Re: College Basketball 2008-2009

[SouthSideRyan]

They're Indiana, you couldn't have expected them to get hit hard.

 

You don't think Indiana got hit hard?

 

well, technically they hit themselves with the self-imposed restrictions on recruiting and scholarships. the ncaa basically said that was good enough (plus 3 years probation). i believe those restrictions are still in effect on Crean until next summer or something.

 

The self-imposed scholarship thing was a joke. Oh you've got 13 scholarships to fill in one year and you're only going to allow yourself to fill 12? IU's self-imposed restrictions were worthless.

[soapy]

They're Indiana, you couldn't have expected them to get hit hard.

 

You don't think Indiana got hit hard?

 

well, technically they hit themselves with the self-imposed restrictions on recruiting and scholarships. the ncaa basically said that was good enough (plus 3 years probation). i believe those restrictions are still in effect on Crean until next summer or something.

 

The self-imposed scholarship thing was a joke. Oh you've got 13 scholarships to fill in one year and you're only going to allow yourself to fill 12? IU's self-imposed restrictions were worthless.

 

ok.

 

there are also the restrictions on phone calls and off-campus visits (prohibited entirely, i believe), but i digress.

[CubColtPacer]

They're Indiana, you couldn't have expected them to get hit hard.

 

You don't think Indiana got hit hard?

 

well, technically they hit themselves with the self-imposed restrictions on recruiting and scholarships. the ncaa basically said that was good enough (plus 3 years probation). i believe those restrictions are still in effect on Crean until next summer or something.

 

The self-imposed scholarship thing was a joke. Oh you've got 13 scholarships to fill in one year and you're only going to allow yourself to fill 12? IU's self-imposed restrictions were worthless.

 

Those restrictions were put on the team when that scholarship was a major loss as were the recruiting restrictions. The fact that the team blew up after that, which made the scholarship issue a much smaller deal because they couldn't possibly fill them, shouldn't take away from that fact. The joke was that the NCAA rules allowed IU to take the APR penalty in advance this year, but the scholarship restriction in November was a huge deal.

 

There's very little the NCAA could do here. The facts of the case were that the school has two things wrong. The fact that they hired him, and the fact that they got a small benefit from the illegal phone calls.

 

In contrast, the school did many things right. Without the school self-reporting, none of this would have happened. Then the school imposed restrictions, and they did buy Sampson out (although credit for this is lessened significantly because they didn't do it immediately). Their compliance standards were actually found to be stricter than most schools, which was partially what enabled them to find the problem in the first place.

 

If you put something like a postseason ban on IU, then you have no room to go up in punishment when a school pays players or does many other worse things than the violations they were found to be guilty of. You also have no incentive for imposing strict compliance standards, because if IU had been more lax in their compliance this isn't an issue at all.

 

There's only so many penalties that the NCAA can give out especially major penalties. You have to save the worst of them for the worst offenders, and the facts of the case would indicate that is not IU.

[SouthSideRyan]

They're Indiana, you couldn't have expected them to get hit hard.

 

You don't think Indiana got hit hard?

 

well, technically they hit themselves with the self-imposed restrictions on recruiting and scholarships. the ncaa basically said that was good enough (plus 3 years probation). i believe those restrictions are still in effect on Crean until next summer or something.

 

The self-imposed scholarship thing was a joke. Oh you've got 13 scholarships to fill in one year and you're only going to allow yourself to fill 12? IU's self-imposed restrictions were worthless.

 

Those restrictions were put on the team when that scholarship was a major loss as were the recruiting restrictions. The fact that the team blew up after that, which made the scholarship issue a much smaller deal because they couldn't possibly fill them, shouldn't take away from that fact. The joke was that the NCAA rules allowed IU to take the APR penalty in advance this year, but the scholarship restriction in November was a huge deal.

 

The scholarship restriction took away a scholarship that belonged to a kid who was busted dealing crack. I hadn't heard that the NCAA let them take an APR penalty this year. That's outrageous. What's the point of having it if you let a school take a hit on a year where they happen to not have a full 13. I wonder if Illinois can start banking APR hits like we've been bankign scholarships the past few years.

 

There's very little the NCAA could do here. The facts of the case were that the school has two things wrong. The fact that they hired him, and the fact that they got a small benefit from the illegal phone calls.

 

In contrast, the school did many things right. Without the school self-reporting, none of this would have happened. Then the school imposed restrictions, and they did buy Sampson out (although credit for this is lessened significantly because they didn't do it immediately). Their compliance standards were actually found to be stricter than most schools, which was partially what enabled them to find the problem in the first place.

 

The penalties were found quite a bit after they actually took place. Of course the compliance department was supposed to be monitoring more strictly, they hired a coach who had already cheated. They weren't watching closely enough obviously if Sampson was able to do this for months before an Ice Miller intern came across the problems. Beyond not allowing a crack dealer to have his scholarship, another of the harsh restrictions IU imposed was not giving Kelvin Sampson the raise that was in his contract. Sure they had some more recruiting restrictions on Sampson, but we saw how well that worked the first time around.

