Apparently, D. Rose, not wait that's too obvious, Derrick R. may have had gotten a major assist on the SAT...
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=4210798
And the Cats Pause crowd is oblivious
http://kentucky.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=1383&tid=128661831&mid=128661831&sid=888&style=2
Its a dirty business...... and its not like we took on a kid who was rumored to have had someone else take his ACT so he could become a partial qualifier? or wait we did.
Interesting timing; they have known for months but just released the details.
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2009/may/27/ncaa-alleges-major-violations-memphis-basketball-p/
you can NEVER compare anything MU has done to what Calipari has done in his shady career. His awful graduation rate and his habit of buying automobiles for recruits put him high on a list of all-time coaching sleazebags. You watch, Kentucky will be on probation inside of four years.
Any surprise here. He was a major proponent of no child left behind even if they couldnt read.
http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=48&f=1030&t=4367984
Guess it's catch me if you can.
Big surprise...every school that guy goes to runs into some trouble with the NCAA.
It is astounding, I mean not really, UK fans would murder their children for another championship, but just how bitter they are at, not at Cal, but at the media, at Memphis, at D. Rose, at Pat Forde, at UMass. But very few posters over on their boards could care less the slime this guy carries around with them.
Over at Cats Pause, one poster seriously argued that at Memphis, Cal was allowed to have women beaters and someone who was in a drive by shooting, but the UK administration will never let that happen here.
And they are openly mocking Memphis, "well, sucks for you guys, he is our coach now. enjoy your sanctions"
Cal, might hold the distinction of the only coach in NCAA history to have 2 FF vacated because of serious sanctions, but in their dream world that could never happen at UK. *Cough 1989 Cough*
Calapari is this generation's Jerry Tarkanian!
The difference is, Tark was a decent guy and a great defensive coach. Cal is a skunk of a huiman being.
Everyone talks about how dirty he is but he always seems to slime his way out of the situation. I think the big issue here will be did the "program" and therefore "Calipari" know about the bogus test D Rose took? unless they have an email or some Blagoyevich type phone tap I'm sure Calipari will slither away to his next NCAA run in.
Does this mean that Cal (like Kelvin Sampson) and TC are no longer BFFs?
I think my favorite part of the story comes from the Sun Times courtesy of Zagoria:
http://www.zagsblog.com/2009/05/28/did-derrick-rose-cheat-on-his-sat/#more-17087
Quote'' [The NCAA] thinks that [former Simeon player Kevin Johnson] took [the SAT test] for him," Luther Topps, who coached Rose's club basketball team with Derrick's brother Reggie, told the newspaper.
I can understanding cheating on the SAT for a top player with academic issues, I can even understand having someone else take the test for you. But I can't comprehend the thought process that goes into having Kevin f'n Johnson take the test for you. Don't you want to improve your chances at qualifying?
(For those who don't recall the name, Kevin Johnson played at UWM last year before transferring to Mineral Area Junior College....and then ending up in jail).
I'm a bit confused on the allegations. Are they saying that Memphis and Calipari knew about the bogus test? Do they believe that Calipari helped to hatch the plan or was involved with the plan with a payoff to the test monitors or something. If neither are true, and it was strictly the players actions, how can the Memphis be punished for relying on test scores provided to them by the national testing agency?
I'm not exactly sure how they administer the test these days, but back when I took it, it would have been a breeze to have another student take the exam. Risky yes, but not too difficult to accomplish. Who has taken the test recently? What is the procedure? If they have cameras or digital photo records this should be a cut and dry case.
Quote from: MilTown on May 28, 2009, 10:13:00 AM
I'm a bit confused on the allegations. Are they saying that Memphis and Calipari knew about the bogus test? Do they believe that Calipari helped to hatch the plan or was involved with the plan with a payoff to the test monitors or something. If neither are true, and it was strictly the players actions, how can the Memphis be punished for relying on test scores provided to them by the national testing agency?
I'm not exactly sure how they administer the test these days, but back when I took it, it would have been a breeze to have another student take the exam. Risky yes, but not too difficult to accomplish. Who has taken the test recently? What is the procedure? If they have cameras or digital photo records this should be a cut and dry case.
The SAT is run by the Collegeboard, and you sign up for the test via their website. You do get to choose the location you take it, so I imagine if you were going to have someone else take it for you, you want to make sure you go to location where no one will know who you are. Maybe 100 miles out or something. When you show up to the testing site, you need to show your SAT Admission ticket, SS Card, and a picture ID. So really, not that hard to get around the system.
