After a sensational opening day of the real first round (now called Round Two), yesterday's second half of the round was far less compelling. As a matter of fact, it bordered on disappointing.
First, there was the issue of overhyped Big East and Big Ten schools advancing to the second round (now called Round Three). While the Big East hit some tumbling blocks, including Georgetown's surrender to potential cinderella Virginia Commonwealth and Villanova's nail-biting loss to potential cinderella George Mason, the league still had three victories Friday. Notre Dame and Syracuse won as expected, but the crucial game of the day for the conference was Marquette's convincing victory over #5 seed Xavier. It wasn't as close as the final score of 66-55 indicated.
Even worse to this observer than the Big East's surge was the Big Ten's immaculate performance Friday. Michigan and Ohio State each won by about 30, while Purdue won by about 20. In the closest game for conference teams, Illinois beat UNLV 73-62, although that was also a blow out until the last few minutes.
Entering today's action, the Big East had seven of its eleven teams still standing and the Big Ten had five of its seven teams remaining.
Second, there was the issue of lopsided games. While Thursday provided plenty of drama (9 of 16 games decided by single digits), Friday produced very few games watchable until the end. Only five games were decided by less than ten points, and only three of them were truly engaging: Washington's 68-65 victory over Georgia, Arizona's 77-75 edging of Memphis, and George Mason's 61-57 heart-stopper over Villanova.
Of course, Villanova didn't belong in the tourney because it had lost its last five games of the season. In this case, justice was served. The George Mason coach provided another highlight at game's end, when he gave emotional praise to his Colonial conference as well as to his school and players: another tremendous performance.
Is it just me, or does the young Arizona coach look like a reject from a Goodfellas audition? Is it just me, or does Syracuse, with its relatively new emasculated nickname change to the Orange, have the lamest mascot in all of Division One? I know, there is the matter of the equally emasculated nickname change and resultant mascot change to the Stanford Cardinal dancing tree.
Anyway, the West had another strong performance Friday, off-setting some of the disappointment. Of the three teams in Pacific or Mountain time zones, only UNLV was a no-show. The Pac-10, after a rocky start of its own when USC failed to show up in a play-in game earlier in the week, has won its other three early games.
What will Saturday bring? Hopefully, the day will produce more close games, more West wins, more Big East and Big Ten losses, and more great plays. With Jimmer Fredette and BYU playing today, the last wish is a given. Enjoy the tournament!
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Friday, March 18, 2011
NCAA Basketball Tournament: First Day Highlights
The real Day One of the NCAA men's tournament produced some great drama, plays, and emotions. For drama, Six of the 16 games were decided by three points or less. For plays, just watch BYU's Jimmer Fredette. For emotion, I can't decide what is more beautiful: watching a Big East team with a moral coach like Rick Pitino lose to a Morehead State or watching a team from the West pound and humble a Big East team with a former ESPN broadcaster.
Either way, the Big East is proving they didn't deserve eleven teams in the tournament. Sure, UConn and Pittsburgh are legitimate title contenders, but as Sir Charles said more than once, the conference is vastly over-rated.
Speaking of over-rated, it was sensational to watch Penn State and Michigan State lose, showing how the Big 10 did not deserve seven teams in the tournament.
Other highlights include Princeton's valiant defeat against Kentucky and Butler's win against ODU. Butler could be the real cinderella again this year: what a coach!
Speaking of good coaches, UCLA and San Diego State have them, and that makes them both the best chance for a team from the West making the Final Four.
Who did I pick to win it all? I might be a defender (and some would say homer) of the West, but I'm also a realist: I took Kansas.
Finally, the television coverage has it right. Not since the ESPN early-round coverage days has it been so complete. And the analysis? While Sir Charles was rather sedate yesterday, he's still Sir Charles, and he has the Big East hyperbole right. He deflates it, too.
Enjoy Day Two!
Either way, the Big East is proving they didn't deserve eleven teams in the tournament. Sure, UConn and Pittsburgh are legitimate title contenders, but as Sir Charles said more than once, the conference is vastly over-rated.
Speaking of over-rated, it was sensational to watch Penn State and Michigan State lose, showing how the Big 10 did not deserve seven teams in the tournament.
Other highlights include Princeton's valiant defeat against Kentucky and Butler's win against ODU. Butler could be the real cinderella again this year: what a coach!
Speaking of good coaches, UCLA and San Diego State have them, and that makes them both the best chance for a team from the West making the Final Four.
Who did I pick to win it all? I might be a defender (and some would say homer) of the West, but I'm also a realist: I took Kansas.
Finally, the television coverage has it right. Not since the ESPN early-round coverage days has it been so complete. And the analysis? While Sir Charles was rather sedate yesterday, he's still Sir Charles, and he has the Big East hyperbole right. He deflates it, too.
Enjoy Day Two!
Thursday, March 17, 2011
March Madness Selection Committee: Corrections and Further Observations
First, allow me to provide a couple corrections to my previous column's questionable math and labels two days ago. As you may recall, my "modest proposal" called for two teams from each of the 31 automatic qualifying conferences to receive bids to the Division One NCAA Men's Basketball Championship Tournament. Since there are now 68 teams in the tourney, that leaves six, not five, at-large bids to be granted judiciously in six separate conferences. I apologize for the bad math.
Do the at-large bids have to go to the six BCS football power conferences? No. We're talking basketball, not football. Subdivisions and categories of Division One conferences only apply to football and the football postseason. Those six major conferences receive enough special treatment in the biggest revenue-generating sport. Why not be more egalitarian in the other sports? For example, this year the Big East would deserve a third team, but so would the Mountain West, a mid-major conference. Likewise, the Big 10 would deserve a third team, but so would the Atlantic 10, a non-football conference.
My previous column also needed more clarity and accuracy when it came to describing the schools and conferences. Obviously, mid-major schools only come from the mid-major football conferences: Conference USA, Mid-American Conference, Mountain West Conference, Sun Belt Conference, and the Western Athletic Conference. With that in mind, schools from the 12 championship subdivision conferences or schools from the eight non-football conferences and all independent schools associated therewith should have been called something besides "mid-major" or "small school." Apologies again.
The term "small school" should only be used for Division Three and NAIA colleges, although many of them have enrollments larger than 7500. Perhaps the term should just be shelved.
With corrections out of the way, let me make a few more observations. First, what's with the new nomenclature for early tournament rounds? I don't have a problem with calling the first four play-in games "The First Four." It is technically a pre-round, though, not a First Round. Where it becomes problematic is when the first full round played on Thursday and Friday is now called Round Two/Second Round and the second full round played on Saturday and Sunday is now called Round Three/Third Round. Really?
We all know what this name change is all about. It's about gradually preparing the public mindset to accept what for many is extremely unpopular: the expansion of the tournament field to 128. I know. I should learn my lesson and avoid any further explorations of math and numbers. The trouble is, I can't.
A solid analogy for the round's name change is what the Sacramento Kings franchise of the NBA is currently doing. Of late, the Kings have been wearing uniforms with the word "Royals" replacing "Kings." This references the old franchise name when the team played in Rochester and Cincinnati. It also portends of the future, an unpopular future for many Sacramento fans, as the team prepares to relocate to Anaheim next year. The NHL L. A. Kings will force a name change for the NBA Kings when/if they enter their market. To most observers, the move is a foregone conclusion.