 

If you put something like a postseason ban on IU, then you have no room to go up in punishment when a school pays players or does many other worse things than the violations they were found to be guilty of. You also have no incentive for imposing strict compliance standards, because if IU had been more lax in their compliance this isn't an issue at all.

 

There's only so many penalties that the NCAA can give out especially major penalties. You have to save the worst of them for the worst offenders, and the facts of the case would indicate that is not IU.

 

As I said, I don't know what else the NCAA could have done, though I think something that actually hit them in the wallet woulda been nice. My problem is with probation in general. Probation says, don't cheat for 3 years. You're not supposed to cheat ever. Does anyone really believe that if IU gets caught again in the next 3 years that they'll get the book thrown at them??

[mul21]

IMO, the punishment from the NCAA was just okay and probably should have included a 2 year post season ban. Anybody know off the top of their head what OU got from Sampson's transgressions? I think IU should have gotten everything OU did plus some extra for hiring a known cheater and not keeping a closer eye on him.

 

At least they've moved in the right direction and put somebody in there who has a seemingly clean track record and appears to be a guy with good morals.

[soapy]

IMO, the punishment from the NCAA was just okay and probably should have included a 2 year post season ban. Anybody know off the top of their head what OU got from Sampson's transgressions? I think IU should have gotten everything OU did plus some extra for hiring a known cheater and not keeping a closer eye on him.

 

At least they've moved in the right direction and put somebody in there who has a seemingly clean track record and appears to be a guy with good morals.

 

if it makes you feel any better, the post-season is probably out of reach the next two years anyway (the NCAA, at least).

[CubColtPacer]

IMO, the punishment from the NCAA was just okay and probably should have included a 2 year post season ban. Anybody know off the top of their head what OU got from Sampson's transgressions? I think IU should have gotten everything OU did plus some extra for hiring a known cheater and not keeping a closer eye on him.

 

At least they've moved in the right direction and put somebody in there who has a seemingly clean track record and appears to be a guy with good morals.

 

Oklahoma got essentially the same thing. One less year of probation for Oklahoma, but otherwise almost exactly the same. Oklahoma and IU's situations were close to the same. IU gets hit with extra for hiring Sampson, but the committee found that Oklahoma got quite a bit of benefits from the phone calls (several players went to Oklahoma from all those extra calls, plus there were a lot more calls than at IU) while IU ended up getting almost no benefit from the cheating.

 

I would have been fine with IU getting monetarily punished. They have already paid millions for this mistake, but I'm always in favor of a school getting punished with their pocketbooks, because that actually hits the people who authorized the mistake.

 

Yeah, the APR thing is silly. IU took 2 additional scholarship reductions this year as a preemptive move with the APR. So they're down 3 scholarships this year, but they weren't that likely to need them.

[Exile on Waveland]

IMO, the punishment from the NCAA was just okay and probably should have included a 2 year post season ban. Anybody know off the top of their head what OU got from Sampson's transgressions? I think IU should have gotten everything OU did plus some extra for hiring a known cheater and not keeping a closer eye on him.

 

At least they've moved in the right direction and put somebody in there who has a seemingly clean track record and appears to be a guy with good morals.

 

A two-year postseason ban would have been an absolutely ludicrous punishment for the crime.

[Exile on Waveland]

They're Indiana, you couldn't have expected them to get hit hard.

 

You don't think Indiana got hit hard?

 

Well they got hit hard in the sense that every player on the team left, but no, I don't think 3 years of probation is getting hit hard. I don't know that they deserved to get any worse, but getting probation for hiring a coach on probation and not monitoring him seems like a slap on the wrist to me.

 

Their APR scores the next couple years are going to knock a scholarship or 2, and if the NCAA grants them a waiver about that, then I'll actually get riled up.

 

Considering it was IU that found the illegal phone calls, reported them to the NCAA and subsequently fired the coach, I'd say they were clearly monitoring. It may not have been found soon enough, nor was Sampson fired soon enough, but they did almost everything you could ask of them after the initial grievous mistake of hiring Sampson.

[SouthSideRyan]

Considering it was IU that found the illegal phone calls, reported them to the NCAA and subsequently fired the coach

 

I know you said later that they waited too long to fire Sampson, but this is really misleading to phrase this like that. IU found the illegal phone calls back in Septemberish. They offered Senderoff as the sacrificial lamb and considered it a done deal. It was only after the heat stayed on that Sampson's seat started getting warm. Then after it was a foregone conclusion that there'd be punishment, Sampson was given up.

[Exile on Waveland]

Considering it was IU that found the illegal phone calls, reported them to the NCAA and subsequently fired the coach

 

I know you said later that they waited too long to fire Sampson, but this is really misleading to phrase this like that. IU found the illegal phone calls back in Septemberish. They offered Senderoff as the sacrificial lamb and considered it a done deal. It was only after the heat stayed on that Sampson's seat started getting warm. Then after it was a foregone conclusion that there'd be punishment, Sampson was given up.