Quote from: MilTown on May 28, 2009, 10:13:00 AM
I'm a bit confused on the allegations. Are they saying that Memphis and Calipari knew about the bogus test? Do they believe that Calipari helped to hatch the plan or was involved with the plan with a payoff to the test monitors or something. If neither are true, and it was strictly the players actions, how can the Memphis be punished for relying on test scores provided to them by the national testing agency?
They played with an illegal player. They would have to forfeit their games, but face no further significant punishment. Unless they knew about it or hatched it, then not only Memphis but Calipari could face sanctions.
True, they may have played with an illegal player, but based on their due dilligence, (verifying test scores directly with the national testing agency), the player was eligible at the time the games were played. I think it's unfair to take games away under that situation, assuming Memphis or Calipari knew nothing.
I understand how the NCAA works, but it just seems unfair on a few levels. This is also happening to Florida State, correct? They want to take away a number of Bowden's victories. Joe Paterno voiced his displeasure on the NCAA's actions.
i understand the rules and if nothing else the severity that needs to be doled out to avoid further occurences. but taking away 38 victories seems harsh...heck with that BS schedule and conference Memphis could have won 35 games with derrick roses grandma on the team.
Reason #312 the NBA rule banning high schoolers from entering the draft is pure folly.
Derrick Rose had no business in college. Didn't want to go to college. Had no need to go to college. Probably didn't benefit from going to college. Likely didn't even attend classes after January, and almost certainly left campus after his last game.
Yet the silly NBA essentially required him to go to college, mostly for the benefit of the NCAA and people who seem to believe kids turning pro after high school is a sign of the apocalypse ... except in baseball, hockey, tennis, soccer and golf.
I guess what makes me incredulous, is that no one really is going to be punished here at all. Memphis gets off the hook for being forthcoming, Calipari is at another school, apparently that's some sort of "sanctuary", and Rose is earning his millions in the NBA.
Quote from: CAINMUTINY on May 27, 2009, 08:40:55 PM
Its a dirty business...... and its not like we took on a kid who was rumored to have had someone else take his ACT so he could become a partial qualifier? or wait we did.
Can you please elaborate on this? That's the first I've heard. If you don't want to name names on the board, can you please send me a PM? That is news to me.
Quote from: MR.HAYWARD on May 28, 2009, 11:03:31 AM
i understand the rules and if nothing else the severity that needs to be doled out to avoid further occurences. but taking away 38 victories seems harsh...heck with that BS schedule and conference Memphis could have won 35 games with derrick roses grandma on the team.
I think retroactively taking away victories is a relatively meaningless penalty when compared scholarship and travel restrictions. I mean, Memphis fans still got the joy from the season, went to the Final Four, etc. Erasing the victories takes down those banners, but it doesn't take away the joy of the moment.
Quote from: MilTown on May 28, 2009, 10:52:06 AM
True, they may have played with an illegal player, but based on their due dilligence, (verifying test scores directly with the national testing agency), the player was eligible at the time the games were played. I think it's unfair to take games away under that situation, assuming Memphis or Calipari knew nothing.
I understand how the NCAA works, but it just seems unfair on a few levels. This is also happening to Florida State, correct? They want to take away a number of Bowden's victories. Joe Paterno voiced his displeasure on the NCAA's actions.
The question is, how do you enforce this with players that are one and done? D. Rose is the one to blame, but because of his one year at Memphis, he got great exposure and was an NBA lottery pick. How can you reprimand him now?
Is it fair to punish Memphis or Calipari? If innocent, they're the ones that were taken advantage of. So the NCAA wants to punish the innocent because ... ... they should have known that D. Rose was too dumb to qualify????? Doesn't the NCAA Clearinghouse review all these cases to ensure that all players meet the qualifications (don't we all know this from the Hayward and Mbakwe cases)? Shouldn't the NCAA make sure the NCAA Clearinghouse is doing it's job?
Quote from: Pakuni on May 28, 2009, 11:23:21 AM
Reason #312 the NBA rule banning high schoolers from entering the draft is pure folly.
Derrick Rose had no business in college. Didn't want to go to college. Had no need to go to college. Probably didn't benefit from going to college. Likely didn't even attend classes after January, and almost certainly left campus after his last game.