Some purists find the prospects of an NCAA Championship Tournament almost doubling to 128 an
appalling thought. I'm one of those. Don't we have enough Division One postseason slots now with the 32 found in the NIT, the 24 found in the CollegeInsider.com, and the 16 found in the College Basketball Invitational in addition to the 68 already set in the NCAA? I believe that makes a total of 140 Division One schools playing basketball in this year's postseason. Pretty good, huh?
If the NCAA goes in the near future to a full first round rather than just a First Four, that would boost the total to 200 teams. It sounds ludicrous. It sounds like Division One college football, where 70 of the 120 schools in the Football Bowl Subdivision qualify for postseason play. Can you spell "saturation"? There are 346 Division One men's basketball teams, so well over half would be playing postseason ball under that scenario. It means all conferences would be like the Big 10 and the Big East this year, where almost two-thirds of the teams qualified for postseason tournaments. Pass the smelling salts.
Do the at-large bids have to go to the six BCS football power conferences? No. We're talking basketball, not football. Subdivisions and categories of Division One conferences only apply to football and the football postseason. Those six major conferences receive enough special treatment in the biggest revenue-generating sport. Why not be more egalitarian in the other sports? For example, this year the Big East would deserve a third team, but so would the Mountain West, a mid-major conference. Likewise, the Big 10 would deserve a third team, but so would the Atlantic 10, a non-football conference.
My previous column also needed more clarity and accuracy when it came to describing the schools and conferences. Obviously, mid-major schools only come from the mid-major football conferences: Conference USA, Mid-American Conference, Mountain West Conference, Sun Belt Conference, and the Western Athletic Conference. With that in mind, schools from the 12 championship subdivision conferences or schools from the eight non-football conferences and all independent schools associated therewith should have been called something besides "mid-major" or "small school." Apologies again.
The term "small school" should only be used for Division Three and NAIA colleges, although many of them have enrollments larger than 7500. Perhaps the term should just be shelved.
With corrections out of the way, let me make a few more observations. First, what's with the new nomenclature for early tournament rounds? I don't have a problem with calling the first four play-in games "The First Four." It is technically a pre-round, though, not a First Round. Where it becomes problematic is when the first full round played on Thursday and Friday is now called Round Two/Second Round and the second full round played on Saturday and Sunday is now called Round Three/Third Round. Really?
We all know what this name change is all about. It's about gradually preparing the public mindset to accept what for many is extremely unpopular: the expansion of the tournament field to 128. I know. I should learn my lesson and avoid any further explorations of math and numbers. The trouble is, I can't.
A solid analogy for the round's name change is what the Sacramento Kings franchise of the NBA is currently doing. Of late, the Kings have been wearing uniforms with the word "Royals" replacing "Kings." This references the old franchise name when the team played in Rochester and Cincinnati. It also portends of the future, an unpopular future for many Sacramento fans, as the team prepares to relocate to Anaheim next year. The NHL L. A. Kings will force a name change for the NBA Kings when/if they enter their market. To most observers, the move is a foregone conclusion.
Some purists find the prospects of an NCAA Championship Tournament almost doubling to 128 an
appalling thought. I'm one of those. Don't we have enough Division One postseason slots now with the 32 found in the NIT, the 24 found in the CollegeInsider.com, and the 16 found in the College Basketball Invitational in addition to the 68 already set in the NCAA? I believe that makes a total of 140 Division One schools playing basketball in this year's postseason. Pretty good, huh?
If the NCAA goes in the near future to a full first round rather than just a First Four, that would boost the total to 200 teams. It sounds ludicrous. It sounds like Division One college football, where 70 of the 120 schools in the Football Bowl Subdivision qualify for postseason play. Can you spell "saturation"? There are 346 Division One men's basketball teams, so well over half would be playing postseason ball under that scenario. It means all conferences would be like the Big 10 and the Big East this year, where almost two-thirds of the teams qualified for postseason tournaments. Pass the smelling salts.
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
March Madness Selection Committee: A Modest Proposal
Is anybody else sick of the usual biases that surface each and every year when the NCAA men's basketball selection committee makes its choices and seedings public for the championship tournament? Should we expect anything different? Can we hope for something different? Under present rules and conditions, I think not. It is time to propose something new that would actually simplify the selection process and reduce anti-West, anti-mid-major biases.
First, some good news: the tournament as it stands is still terrific drama, with strategy and athleticism to spare. Unlike in football, non-BCS schools from mid-major conferences have a chance to compete for the number one spot in basketball. All they have to do, once selected for the tournament, is win six or seven games in a row.
More good news? Every tournament game will be shown in its entirety everywhere in the USA that offers CBS, TNT, TBS, CBS College Sports, and truTV. The great in-studio TNT crew of Ernie Johnson, Kenny Smith, and Charles Barkley will also be on hand for much of the action.
Other good news? The ten members of the NCAA selection committee are carefully selected to represent a cross-section of schools and conferences large and small, from East to West.
More good news? Every tournament game will be shown in its entirety everywhere in the USA that offers CBS, TNT, TBS, CBS College Sports, and truTV. The great in-studio TNT crew of Ernie Johnson, Kenny Smith, and Charles Barkley will also be on hand for much of the action.
Other good news? The ten members of the NCAA selection committee are carefully selected to represent a cross-section of schools and conferences large and small, from East to West.
This year, the committee consists of athletic directors from UConn (Big East), Wake Forest (ACC), Ohio State (Big 10), Xavier (Atlantic 10), SMU (Conference-USA), UT-San Antonio (Southland), Utah State (WAC) and UC Riverside (Big West), as well as conference commissioners from the Big 12 and the Big Sky. The chairperson is Gene Smith of The Ohio State University (no surprise). Noticeably absent are any representatives from the other major conferences, the Pac-10 and the SEC.
Did they get it right? Are the selections and seedings properly objective? For the most part, given the complicated rules and conditions they work under (or set themselves), I would say perhaps. However, there is room for improvement. Discrimination against smaller schools, smaller conferences, and schools in the West still runs rampant.
The committee hides behind allegedly objective criteria (won-loss records, road records, records against Top 25 foes, recent trends, RPI's, strength of schedules, and strength of conferences) just as the BCS committee hides behind its allegedly objective criteria to retain the status quo in major college football making it virtually impossible for non-BCS schools and conferences to become BCS eligible in future bowl games or seasons.
I know some observers focus on poor Colorado, Virginia Tech and Alabama this year. Yes, Virginia Tech was robbed again. But Colorado? The team finished sixth in the Big 12. I hate to say this because I normally defend teams in the West, but were they really robbed? Was Cal robbed for being denied a tourney bid when they tied for fourth in the Pac-10 with USC and got thoroughly thrashed in the conference tournament by those same inconsistent Trojans? I think not. Nevertheless, better Cal and Colorado than Marquette and Villanova, Big East stocking stuffers. It would be better for geographic diversity.
Let us focus on second-place teams in mid-major conferences, particularly those in the West (from Hawaii, Pacific, or Mountain time zones). I contend that many of them have been robbed for many years. Oftentimes, strength of conference and strength of schedule are a matter of impressions, not just records.
