is necessary to attend college was achieved by someone other than Rose).

Since: Aug 20, 2009
Posted on: August 20, 2009 1:06 pm

The NCAA is so hypocritical

This author of this article has a personal vendetta agains Duke. Duke is not at question here Mr. Doyle. What is at question is the fact that this is the SECOND time that Callipari has been involved in scandal with his players. You say he did this while in High School?? Correct. But, if he didnt cheat on his test then there would be no Derrik Rose on on overratted team in a weak ass conference with a weak ass schedule. Punish them like they did to Michigan! If Duke EVER gets involved in NCAA VIOLATIONS, then your silly vendetta will be warranted. Until then, shut up.  

Since: Jan 28, 2008
Posted on: August 20, 2009 12:54 pm

The NCAA is so hypocritical

"I believe schools are not punished for what the student athletes do, but the level of control and oversight they provided."

That's the whole point!!!!  What college in the country wants to be held responsible for certifying the SAT scores of ANY of their students?????  Let alone student athletes.  Validating an SAT score is not and will NEVER be the college's responsibility.  It is the responsibility of the SAT organization, the school where the test is administered, the students, and the parents.  And now, the NCAA Clearinghouse.  Memphis accepted the valid SAT score because that is what is expected from ALL schools.

Basically Memphis is being punished for something that happened before Rose even enrolled at Memphis.  They are being punished for playing a player in games after the NCAA said "this player is eligible to play."  The SAT canceled his score AFTER the season was over, and now they have to vacate wins because of it.  I can see the argument "even though Memphis didn't know, he still was ineligible and thus they have to vacate the wins."  Even though that sucks and doesn't seem fair, I understand it.  I don't understand though how the NCAA can treat schools differently.  That's what I don't get.

BTW, I love Gregg's Duke hatred tirades.  I love all Duke hatred tirades.  They give me the same warm-fuzzy feeling I get when I go to a state fair, or pet a puppydog.

The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or