Yet the silly NBA essentially required him to go to college, mostly for the benefit of the NCAA and people who seem to believe kids turning pro after high school is a sign of the apocalypse ... except in baseball, hockey, tennis, soccer and golf.
Thank you.
If Derrick Rose grew up in Winnetka, took his amazing athletic gifts to the sport of tennis he would have been in Florida training at an IMG academy at age 13. But since his neighborhood favored hoops, he was forced to jump through ridiculous hoops, no pun intended to get to the professional level of his sport.
I wish the NBA would adopt the MLB rules. If you want to go pro, go. If you go to college you're there for 3 years. You make the call.
Quote from: lurch91 on May 28, 2009, 12:04:02 PM
The question is, how do you enforce this with players that are one and done? D. Rose is the one to blame, but because of his one year at Memphis, he got great exposure and was an NBA lottery pick. How can you reprimand him now?
Disagree. The NBA (and their NCAA enablers) are the ones to blame for making kids go to college when they have no desire, need or acumen for college.
I suspect Rose would have much preferred just going to the NBA than going to the extent of cheating on an entrance exam so he could spend six months in college.
And Rose would have been a lottery pick out of high school. Memphis needed him a lot more than he needed Memphis.
Quote from: CAINMUTINY on May 27, 2009, 08:40:55 PM
Its a dirty business...... and its not like we took on a kid who was rumored to have had someone else take his ACT so he could become a partial qualifier? or wait we did.
If you're going to have someone take the ACT for you, why not have them get a qualifying score so that you can play right away instead of missing a score and having to sit out a year?
So, while we're at it, should we blame the NFL for Maurice Clarrett?
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on May 28, 2009, 11:44:38 AM
Can you please elaborate on this? That's the first I've heard. If you don't want to name names on the board, can you please send me a PM? That is news to me.
I haven't heard about it either, but we've only had one partial qualifier in recent history ...
And supposedly he left school in good academic standing (albeit, without a diploma), so take it for what it's worth...
Quote from: rocky_warrior on May 28, 2009, 12:46:52 PM
I haven't heard about it either, but we've only had one partial qualifier in recent history ...
And supposedly he left school in good academic standing (albeit, without a diploma), so take it for what it's worth...
He also didn't get the ACT score that he needed, which is how he ended up as a partial qualifier in the first place. He had the grades, but not the test score. Not the other way around.
How in the world does Calipari not know that Derrick Rose's brother is on their chartered airplane going to Memphis's road games? No excuse for that - a violation that he had to have known about.
Quote from: Pakuni on May 28, 2009, 11:23:21 AM
Reason #312 the NBA rule banning high schoolers from entering the draft is pure folly.
Derrick Rose had no business in college. Didn't want to go to college. Had no need to go to college. Probably didn't benefit from going to college. Likely didn't even attend classes after January, and almost certainly left campus after his last game.
Yet the silly NBA essentially required him to go to college, mostly for the benefit of the NCAA and people who seem to believe kids turning pro after high school is a sign of the apocalypse ... except in baseball, hockey, tennis, soccer and golf.
Not only that, but for kids with great skills but aren't good at taking tests and fail to qualify... the NBA requires you to go to the NCAA, the NCAA won't have you because you didn't qualify, what are you supposed to do? Are we going to start seeing NBA lottery picks playing at JUCOs? (ok, I know they'd probably play in Europe or something else, but that's not necessarily ideal either.)
Quote from: The Wizard of West Salem on May 28, 2009, 11:56:44 AM
I think retroactively taking away victories is a relatively meaningless penalty when compared scholarship and travel restrictions. I mean, Memphis fans still got the joy from the season, went to the Final Four, etc. Erasing the victories takes down those banners, but it doesn't take away the joy of the moment.
But it seems to me it is offset by the stigma of having others look at the accomplishments of that season and your school as tainted. For example, it seems to me that a significant number of people generally suspect Kentucky of cheating at all times, based on past history. See also Michigan and the Fab Five situation -- when those players are mentioned now the NCAA violations are what a lot of people think about. (That, and CWebb's infamous timeout.)
Quote from: Pakuni on May 28, 2009, 12:16:59 PM
Disagree. The NBA (and their NCAA enablers) are the ones to blame for making kids go to college when they have no desire, need or acumen for college.
I suspect Rose would have much preferred just going to the NBA than going to the extent of cheating on an entrance exam so he could spend six months in college.