What is the disturbing rule and related vicious cycle pertaining thereto? Selection committee members must base their questions and decisions on games they have actually seen in their entirety, whether in person, on live television, or on DVR. Four members live in the eastern time zone. Three members live in the central time zone. How many stay up late to watch live games from the West when they have full-time day jobs? How many are dedicated enough to take time from their busy schedules to watch in full games from previous nights on their DVR's? How much fun is it for anybody to watch a game in its entirety when the result is already known via the internet or newspaper?
I submit old games aren't watched much due to human nature. The drama for a competitive contest where the result is known in advance is lower than the drama during Final Jeopardy when the leader has more than double the score of his or her closest competitor. That means most discussions and questions concern central and eastern time zone schools. That, combined with the already-prevalent national media bias for Midwest and East teams, creates a perfect storm for recruits and a vicious cycle for schools in the West.
A star recruit wants to attend a power conference school, a school that receives maximum media exposure, media favoritism, and selection committee preference (subconciously or rule-related consciously). The player signs to play with a power conference team, the team flourishes in its non-conference schedule, the conference flourishes with its NCAA tournament selections, and the non-power conferences continue to decline in strength, perceived and actual. The cycle continues.
Is it a healthy cycle? Exaggerating cause and effect, does the tournament really need eleven teams from the Big East and seven teams from the Big 10? I thought the end-of-season major conference tournaments meant more than just seedings in the NCAA tourney. Who knew the eleventh-place game was the most important in the Big East tourney? What a joke! The conference tournaments aren't going anywhere: they are all great revenue producers.
Let us focus on second-place teams in mid-major conferences, particularly those in the West (from Hawaii, Pacific, or Mountain time zones). I contend that many of them have been robbed for many years. Oftentimes, strength of conference and strength of schedule are a matter of impressions, not just records.
What is the disturbing rule and related vicious cycle pertaining thereto? Selection committee members must base their questions and decisions on games they have actually seen in their entirety, whether in person, on live television, or on DVR. Four members live in the eastern time zone. Three members live in the central time zone. How many stay up late to watch live games from the West when they have full-time day jobs? How many are dedicated enough to take time from their busy schedules to watch in full games from previous nights on their DVR's? How much fun is it for anybody to watch a game in its entirety when the result is already known via the internet or newspaper?
I submit old games aren't watched much due to human nature. The drama for a competitive contest where the result is known in advance is lower than the drama during Final Jeopardy when the leader has more than double the score of his or her closest competitor. That means most discussions and questions concern central and eastern time zone schools. That, combined with the already-prevalent national media bias for Midwest and East teams, creates a perfect storm for recruits and a vicious cycle for schools in the West.
A star recruit wants to attend a power conference school, a school that receives maximum media exposure, media favoritism, and selection committee preference (subconciously or rule-related consciously). The player signs to play with a power conference team, the team flourishes in its non-conference schedule, the conference flourishes with its NCAA tournament selections, and the non-power conferences continue to decline in strength, perceived and actual. The cycle continues.
Is it a healthy cycle? Exaggerating cause and effect, does the tournament really need eleven teams from the Big East and seven teams from the Big 10? I thought the end-of-season major conference tournaments meant more than just seedings in the NCAA tourney. Who knew the eleventh-place game was the most important in the Big East tourney? What a joke! The conference tournaments aren't going anywhere: they are all great revenue producers.
Even with the expanded tournament field (from 65 to 68, although 64 is just right), BCS major conferences accounted for (hogged) 30 of the 37 at-large bids. Zzzzzzz. Wake me when it's over. I thought diversity was important, not just as a concept but as something to practice. Evidently, I'm mistaken.
Allow me to make a modest proposal that would make the NCAA basketball tournament much more exciting and diverse. At this time, there are 31 automatic bids and 37 at-large bids. I suggest that each automatic qualifying conference be given two bids, meaning there would only be five at-large bids. Three teams each from the Big East, Big 10, ACC, SEC, and Pac-10 is acceptable.
Think how much easier and faster the selection committee would have it. Seedings would still be somewhat controversial, but pairings and bracketing would be easy, too. Keeping teams from the same conference in different regional brackets would be a cinch.
Allow me to make a modest proposal that would make the NCAA basketball tournament much more exciting and diverse. At this time, there are 31 automatic bids and 37 at-large bids. I suggest that each automatic qualifying conference be given two bids, meaning there would only be five at-large bids. Three teams each from the Big East, Big 10, ACC, SEC, and Pac-10 is acceptable.
Think how much easier and faster the selection committee would have it. Seedings would still be somewhat controversial, but pairings and bracketing would be easy, too. Keeping teams from the same conference in different regional brackets would be a cinch.
What is the best reason for making this proposal a reality? It would make college basketball more like college football in that every game would count. Teams from power conferences couldn't just coast through the regular season and conference tournament knowing they would qualify for the Big Dance as long as they finished with a record above .500. It also wouldn't penalize teams and players from mid-major conferences who might steamroll through the regular season but lose a tournament bid on a fluke last-second shot against them in a conference tournament game.
With the new rule, both the regular season champ and the conference tournament champ would qualify for the Big Dance if they were two different teams. If they were the same team, then the second conference qualifier would be the team with the second-best conference record percentage-wise, including conference tournament games.
I also propose eliminating the games-in-their-entirety viewing rule which works against teams in the West without national reputations (meaning every school except UCLA, Arizona, and Gonzaga). I suggest that highlights from ESPN or another media outlet should suffice so more committee members could at least get some cursory knowledge of all of the conferences in the West.
With the new rule, both the regular season champ and the conference tournament champ would qualify for the Big Dance if they were two different teams. If they were the same team, then the second conference qualifier would be the team with the second-best conference record percentage-wise, including conference tournament games.
I also propose eliminating the games-in-their-entirety viewing rule which works against teams in the West without national reputations (meaning every school except UCLA, Arizona, and Gonzaga). I suggest that highlights from ESPN or another media outlet should suffice so more committee members could at least get some cursory knowledge of all of the conferences in the West.
Imagine looking forward to a 2011 NCAA championship tournament with teams like Saint Mary's, Long Beach State, Montana, Boise State, and Harvard instead of Marquette, Villanova, Michigan State, Penn State, and Vanderbilt.
In the long run, does it really matter who the bottom 32-36 teams are in the tournament when one of the favorites almost always wins? No. Therefore, make the Big Dance fun again by selecting diversity over virtual power conference tournament replays for each of the four regional brackets.
As an aside, did you know selection committee members are also responsible for assigning officials to handle the tournament games? Hopefully, the members never allow for a conflict of interest to occur on the court. With Mr. Gene Smith of The Ohio State University in charge, I'm sure there is nothing to worry about. Or is there?
In the long run, does it really matter who the bottom 32-36 teams are in the tournament when one of the favorites almost always wins? No. Therefore, make the Big Dance fun again by selecting diversity over virtual power conference tournament replays for each of the four regional brackets.
As an aside, did you know selection committee members are also responsible for assigning officials to handle the tournament games? Hopefully, the members never allow for a conflict of interest to occur on the court. With Mr. Gene Smith of The Ohio State University in charge, I'm sure there is nothing to worry about. Or is there?
