2 IU Freshman Suspended

[Benny B]

Silly me, I was working under the notion that we only punish people when wrongdoing can be proven, not because of suspicion and innuendo. Good thing that was at least the case after some MU player hijinks in October 2010.

The only thing that made these benefits "illegal" was that Adams gave IU a whopping total of $185 over a 6-year period more than two decades ago.

Seriously, does any objective source out there think IU and these players were treated fairly?

No.  But rules are rules, and Adams broke them.  He can complain about how ridiculous the rule is, but he also needs to accept complete responsibility for the suspension.  The NCAA didn't treat IU and the players unfairly, Adams did.

[Pakuni]

No.  But rules are rules, and Adams broke them.  He can complain about how ridiculous the rule is, but he also needs to accept complete responsibility for the suspension.  The NCAA didn't treat IU and the players unfairly, Adams did.

For sure, Adams should have known 25 years ago that buying some stickers for his wife's car window  would lead to ridiculous suspensions for kids who had yet to be born.
I mean, it was sooooo obvious.

Hooray for enforcement of the stupid.

[Benny B]

For sure, Adams should have known 25 years ago that buying some stickers for his wife's car window  would lead to ridiculous suspensions for kids who had yet to be born.
I mean, it was sooooo obvious.

Hooray for enforcement of the stupid.

No... he should have known that he was still considered an IU booster when he doled out thousands of dollars in benefits to these kids and then funneled them to IU just a few months ago.

Stupid is as stupid does.  And Adams did.

[GGGG]

No... he should have known that he was still considered an IU booster when he doled out thousands of dollars in benefits to these kids and then funneled them to IU just a few months ago.

Stupid is as stupid does.  And Adams did.

Really?  So he can no longer send his AAU players to IU because of a gift he made 20 years ago?  So no player who is even remotely interested in playing at IU can risk playing for his AAU team?  This makes sense to you?

Felons get more leeway than this.  Honestly, how anyone can defend this stupid, wrong-headed decision by the NCAA is beyond me.

[Lennys Tap]

Silly me, I was working under the notion that we only punish people when wrongdoing can be proven, not because of suspicion and innuendo. Good thing that was at least the case after some MU player hijinks in October 2010.

Silly indeed. Like it or hate it (I hate it), the NCAA is a voluntarily joined organization. They don't need the kind of proof required in our criminal courts. They can be as vague (I love the whole "lack of institutional control" thing) and as arbitrary as they please.

That said, does anyone anywhere (other than Chicos) think that this whole "arrangement" (hiring sons of coaches, making sons of board members preferred walk ons, etc., then, Voila! being suddenly funneled all that program's best players) isn't a quid pro quo that's squirmworthy? That would be an insult to anyone's intelligence.

[Pakuni]

Silly indeed. Like it or hate it (I hate it), the NCAA is a voluntarily joined organization. They don't need the kind of proof required in our criminal courts. They can be as vague (I love the whole "lack of institutional control" thing) and as arbitrary as they please.

That said, does anyone anywhere (other than Chicos) think that this whole "arrangement" (hiring sons of coaches, making sons of board members preferred walk ons, etc., then, Voila! being suddenly funneled all that program's best players) isn't a quid pro quo that's squirmworthy? That would be an insult to anyone's intelligence.

Actually, the NCAA establishes itself as a quasi-legal organization with clearly stated rules outlining the enforcement process. They cannot be as vague as they please, and they do need proof before issuing sanctions. Not proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but proof nonetheless.

Sure it's squirmworthy. I said that when the ESPN report came out last year.
But I still have the old-fashioned belief that one shouldn't be punished based simply on an accusation.

[Pakuni]

Honestly, how anyone can defend this stupid, wrong-headed decision by the NCAA is beyond me.

It might have something to do with the coach at Indiana.
Just a guess.

[Lennys Tap]

Actually, the NCAA establishes itself as a quasi-legal organization with clearly stated rules outlining the enforcement process. They cannot be as vague as they please, and they do need proof before issuing sanctions. Not proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but proof nonetheless.

True, but when the regulator is the investigator, judge, jury and executioner how much real proof do they need?

[Pakuni]

True, but when the regulator is the investigator, judge, jury and executioner how much real proof do they need?

That's not correct.
Both the NCAA infractions committee and infractions appeals committee are made up primarily of representatives of NCAA members, i.e. school administrators, professors, conference officials, etc.
Schools literally make their cases before a jury of their peers. Sanctions aren't handed down by NCAA administrators. They're handed down by NCAA members.

[GGGG]

Silly indeed. Like it or hate it (I hate it), the NCAA is a voluntarily joined organization. They don't need the kind of proof required in our criminal courts. They can be as vague (I love the whole "lack of institutional control" thing) and as arbitrary as they please.

That said, does anyone anywhere (other than Chicos) think that this whole "arrangement" (hiring sons of coaches, making sons of board members preferred walk ons, etc., then, Voila! being suddenly funneled all that program's best players) isn't a quid pro quo that's squirmworthy? That would be an insult to anyone's intelligence.

Of course it is squirmy.  It also breaks no rule.  At some point the NCAA cant simply legislate everything in an attempt to have a perfectly level playing field - especially when kids get caught in the cross hairs as a result.  Life isn't fair...deal with it.