And Rose would have been a lottery pick out of high school. Memphis needed him a lot more than he needed Memphis.
I'm on board with your feelings toward the NBA and the NCAA. The athlete is caught in the middle as the "big boys" protect their turf.
But just because you or I or Derrick Rose disagree with the way voluntary organizations do their business, it doesn't provide moral cover for something as egregious as cheating on an entrance exam. Rose knew what the rules were and he had choices. Preparing for the test, going to a juco or playing in Europe were all viable and legitimate alternatives. Instead, he chose a course that will forever tarnish his reputation and reflect on his character. I hope his "handlers" and coach Cal are happy.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on May 28, 2009, 03:07:48 PM
But just because you or I or Derrick Rose disagree with the way voluntary organizations do their business, it doesn't provide moral cover for something as egregious as cheating on an entrance exam. Rose knew what the rules were and he had choices. Preparing for the test, going to a juco or playing in Europe were all viable and legitimate alternatives. Instead, he chose a course that will forever tarnish his reputation and reflect on his character. I hope his "handlers" and coach Cal are happy.
I highly doubt this does anything to affect, much less tarnish, Rose's reputation. Cheating on an entrace exam he shouldn't have been required to take hardly is the most egregious sin of which an NBA player has been guilty. A certain local hero ... we'll call him DW ... has done some cheating himself (along with, I suspect, 98 percent of the NBA) and I don't see many of his fans turning on him. Which cheating is worse?
I think people will get over this pretty quickly.
Quote from: Pakuni on May 28, 2009, 03:58:50 PM
I highly doubt this does anything to affect, much less tarnish, Rose's reputation. Cheating on an entrace exam he shouldn't have been required to take hardly is the most egregious sin of which an NBA player has been guilty. A certain local hero ... we'll call him DW ... has done some cheating himself (along with, I suspect, 98 percent of the NBA) and I don't see many of his fans turning on him. Which cheating is worse?
I think people will get over this pretty quickly.
You are probably right that most people will get over this quickly. And maybe I am hopelessly old fashioned to be put off by an athlete who has someone take the ACT for him.
As to which kind of cheating is worse, I don't know. You suspect that only 2% of NBA players are faithful to their spouses/girlfriends. Cheating is the norm, business as usual. Sadly, in a twisted way it all but becomes "acceptable" and does little to tarnish a reputation. But what percentage of NBA players take their own ACTs? How many had grades changed on the transcripts they sent to colleges? How many have family members on the take? How many caused their universities to forfeit any games or honors? My guess would be a) 99% b)less than 10% c)less than 25% and d) 0-1%. So I think there is some "shock value" to these allegations and if true may turn out to be more damaging than you think.
We wouldn't be having this conversation if colleges could pay their players.
Oops, zap, I'm dead. Just touched the third rail.
Quote from: Pakuni on May 28, 2009, 11:23:21 AM
Reason #312 the NBA rule banning high schoolers from entering the draft is pure folly.
Derrick Rose had no business in college. Didn't want to go to college. Had no need to go to college. Probably didn't benefit from going to college. Likely didn't even attend classes after January, and almost certainly left campus after his last game.
Yet the silly NBA essentially required him to go to college, mostly for the benefit of the NCAA and people who seem to believe kids turning pro after high school is a sign of the apocalypse ... except in baseball, hockey, tennis, soccer and golf.
I don't think that the NBA's age requirement has anything to do with benefiting the NCAA. IMO, it's all about improving the quality of the NBA product on the floor. The NBA feels that they get a better product with older players. I recognize that a one year lag doesn't make that much of a difference, but I think the NBA is going to try and push it for two years in a bit.
I fully agree with you that there is a double standard for basketball that isn't there in baseball, hockey, etc. I think that there is a definite racism component of this double-standard.
There is also the issue of NCAA eligibility. Frankly, it's egregious that an athlete (let's not be naive and call them student-athletes) can just stop attending classes if they plan on going pro.
This is why I am a fan of the move that Brandon Jennings made, recognizing that sending a young kid abroad at 18 has its own challenges.
However, the broader problem is the lack of full development leagues and minor league associations for the NBA. Where is the corresponding Juniors league or IMG for basketball?
Quote from: Henry Sugar on May 29, 2009, 08:52:04 AM
I don't think that the NBA's age requirement has anything to do with benefiting the NCAA.