Saturday, March 12, 2011
The Schools for Scandal This Week: Ohio State and Oregon
Unlike Richard Sheridan's witty dialogue in his 1777 play, The School for Scandal, recent comments made by Oregon and The Ohio State representatives concerning alleged or proven NCAA violations take its audience for complete imbeciles or gullible innocents. Is it a sign of the further dumbing down of language and culture or is it a sign of something far worse--complicit erosion of values between school and society, including rabid fan bases? In other words, the fan base expects the school to say something, anything, to deflect the scrutiny of the national media. Then, the fan base expects the storm to pass and life to proceed as usual. Why? Because the school president, athletic director, or head coach has met his or her job description by addressing the issue, even if said address occurs in skate-around fashion.
The potential scandal involving the Oregon football program concerns payments made to two individuals in Texas: up to $25,000.00 went to Willie Lyles of Complete Scouting Services in Houston (including $16,500.00 that went to the service itself) and $3745.00 to Baron Flenory of New Level Athletics and Badger Sports Elite 7-on-7 football camps. Most big-time BCS football programs do pay for recruiting services, and the checks came from the school itself above-board, not from an avid Ducks booster like Phil Knight of Nike. So where's the infraction?
Flenory's Badger football camps have spawned Ducks signees DeAnthony Thomas, Cliff Harris, Dior Mathis, Tacoi Sumler, and Anthony Wallace (the latter of whom he personally trained). Flenory played under Oregon head coach Chip Kelly when the latter was the offensive coordinator at New Hampshire.
Willie Lyles possibly worked as a trainer for current Ducks star LaMichael James and definitely worked as a trainer for future Ducks star Lache Seastrunk before joining the recruiting service. Curiously, the $8500.00 payment balance was made to Willie Lyles personally after the recruiting entity let him go and after Seastrunk signed his letter of intent with the Ducks.
Still, the main question is one of steering. Did Flenory and Lyles steer these prospects to Eugene, or was their arrival purely coincidental? If it was coincidental, why were the payments so unusually large? Were other schools making similar payments to Lyles or Flenory?
According to Oregon athletic director Rob Mullens, the school's compliance office signed off on the payments. Let's see, who do such office personnel work for? Would anyone there contradict Mr. Mullens in public? According to Mullens, the subject recruiting services met NCAA rules. Translation: it is Oregon's position that no steering of prospects/recruits took place.
If steering occurred, Flenory and Lyles would be considered Oregon boosters, and any payment to them would be considered a violation of Bylaw 13 (prohibiting a booster from directing a recruit to a school). If steering occurred, Bylaw 12.3.3.1 would also have been violated by the school and agent or scouting service. Bylaw 12.3.3.1 states that a student-athlete may allow a scouting service or agent to distribute personal information to a school, provided a fee is not based on placing the player at a school.
Yahoo!Sports broke the story last Thursday, March 3. On Friday, athletic director Mullens (who was ironically brought in just last summer to clean up the program although his expertise lies in revenue growth and accounting) stated the following:
"We have been asked to provide a series of documents by the NCAA and intend to fully cooperate. I reiterate that it is our belief that the purchase of such [recruiting] services is within the allowable NCAA guidelines. . . .Our compliance office signed off on it."
Head coach Chip Kelly said, "Most programs purchase recruiting services. Our compliance office is aware of it. Will has a recruiting service that met NCAA rules, and we used him in 2010."
To paraphrase the old MST3K cable show, Flenory and Lyles (if called upon to testify) will probably claim Ph.D's in not steering recruits in certain directions as they allegedly have no vested interest in their collegiate destinations. Do you buy it? Will the NCAA buy it? At least we know the Ducks fan base has bought it. After all, winning makes everybody honest, and the Ducks have won a lot over the past few years.
Never mind that other powerhouse programs like Texas were aware of Lyles's "street agent" reputation and steered away from him to avoid even the impression of impropriety.
Cut to Columbus, Ohio. The Ohio State head football coach Jim Tressel, he of The pristine sweater-vest reputation, apparently was made aware through an e-mail on April 2, 2010 that some of his players were selling autographed Buckeye memorabilia for cash and discounted tattoos. What's the problem?
First, NCAA bylaws since 2004 have prohibited players from selling any team-related materials for cash, merchandise, or services while still in school. Second, NCAA bylaws prohibit individuals or institutions from obstructing NCAA investigations.
Unfortunately for the players involved, the U.S. Attorney's office in Columbus was investigating the tattoo parlor owner, Eddie Rife, for federal drug-trafficking charges at the time the stuff-for-tats and cash transactions went down.
Unfortunately for Coach Tressel, he received two e-mails in April of 2010 from a concerned Ohio State alum and former Buckeye baller, attorney Christopher Cicero, alerting him to the problem. Unfortunately for Coach Tressel, he acknowledged receipt of the first Cicero e-mail in his own brief e-mail reply on the same date of April 2, 2010, thus creating a paper trail of his knowledge. Unfortunately for Coach Tressel, he signed an NCAA Certificate of Compliance form on September 13, 2010, wherein he claimed to have no knowledge of any possible NCAA violations. Unfortunately for Coach Tressel, he again claimed no prior knowledge when OSU officials told him about the tattoo parlor transactions on December 9, 2010. Unfortunately for Coach Tressel, he gave this tepid disingenuous reply on December 16, 2010, when asked about his knowledge of the sales:
"While I received a tip about general rumors pertaining to certain of my players, that information had not been specific, and it pertained to their off-field choices."
Apparently, Coach Tressel was told in April the name of the tattoo parlor owner and names of two of the six players involved, who just happened to be star quarterback Terrelle Pryor and star wide receiver DeVier Posey. Since when did questionable off-field conduct of players become off-limits to football coaches and programs? Since when did it become right to shield players from law-enforcement officials and NCAA investigators?
Ohio State had been a preseason Top 10 pick in football and a viable candidate for the national championship in 2010. How would losing four stars from its offense impact the record? Coach Tressel wasn't about to find out.
More troubling than the spring 2010 lack of disclosure was the December 2010 lack of disclosure. Not only did Tressel's silence prevent the NCAA from adopting immediate penalties and suspensions against the school and players, but it encouraged athletic director Gene Smith, school president E. Gordon Gee, and Big 10 commissioner Jim Delaney to become vocal advocates and lobbyists for The Ohio State to play the Sugar Bowl in January 2011 with a full roster.
The NCAA permitted the penalties against the six players to be delayed until the 2011 season. Ohio State wound up barely beating Arkansas 31-26 in the Sugar Bowl. Five players were suspended for five games and one for one game. All of the players had to pay back the more than $7,000.00 in cash that they received for autographed jerseys and gloves, trophies, rings, and footballs. Fortunately for them, they were not required to return their tattoos.
What about the Sugar Bowl game? The Ohio State wound up barely beating Arkansas 31-26. Apparently, they needed every one of their players to overcome the Razorbacks.
Shortly after the Sugar Bowl game in early January of 2011, Ohio State officials presented Coach Tressel with the e-mails they had discovered during their own investigation of Tattoogate. At that point, after the entire season was safely behind him, Coach Tressel confessed his prior knowledge.