[Lennys Tap]

That's not correct.
Both the NCAA infractions committee and infractions appeals committee are made up primarily of representatives of NCAA members, i.e. school administrators, professors, conference officials, etc.
Schools literally make their cases before a jury of their peers. Sanctions aren't handed down by NCAA administrators. They're handed down by NCAA members.

Well, if these sanctions followed due process and were meted out by a jury of IU's peers I guess no one has a reason to complain. Didn't know that.

[Pakuni]

Well, if these sanctions followed due process and were meted out by a jury of IU's peers I guess no one has a reason to complain. Didn't know that.

Right, right.
Cause they never get anything wrong.

[Dr. Blackheart]

We can agree on three things:
1)  The noted infraction is lame.
2)  The wrong parties (the kids) bore the brunt of the penalty, rather harshly for the crime of some one else years ago.
3)  Indiana basketball has now been cited by the NCAA for three minor infractions while they were still on major NCAA probation.

Can we also agree?:
1)  The NCAA must have felt there was a deeper reason to mete out such a harsh penalty--whether with direct proof or circumstantial of more squirminess, per ESPN.  
2)  CTC has incurred three minor NCAA violations on his watch, but he does not have to sit out a game to be held accountable.
3)  Indiana's major NCAA probation period was violated three times with these minor violations, but suffered little for said violations.  The NCAA must have a double-secret probation clause for certain schools.  

[Pakuni]

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/8601441/ncaa-rules-two-indiana-hoosiers-players-miss-9-games

This has nothing to do with Crean or IU bashing, just that to me the punishment does not fit the crime. Last year Juan Anderson suspended 3 games for accepting Brewers playoff tickets. Tickets cost what maybe $300?!

These guys only suspended 9 games for benefits somewhere between $6000 and $8000 

The benefits were a place to live, food, school supplies and travel back to Africa to visit their families, provided through a foundation Adams runs that brings foreign kids to the U.S. to play ball in hopes of getting a scholarship.

[bilsu]

I have trouble with the idea that a small donation made several years ago makes you a booster. When an AAU coach or someone like Worldwide Wes(?) routinely steers players to Calipari and is not considered a booster. It would seem to me that you are a booster if you are steering players to a particular program.

[Benny B]

Really?  So he can no longer send his AAU players to IU because of a gift he made 20 years ago?  So no player who is even remotely interested in playing at IU can risk playing for his AAU team?  This makes sense to you?

Felons get more leeway than this.  Honestly, how anyone can defend this stupid, wrong-headed decision by the NCAA is beyond me.

Stupid rule?  Agreed.
Shortsighted decision?  Agreed.
Selective enforcement?  Sure.
Kids unfairly caught in the cross hairs?  Absolutely.

None of that changes the fact that ADAMS VIOLATED NCAA RULES.  Stealing bread to feed your starving family is still stealing.  Why is this concept so difficult for people to understand?

[Lennys Tap]

I have trouble with the idea that a small donation made several years ago makes you a booster. When an AAU coach or someone like Worldwide Wes(?) routinely steers players to Calipari and is not considered a booster. It would seem to me that you are a booster if you are steering players to a particular program.

I agree. It's nitpicking that Adam's is considered a booster because he gave $185 to IU 25 years ago. OTOH, it's ridiculous to think that the same guy (whose kid was hired by IU and has since funneled all of his top talent there) isn't a booster now.

[mugrad99]

The benefits were a place to live, food, school supplies and travel back to Africa to visit their families, provided through a foundation Adams runs that brings foreign kids to the U.S. to play ball in hopes of getting a scholarship.

Interested to know who made the biggest donations to his foundation....

[mugrad99]

When's the last time anyone won their case using the "that's a stupid rule/law" defense?  And why should this be the first?

The Supreme Court hears these kinds of cases every session.

[Benny B]

The Supreme Court hears these kinds of cases every session.

My bad... I was using it in the context of more low-brow issues with which we might be more familiar: underage drinking, not showing up to class, GPA requirements, why can't MU be more like ND, sales tax on seat donations, etc.

[Lennys Tap]

The Supreme Court hears these kinds of cases every session.

Do the Supremes hear complaints from members of voluntary organizations on rules/enforcement?

[Lennys Tap]

Interested to know who made the biggest donations to his foundation....

Think there are a few IU boosters on that list?

[Pakuni]

Do the Supremes hear complaints from members of voluntary organizations on rules/enforcement?

Yes.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/488/179

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/468/85

[GGGG]

Stupid rule?  Agreed.
Shortsighted decision?  Agreed.
Selective enforcement?  Sure.
Kids unfairly caught in the cross hairs?  Absolutely.

None of that changes the fact that ADAMS VIOLATED NCAA RULES.  Stealing bread to feed your starving family is still stealing.  Why is this concept so difficult for people to understand?

So is speeding when you go 56 in a 55 zone....and it would be lame to enforce it...which is why no police force does it.  

[Dawson Rental]

Stupid rule?  Agreed.
Shortsighted decision?  Agreed.
Selective enforcement?  Sure.
Kids unfairly caught in the cross hairs?  Absolutely.

None of that changes the fact that ADAMS VIOLATED NCAA RULES.  Stealing bread to feed your starving family is still stealing.  Why is this concept so difficult for people to understand?

So is speeding when you go 56 in a 55 zone....and it would be lame to enforce it...which is why no police force does it.  

As a wise man once said: "Life isn't fair...deal with it."