I think for sure the rule benefits the NCAA, or at the very least its individual members.
How many additional tickets did Derrick Rose sell at Memphis, or at Memphis' road games? How much additional revenue did the university gain from its Final Four run, a run that would have been far less likely without Rose?
How much national attention would have been paid to the K-State basketball program without Michael Beasley?
How many Greg Oden jerseys did Ohio State sell? How much did Texas earn off Kevin Durant merchandise?
Plus, it's a gift that keeps on giving to these schools because it's safe bet that 10 years from now Memphis will be generating revenue from a new line of 'retro' Derrick Rose jerseys.
And I don't believe it's a stretch to say the NCAA as whole gains when its member institutions gain.
QuoteHowever, the broader problem is the lack of full development leagues and minor league associations for the NBA. Where is the corresponding Juniors league or IMG for basketball?
Why would NBA owners ever invest in a true developmental league when the NCAA is willing - heck, eager - to do it for them at no cost?
Quote from: MARQKC on May 29, 2009, 03:03:54 AM
We wouldn't be having this conversation if colleges could pay their players.
Oops, zap, I'm dead. Just touched the third rail.
You're exactly right, because the Marquette athletic department would cease to exist if we went down that path. The discussion wouldn't happen here at all, it would happen at about 100 schools in a super conference. That would be great. :o
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on May 29, 2009, 09:47:11 AM
You're exactly right, because the Marquette athletic department would cease to exist if we went down that path. The discussion wouldn't happen here at all, it would happen at about 100 schools in a super conference. That would be great. :o
Exactly. There are many, many reasons why paying players is unfeasible for the vast majority of athletic programs, not the least of which is Title IX.
Maybe some major football and basketball programs generate enough revenue to pay players, but do they make enough to pay an equal amount to members of the women's field hockey squad and the men's rowing team and the women's ice hockey team?
Because that's what Title IX would almost assuredly require. I can imagine no circumstance in which a university could pay players in only a couple "revenue producing" sports and not be in violation of Title IX.
I suspect even many of the largest athletic departments would struggle to pay all its athletes equally. Either that, or the amount they pay would be so small as to be insignificant to this issue.
Quote from: Pakuni on May 29, 2009, 09:46:14 AM
I think for sure the rule benefits the NCAA, or at the very least its individual members.
How many additional tickets did Derrick Rose sell at Memphis, or at Memphis' road games? How much additional revenue did the university gain from its Final Four run, a run that would have been far less likely without Rose?
How much national attention would have been paid to the K-State basketball program without Michael Beasley?
How many Greg Oden jerseys did Ohio State sell? How much did Texas earn off Kevin Durant merchandise?
Plus, it's a gift that keeps on giving to these schools because it's safe bet that 10 years from now Memphis will be generating revenue from a new line of 'retro' Derrick Rose jerseys.
And I don't believe it's a stretch to say the NCAA as whole gains when its member institutions gain.
I agree with everything you said. The NCAA and member institutions surely benefit. But it's not because the NBA increased the age requirement out of the goodness of their heart to help out their friends in the NCAA.
My point is that I believe the NBA increased their age requirement to benefit the NBA. Older players, more seasoned, etc. Don't quote me on this, but I'm pretty sure the only reason the age requirement wasn't greater was because of the Player's Association fighting it.
Quote from: Pakuni on May 29, 2009, 09:46:14 AM
Why would NBA owners ever invest in a true developmental league when the NCAA is willing - heck, eager - to do it for them at no cost?
I agree with you (although for semantics I'd say "at no charge"). There is no incentive for an alternative development program.
The only viable options seem to be better enforcement by the NCAA (ingress and egress) and more players opting to head to Europe.
Quote from: PE8983 on May 28, 2009, 12:57:43 PM
How in the world does Calipari not know that Derrick Rose's brother is on their chartered airplane going to Memphis's road games? No excuse for that - a violation that he had to have known about.
Derrick's brother was on numerous charter and paid is way except for 2. Cal will chalk it up to an "accounting error". Cal will say he was not in charge of collecting the fees for the charter.
Don't we already pay players? I wonder if anyone has done a study on how much student athletes are typically compensated over the course of their college careers. Would be a bit different for in-state public school athletes versues the rest. But still pretty interesting. Tuition, r&b, food, clothing, I'm guessing some transportation assistance. At today's pricier private schools (ND, etc.) it has to get up to $200,000 to $225,000 a year.