Previously, I've discussed The potential conflict of interest between The Ohio State University and The NCAA Infractions Committee. No need to go there again.
On March 7, 2011, Yahoo! Sports (again) disclosed Coach Tressel's prior knowledge of Tattoogate. On March 8, 2011, Ohio State hastily organized a press conference to "properly" handle the situation. Have you ever heard of gasoline on fire? The Three Stooges (Gee, Smith, and Tressel) performed like idiots or arrogant, patronizing, above-the-law shirkers. You decide.
First, they acknowledged that Coach Tressel would be suspended for the first two games of 2011 against a pair of MAC cupcakes. Second, they acknowledged that Coach Tressel would be fined $250,000.00, a large penalty until you consider he makes $3.5 million per annum. Third, they acknowledged that Coach Tressel must attend an NCAA rules seminar and must issue a public apology. The self-imposed sanctions are flyweight when compared with the NCAA sanctions against Dez Bryant at Oklahoma State and Bruce Pearl at Tennessee.
When asked if terminating Coach Tressel had ever been considered, President Gee said, "I'm just hopeful the coach doesn't dismiss me." Even if this were a joke, it does speak to the priorities at the school and in the OSU fan base: nobody's more important and powerful than the football coach and nothing's more important than winning football games.
How did Coach Tressel feel about covering up a scandal and misleading NCAA investigators? First, he made an excuse: "I didn't disclose information from Cicero because he was concerned about preserving the confidentiality of a federal drug investigation." Second, he made an arrogant self-appraisal while providing a second excuse: "I don't think less of myself at this moment. I felt at the time as if I was doing the right thing for the safety of the young people and the overall situation." Did he actually believe star Buckeye players' lives were in jeopardy? What type of Columbus, Ohio, businessman would threaten or harm Ohio State players and expect to stay in business?
Indeed, the death threats that have surfaced emanate from a few deranged Buckeye fans who have threatened good citizen Cicero, the attorney who was only trying to help the program and nip a scandal in the bud. Said Cicero later in the week, "I'm not the Judas in this situation. You know, I feel like Peter, but I'm not the Judas."
At this time, the NCAA continues its own investigation into Tattoogate, torn between its BCS alliance with The Ohio State and the national media scrutiny provided by less sympathetic individuals. Petros of the nationally-syndicated Fox Sports Radio Petros and Money Show believes Coach Tressel may be taking one for the team and covering up for a higher-up like A.D. Gene Smith. That would provide another explanation why the higher-ups didn't terminate him or issue a greater fine and suspension. Even national ESPN personality Colin Cowherd, a man usually in bed with all things BCS and Ohio State, finds Coach Tressel's conduct indefensible in Tattoogate. It is hard to believe the NCAA will not hammer Coach Tressel and The Ohio State much harder. Why? It has to.
Could Coach Tressel have been happy to receive ringing endorsements and support from a rogue's gallery of coaches, including Bob Knight, Rich Rodriguez, and Jim Calhoun? Was it their way of saying in code, "Welcome to the club"?
Let's analyze the periphery issue concerning the spy sources for Yahoo! Sports. One thing we know: it's not just idle gossip-mongering observers trying to stir things up for their own amusement, as is the case in The School for Scandal. Were the sources for the two scandals internal or external? One must assume they are external since whistleblowing immunity rarely appears in big-time athletics.
Lane Kiffin of USC had already accused Oregon of recruiting misdeeds before the Texas story broke. Last month, USC lost a five-star recruit on signing day to Oregon. What is a school like USC (already under its own NCAA sanctions) to gain from a school like Oregon getting penalized? You do the math.
Naturally, any of the other eleven schools in the Pac-12 have a lot to gain from Oregon's fall from grace. Don't rule out Big 12 schools, either, who perhaps were tired of losing local star recruits to a West Coast program. It's not fair to point fingers only at Kiffin and USC. However, based on Kiffin's Tennessee travesty, it is fun.
Who would be the most logical external sources for the Tressel controversy? Starting with arch-rival Michigan and more recent rival Penn State, any Big 10 school is a prime suspect. One wouldn't put it past Coach Rodriguez, regardless of his recent words of support, to provide a parting shot to the school and individual most responsible for his demise (if one doesn't include his own misconduct). Then again, what BCS school of any conference lacks motivation to dismantle the arrogance and effrontery and hyper-success of The Ohio State University?
The schools for scandal keep growing in numbers. If it's not one issue, it's another. Nevertheless, society grows more jaded as examples of outlandish behavior multiply. To most jaded fans, winning is everything. Therefore, they implicitly approve of any conduct that produces positive results (wins) for their teams.
It's understood that head coaches of collegiate revenue-generating sports are in pressure cookers. Administrations expect them to win. Alumni expect them to win. Boosters expect them to win. Non-revenue sports programs hope and expect them to win. Still, that is no excuse for cheating.
The coaches are compensated generously. Many of them are the highest-paid employees in their states. If they can't win playing by the rules and if they can't handle the pressure, they can always find another lower-paying vocation. Shed no tears for them. As Coach Tressel himself said this week, "The most pathetic thing is a leader looking for self-pity." In the midst of the turmoil, that was his most honorable statement.
Can schools really be expected to police themselves fairly? Can conferences really be expected to police schools fairly? Can the NCAA really be expected to police all conferences equally and fairly? Are we talking human nature or superhuman nature?
One thing you can alway expect in the world of college football is the unexpected. A new scandal will no doubt overshadow these two current scandals sometime soon. Scandals both real and imagined will continue to capture publicity in the more distant future. The fan bases will go from accepting to embracing the misconduct of their schools as egos, profits, and an intense competitive nature interfere with common decency and morality.
Fans are less concerned than ever with the image of their schools. Integrity mixed with losses does not boost the ego like Oregon recruit steering or Ohio State cover-ups mixed with wins. Are fans ever anxious about sanctions? As Sheridan wrote in the last line of his play, "You can, indeed, each anxious fear remove, For even Scandal dies, if you approve."
The potential scandal involving the Oregon football program concerns payments made to two individuals in Texas: up to $25,000.00 went to Willie Lyles of Complete Scouting Services in Houston (including $16,500.00 that went to the service itself) and $3745.00 to Baron Flenory of New Level Athletics and Badger Sports Elite 7-on-7 football camps. Most big-time BCS football programs do pay for recruiting services, and the checks came from the school itself above-board, not from an avid Ducks booster like Phil Knight of Nike. So where's the infraction?
Flenory's Badger football camps have spawned Ducks signees DeAnthony Thomas, Cliff Harris, Dior Mathis, Tacoi Sumler, and Anthony Wallace (the latter of whom he personally trained). Flenory played under Oregon head coach Chip Kelly when the latter was the offensive coordinator at New Hampshire.
Willie Lyles possibly worked as a trainer for current Ducks star LaMichael James and definitely worked as a trainer for future Ducks star Lache Seastrunk before joining the recruiting service. Curiously, the $8500.00 payment balance was made to Willie Lyles personally after the recruiting entity let him go and after Seastrunk signed his letter of intent with the Ducks.