 

Yes, that was certainly a cynical mistake by the IU administration (who I am not fond of at all -- well, I now think very highly of President McRobbie and have no opinion yet on AD Glass). It took too long -- which is why I said IU did almost everything they could be expected to do. Eventually, Sampson, the AD that hired him, the President that pushed for Sampson (Herbert was demoted much earlier) and all the players were forced out. IU cleaned house. They were not innocent bystanders by any means; they did, however, report and eventually clean up the mess.

[rchap24]

Purdue's got BC for the semi-finals tomorrow...anyone know what the other side of the bracket is?

[bukie]

Purdue's got BC for the semi-finals tomorrow...anyone know what the other side of the bracket is?

Oklahoma vs. Arizona....err, UAB. OU-UAB.

[fromthestretch]

Purdue's got BC for the semi-finals tomorrow...anyone know what the other side of the bracket is?

 

The other game is Oklahoma vs. UAB, I believe.

[rchap24]

Purdue's got BC for the semi-finals tomorrow...anyone know what the other side of the bracket is?

Oklahoma vs. Arizona....err, UAB. OU-UAB.

 

Ha oh I fogot about that. Think we should have no problem with BC, but Blake Griffin is disgusting. I think we'll struggle to guard him. Who'll guard him?

[SouthSideRyan]

I guess my issue is that IU is getting credit for some common sense moves(although considering some of the dirtbags around the college game, maybe that is something to be praised) Most of the kids who left left on their own accord, or didn't have the grades to stick around this year anyway.

[fromthestretch]

Purdue's got BC for the semi-finals tomorrow...anyone know what the other side of the bracket is?

Oklahoma vs. Arizona....err, UAB. OU-UAB.

 

Ha oh I fogot about that. Think we should have no problem with BC, but Blake Griffin is disgusting. I think we'll struggle to guard him. Who'll guard him?

 

Just pray that he gets in foul trouble early. Calasan is physically stronger than Johnson, so Calasan would probably be the best option to put on him.

[rchap24]

Purdue's got BC for the semi-finals tomorrow...anyone know what the other side of the bracket is?

Oklahoma vs. Arizona....err, UAB. OU-UAB.

 

Ha oh I fogot about that. Think we should have no problem with BC, but Blake Griffin is disgusting. I think we'll struggle to guard him. Who'll guard him?

 

Just pray that he gets in foul trouble early. Calasan is physically stronger than Johnson, so Calasan would probably be the best option to put on him.

 

That's what I'm thinking, but Calasan is a hacker, I don't have a good feeling about him stopping him. Will see though

[illiniguy]

The Indiana punishment was lighter because they self reported. If it wasn't lighter no one else would ever self report again. The real issue is the NCAA needs to do a better job of being the one who catches the cheating. Edited November 25, 2008 by illiniguy

[imb]

Purdue's got BC for the semi-finals tomorrow...anyone know what the other side of the bracket is?

Oklahoma vs. Arizona....err, UAB. OU-UAB.

 

Ha oh I fogot about that. Think we should have no problem with BC, but Blake Griffin is disgusting. I think we'll struggle to guard him. Who'll guard him?

 

Just pray that he gets in foul trouble early. Calasan is physically stronger than Johnson, so Calasan would probably be the best option to put on him.

 

That's what I'm thinking, but Calasan is a hacker, I don't have a good feeling about him stopping him. Will see though

 

hacking him may be the answer ... he's like a 55% FT shooter

[mul21]

Considering it was IU that found the illegal phone calls, reported them to the NCAA and subsequently fired the coach, I'd say they were clearly monitoring. It may not have been found soon enough, nor was Sampson fired soon enough, but they did almost everything you could ask of them after the initial grievous mistake of hiring Sampson.

 

This is exactly why I think they should have gotten more. They went out and hired him even though he was still on probation from his screw ups at OU.

[Exile on Waveland]

Considering it was IU that found the illegal phone calls, reported them to the NCAA and subsequently fired the coach, I'd say they were clearly monitoring. It may not have been found soon enough, nor was Sampson fired soon enough, but they did almost everything you could ask of them after the initial grievous mistake of hiring Sampson.

 

This is exactly why I think they should have gotten more. They went out and hired him even though he was still on probation from his screw ups at OU.

 

He didn't have a show cause. If the NCAA didn't want someone to hire him, they should have imposed sanctions against him moving jobs. They didn't; therefore, they implicitly gave other schools permission to hire him.

[Exile on Waveland]

Purdue's got BC for the semi-finals tomorrow...anyone know what the other side of the bracket is?

Oklahoma vs. Arizona....err, UAB. OU-UAB.

 

Ha oh I fogot about that. Think we should have no problem with BC, but Blake Griffin is disgusting. I think we'll struggle to guard him. Who'll guard him?

 

Just pray that he gets in foul trouble early. Calasan is physically stronger than Johnson, so Calasan would probably be the best option to put on him.

 

That's what I'm thinking, but Calasan is a hacker, I don't have a good feeling about him stopping him. Will see though

 

I'm not sure Purdue will stop Griffin at all. I'm also not sure that will keep them from winning.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Notre Dame wins essentially because Harangody made a 40 footer at the end of a shot clock.

[snoodmonger]

Tyshawn Taylor is going to be a good player.