Still, the main question is one of steering. Did Flenory and Lyles steer these prospects to Eugene, or was their arrival purely coincidental? If it was coincidental, why were the payments so unusually large? Were other schools making similar payments to Lyles or Flenory?
According to Oregon athletic director Rob Mullens, the school's compliance office signed off on the payments. Let's see, who do such office personnel work for? Would anyone there contradict Mr. Mullens in public? According to Mullens, the subject recruiting services met NCAA rules. Translation: it is Oregon's position that no steering of prospects/recruits took place.
If steering occurred, Flenory and Lyles would be considered Oregon boosters, and any payment to them would be considered a violation of Bylaw 13 (prohibiting a booster from directing a recruit to a school). If steering occurred, Bylaw 12.3.3.1 would also have been violated by the school and agent or scouting service. Bylaw 12.3.3.1 states that a student-athlete may allow a scouting service or agent to distribute personal information to a school, provided a fee is not based on placing the player at a school.
Yahoo!Sports broke the story last Thursday, March 3. On Friday, athletic director Mullens (who was ironically brought in just last summer to clean up the program although his expertise lies in revenue growth and accounting) stated the following:
"We have been asked to provide a series of documents by the NCAA and intend to fully cooperate. I reiterate that it is our belief that the purchase of such [recruiting] services is within the allowable NCAA guidelines. . . .Our compliance office signed off on it."
Head coach Chip Kelly said, "Most programs purchase recruiting services. Our compliance office is aware of it. Will has a recruiting service that met NCAA rules, and we used him in 2010."
To paraphrase the old MST3K cable show, Flenory and Lyles (if called upon to testify) will probably claim Ph.D's in not steering recruits in certain directions as they allegedly have no vested interest in their collegiate destinations. Do you buy it? Will the NCAA buy it? At least we know the Ducks fan base has bought it. After all, winning makes everybody honest, and the Ducks have won a lot over the past few years.
Never mind that other powerhouse programs like Texas were aware of Lyles's "street agent" reputation and steered away from him to avoid even the impression of impropriety.
Cut to Columbus, Ohio. The Ohio State head football coach Jim Tressel, he of The pristine sweater-vest reputation, apparently was made aware through an e-mail on April 2, 2010 that some of his players were selling autographed Buckeye memorabilia for cash and discounted tattoos. What's the problem?
First, NCAA bylaws since 2004 have prohibited players from selling any team-related materials for cash, merchandise, or services while still in school. Second, NCAA bylaws prohibit individuals or institutions from obstructing NCAA investigations.
Unfortunately for the players involved, the U.S. Attorney's office in Columbus was investigating the tattoo parlor owner, Eddie Rife, for federal drug-trafficking charges at the time the stuff-for-tats and cash transactions went down.
Unfortunately for Coach Tressel, he received two e-mails in April of 2010 from a concerned Ohio State alum and former Buckeye baller, attorney Christopher Cicero, alerting him to the problem. Unfortunately for Coach Tressel, he acknowledged receipt of the first Cicero e-mail in his own brief e-mail reply on the same date of April 2, 2010, thus creating a paper trail of his knowledge. Unfortunately for Coach Tressel, he signed an NCAA Certificate of Compliance form on September 13, 2010, wherein he claimed to have no knowledge of any possible NCAA violations. Unfortunately for Coach Tressel, he again claimed no prior knowledge when OSU officials told him about the tattoo parlor transactions on December 9, 2010. Unfortunately for Coach Tressel, he gave this tepid disingenuous reply on December 16, 2010, when asked about his knowledge of the sales:
"While I received a tip about general rumors pertaining to certain of my players, that information had not been specific, and it pertained to their off-field choices."
Apparently, Coach Tressel was told in April the name of the tattoo parlor owner and names of two of the six players involved, who just happened to be star quarterback Terrelle Pryor and star wide receiver DeVier Posey. Since when did questionable off-field conduct of players become off-limits to football coaches and programs? Since when did it become right to shield players from law-enforcement officials and NCAA investigators?
Ohio State had been a preseason Top 10 pick in football and a viable candidate for the national championship in 2010. How would losing four stars from its offense impact the record? Coach Tressel wasn't about to find out.
More troubling than the spring 2010 lack of disclosure was the December 2010 lack of disclosure. Not only did Tressel's silence prevent the NCAA from adopting immediate penalties and suspensions against the school and players, but it encouraged athletic director Gene Smith, school president E. Gordon Gee, and Big 10 commissioner Jim Delaney to become vocal advocates and lobbyists for The Ohio State to play the Sugar Bowl in January 2011 with a full roster.
The NCAA permitted the penalties against the six players to be delayed until the 2011 season. Ohio State wound up barely beating Arkansas 31-26 in the Sugar Bowl. Five players were suspended for five games and one for one game. All of the players had to pay back the more than $7,000.00 in cash that they received for autographed jerseys and gloves, trophies, rings, and footballs. Fortunately for them, they were not required to return their tattoos.
What about the Sugar Bowl game? The Ohio State wound up barely beating Arkansas 31-26. Apparently, they needed every one of their players to overcome the Razorbacks.
Shortly after the Sugar Bowl game in early January of 2011, Ohio State officials presented Coach Tressel with the e-mails they had discovered during their own investigation of Tattoogate. At that point, after the entire season was safely behind him, Coach Tressel confessed his prior knowledge.
Previously, I've discussed The potential conflict of interest between The Ohio State University and The NCAA Infractions Committee. No need to go there again.
On March 7, 2011, Yahoo! Sports (again) disclosed Coach Tressel's prior knowledge of Tattoogate. On March 8, 2011, Ohio State hastily organized a press conference to "properly" handle the situation. Have you ever heard of gasoline on fire? The Three Stooges (Gee, Smith, and Tressel) performed like idiots or arrogant, patronizing, above-the-law shirkers. You decide.
First, they acknowledged that Coach Tressel would be suspended for the first two games of 2011 against a pair of MAC cupcakes. Second, they acknowledged that Coach Tressel would be fined $250,000.00, a large penalty until you consider he makes $3.5 million per annum. Third, they acknowledged that Coach Tressel must attend an NCAA rules seminar and must issue a public apology. The self-imposed sanctions are flyweight when compared with the NCAA sanctions against Dez Bryant at Oklahoma State and Bruce Pearl at Tennessee.
When asked if terminating Coach Tressel had ever been considered, President Gee said, "I'm just hopeful the coach doesn't dismiss me." Even if this were a joke, it does speak to the priorities at the school and in the OSU fan base: nobody's more important and powerful than the football coach and nothing's more important than winning football games.
How did Coach Tressel feel about covering up a scandal and misleading NCAA investigators? First, he made an excuse: "I didn't disclose information from Cicero because he was concerned about preserving the confidentiality of a federal drug investigation." Second, he made an arrogant self-appraisal while providing a second excuse: "I don't think less of myself at this moment. I felt at the time as if I was doing the right thing for the safety of the young people and the overall situation." Did he actually believe star Buckeye players' lives were in jeopardy? What type of Columbus, Ohio, businessman would threaten or harm Ohio State players and expect to stay in business?
Indeed, the death threats that have surfaced emanate from a few deranged Buckeye fans who have threatened good citizen Cicero, the attorney who was only trying to help the program and nip a scandal in the bud. Said Cicero later in the week, "I'm not the Judas in this situation. You know, I feel like Peter, but I'm not the Judas."
At this time, the NCAA continues its own investigation into Tattoogate, torn between its BCS alliance with The Ohio State and the national media scrutiny provided by less sympathetic individuals. Petros of the nationally-syndicated Fox Sports Radio Petros and Money Show believes Coach Tressel may be taking one for the team and covering up for a higher-up like A.D. Gene Smith. That would provide another explanation why the higher-ups didn't terminate him or issue a greater fine and suspension. Even national ESPN personality Colin Cowherd, a man usually in bed with all things BCS and Ohio State, finds Coach Tressel's conduct indefensible in Tattoogate. It is hard to believe the NCAA will not hammer Coach Tressel and The Ohio State much harder. Why? It has to.
Could Coach Tressel have been happy to receive ringing endorsements and support from a rogue's gallery of coaches, including Bob Knight, Rich Rodriguez, and Jim Calhoun? Was it their way of saying in code, "Welcome to the club"?
Let's analyze the periphery issue concerning the spy sources for Yahoo! Sports. One thing we know: it's not just idle gossip-mongering observers trying to stir things up for their own amusement, as is the case in The School for Scandal. Were the sources for the two scandals internal or external? One must assume they are external since whistleblowing immunity rarely appears in big-time athletics.
Lane Kiffin of USC had already accused Oregon of recruiting misdeeds before the Texas story broke. Last month, USC lost a five-star recruit on signing day to Oregon. What is a school like USC (already under its own NCAA sanctions) to gain from a school like Oregon getting penalized? You do the math.
Naturally, any of the other eleven schools in the Pac-12 have a lot to gain from Oregon's fall from grace. Don't rule out Big 12 schools, either, who perhaps were tired of losing local star recruits to a West Coast program. It's not fair to point fingers only at Kiffin and USC. However, based on Kiffin's Tennessee travesty, it is fun.
Who would be the most logical external sources for the Tressel controversy? Starting with arch-rival Michigan and more recent rival Penn State, any Big 10 school is a prime suspect. One wouldn't put it past Coach Rodriguez, regardless of his recent words of support, to provide a parting shot to the school and individual most responsible for his demise (if one doesn't include his own misconduct). Then again, what BCS school of any conference lacks motivation to dismantle the arrogance and effrontery and hyper-success of The Ohio State University?
The schools for scandal keep growing in numbers. If it's not one issue, it's another. Nevertheless, society grows more jaded as examples of outlandish behavior multiply. To most jaded fans, winning is everything. Therefore, they implicitly approve of any conduct that produces positive results (wins) for their teams.
It's understood that head coaches of collegiate revenue-generating sports are in pressure cookers. Administrations expect them to win. Alumni expect them to win. Boosters expect them to win. Non-revenue sports programs hope and expect them to win. Still, that is no excuse for cheating.
The coaches are compensated generously. Many of them are the highest-paid employees in their states. If they can't win playing by the rules and if they can't handle the pressure, they can always find another lower-paying vocation. Shed no tears for them. As Coach Tressel himself said this week, "The most pathetic thing is a leader looking for self-pity." In the midst of the turmoil, that was his most honorable statement.
Can schools really be expected to police themselves fairly? Can conferences really be expected to police schools fairly? Can the NCAA really be expected to police all conferences equally and fairly? Are we talking human nature or superhuman nature?
One thing you can alway expect in the world of college football is the unexpected. A new scandal will no doubt overshadow these two current scandals sometime soon. Scandals both real and imagined will continue to capture publicity in the more distant future. The fan bases will go from accepting to embracing the misconduct of their schools as egos, profits, and an intense competitive nature interfere with common decency and morality.
Fans are less concerned than ever with the image of their schools. Integrity mixed with losses does not boost the ego like Oregon recruit steering or Ohio State cover-ups mixed with wins. Are fans ever anxious about sanctions? As Sheridan wrote in the last line of his play, "You can, indeed, each anxious fear remove, For even Scandal dies, if you approve."
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
BYU vs. Auburn: A Matter of Integrity
BYU and Auburn may never face each other in football or basketball, but the school from Utah already has an important victory over the school from Alabama: it believes in honor. As a matter of fact, the belief is to such an extent that the school has codified honor, adhering to the principles and moral foundation of the LDS Church, the entity which operates the school.
There was the Harvey Unga situation in BYU football last spring, where the school's all-time leading rusher was dismissed from school for a violation of the honor code. It was not a criminal act; it was, according to LDS principle and doctrine, an unethical act, premarital sex. Unga would have helped the team balance and kept some pressure off frosh quarterback phenom Jake Heaps.
Now there's the Brandon Davies situation in BYU basketball. Davies, the team's leading rebounder and third leading scorer, was suspended/dismissed from the team yesterday for the remainder of the season for a violation of the same honor code. BYU is ranked in the top five nationally with only two weeks to go before the NCAA tournament begins. A top bracket seed was possible and a #2 seed likely. Now all is in doubt, with BYU taking on a tough New Mexico team tonight and having to survive a tough Mountain West tournament next week before seedings and first-round NCAA tourney pairings are announced.
The violation occurred between the end of Saturday afternoon's game in San Diego and yesterday. When BYU officials learned of the transgression, they were quick to act. They were quick to follow the noble policy of erring on the side of integrity. This was not an NCAA violation; this was a BYU honor code violation. This was not punishment for criminal conduct. As in the Unga situation, this was punishment for what to them is unethical off-the-court/field conduct. Such unethical conduct includes academic dishonesty, premarital sex, irregular church attendance, poor personal grooming, gambling, cursing, homosexual relations, substance abuse of prescription or illegal drugs, and the use or possession of alcohol, coffee, tobacco, or pornography. You can probably strike poor personal grooming from the list of possible infractions.
In stark contrast to BYU's near-instantaneous and hard-line justice, there is the case of star quarterback Cam Newton's soft handling or mishandling at national champion Auburn. To understand Auburn's treatment of Mr. Newton, it is necessary to review and summarize Newton's off-the-field antics at the University of Florida. Why? After hearing Cam's history at Gainesville, what reasonable person would believe Cam when he said he knew nothing about his father's pay-for-play demands during Mississippi State's recruiting of him? Apparently, Auburn believed him. In truth, even the SEC and NCAA believed him. Bowl promoters believed him, too. Wait, wasn't there some type of fiscal incentive for believing in Cam Newton? It certainly helped the television network (ESPN), the BCS, the conference, and the school to keep him eligible.
What was Cam Newton like at Florida? First, he accumulated 12 driving infractions within an 18-month period, including driving with a suspended or revoked license. Rumor has it he was not #2 on the depth chart behind Tim Tebow, he was #3. Off the field, he was charged with two or three instances of academic cheating, including putting his name on another student's paper and handing in a paper bought off the internet.
He was also arrested on three felony counts by university police for being in possession of a stolen laptop computer. The Dell computer was worth about $1700, and Cam claimed he had bought the computer from another student with no knowledge it was stolen. However, one of the serial numbers had been changed and when the police left the room briefly to call the victim of the crime, Cam tossed the laptop out of his third-floor dorm room where it inaccurately landed behind the dumpster. If Mr. Newton were so innocent, why did he change a number and try to hide/destroy the evidence?
What kind of justice did Cam Newton receive at Florida? The burglary/larceny/obstruction of justice charges were dropped when Mr. Newton attended a first-time offender intervention program (lenient). However, he was suspended immediately from the football team after his arrest (hard-line). For academic cheating, Mr. Newton was set to appear in front of UF's Student Conduct Committee in the spring of 2009. Cam transferred to Blinn Community College in Texas before said hearing occurred. The result of his driving infractions is unknown.
After a solid season on the gridiron at Blinn that fall, Cam and his father Cecil were recruited by Tennessee, Oklahoma, Mississippi State, and Auburn. On November 27 and 28 of 2009, Cam and Cecil visited Mississippi State. Cecil told an MSU recruiter that it would take more than a scholarship for Cam to sign a letter of intent. It would take $180,000! Was Cam present when the demand was made? Cam says no. Cecil says no. The investigation is still pending. There are said to be tapes proving Cam's presence. They have yet to appear for investigators.
Less than one month later, Cam and Cecil visited Auburn on December 18 and 19. No details of any meetings or demands there have been revealed. Were any demands presented? Assume all was on the level when Auburn offered Mr. Newton a scholarship on December 20. Assume all was on the level when Mr. Newton signed his letter of intent with Auburn on December 31. Assume all was on the level when Auburn named Cam it starting quarterback on April 28, 2010.
In July of 2010, the SEC office notified Auburn of suspected improper recruiting conduct by Cecil Newton. What was done by the school? They started their own investigation, but kept Mr. Newton eligible. When the recruiting stories went national and public on November 4, 2010, the NCAA began its own investigation. Are we to assume the SEC and Auburn did not inform the NCAA office of their own investigations beforehand, or did the NCAA act in its own best interest by staying out of the loop until forced to launch its own query by public demand?
Regardless, it took the NCAA just 25 days to determine there had been a "violation of amateurism rules." The SEC and Auburn had been allegedly investigating since at least July. One day later, Auburn ruled Mr. Newton ineligible for the remainder of the season on November 30. No doubt, more calls were placed. Network executives, bowl committees, BCS committees, SEC officials, and even Auburn officials may have been involved. In any case, the NCAA reinstated Cam Newton a day later, on December 1, 2010, insuring higher ratings for the SEC title game and a possible goldmine-payday for a national championship game with similarly undefeated Oregon.
We know what happened. Cam Newton remained a cash cow for Auburn and the SEC. Cam Newton became, for better or worse, the face of college football in 2010. The BCS was happy, ESPN was happy, bowl organizers were happy, and sponsors were happy. Auburn won the national championship and Cam Newton won the Heisman.
Auburn, if it is proven they did err, erred on the side of profit. Will they lose the bowl game and merchandising revenue generated by a championship season if it is finally determined that Cam Newton was ineligible? No. Will they have to forfeit every game of 2010 and the title game of 2011? Yes.
Hasn't Auburn already erred by eagerly pursuing an athlete with Cam Newton's character? We know Mr. Newton obstructs justice, based on the Florida laptop case. What makes him credible? To Auburn, credibility is based on athleticism.
One cannot say BYU never makes mistakes. Going independent in football in 2012 for a few more dollars to the detriment of other Mountain West member schools and other BYU sports is a black eye to its reputation. Must it emulate the selfishness of another religious football school powerhouse, Notre Dame?
As for Brandon Davies, he will receive an honor code review to determine his status as a student and athlete for next year. He is done as an athlete for the remainder of this season.
BYU got the Brandon Davies and Harvey Unga cases 100% right. When in doubt, err on the side of integrity. Too bad more schools don't follow such a mandate.
There was the Harvey Unga situation in BYU football last spring, where the school's all-time leading rusher was dismissed from school for a violation of the honor code. It was not a criminal act; it was, according to LDS principle and doctrine, an unethical act, premarital sex. Unga would have helped the team balance and kept some pressure off frosh quarterback phenom Jake Heaps.
Now there's the Brandon Davies situation in BYU basketball. Davies, the team's leading rebounder and third leading scorer, was suspended/dismissed from the team yesterday for the remainder of the season for a violation of the same honor code. BYU is ranked in the top five nationally with only two weeks to go before the NCAA tournament begins. A top bracket seed was possible and a #2 seed likely. Now all is in doubt, with BYU taking on a tough New Mexico team tonight and having to survive a tough Mountain West tournament next week before seedings and first-round NCAA tourney pairings are announced.
The violation occurred between the end of Saturday afternoon's game in San Diego and yesterday. When BYU officials learned of the transgression, they were quick to act. They were quick to follow the noble policy of erring on the side of integrity. This was not an NCAA violation; this was a BYU honor code violation. This was not punishment for criminal conduct. As in the Unga situation, this was punishment for what to them is unethical off-the-court/field conduct. Such unethical conduct includes academic dishonesty, premarital sex, irregular church attendance, poor personal grooming, gambling, cursing, homosexual relations, substance abuse of prescription or illegal drugs, and the use or possession of alcohol, coffee, tobacco, or pornography. You can probably strike poor personal grooming from the list of possible infractions.
In stark contrast to BYU's near-instantaneous and hard-line justice, there is the case of star quarterback Cam Newton's soft handling or mishandling at national champion Auburn. To understand Auburn's treatment of Mr. Newton, it is necessary to review and summarize Newton's off-the-field antics at the University of Florida. Why? After hearing Cam's history at Gainesville, what reasonable person would believe Cam when he said he knew nothing about his father's pay-for-play demands during Mississippi State's recruiting of him? Apparently, Auburn believed him. In truth, even the SEC and NCAA believed him. Bowl promoters believed him, too. Wait, wasn't there some type of fiscal incentive for believing in Cam Newton? It certainly helped the television network (ESPN), the BCS, the conference, and the school to keep him eligible.
What was Cam Newton like at Florida? First, he accumulated 12 driving infractions within an 18-month period, including driving with a suspended or revoked license. Rumor has it he was not #2 on the depth chart behind Tim Tebow, he was #3. Off the field, he was charged with two or three instances of academic cheating, including putting his name on another student's paper and handing in a paper bought off the internet.
He was also arrested on three felony counts by university police for being in possession of a stolen laptop computer. The Dell computer was worth about $1700, and Cam claimed he had bought the computer from another student with no knowledge it was stolen. However, one of the serial numbers had been changed and when the police left the room briefly to call the victim of the crime, Cam tossed the laptop out of his third-floor dorm room where it inaccurately landed behind the dumpster. If Mr. Newton were so innocent, why did he change a number and try to hide/destroy the evidence?
What kind of justice did Cam Newton receive at Florida? The burglary/larceny/obstruction of justice charges were dropped when Mr. Newton attended a first-time offender intervention program (lenient). However, he was suspended immediately from the football team after his arrest (hard-line). For academic cheating, Mr. Newton was set to appear in front of UF's Student Conduct Committee in the spring of 2009. Cam transferred to Blinn Community College in Texas before said hearing occurred. The result of his driving infractions is unknown.
After a solid season on the gridiron at Blinn that fall, Cam and his father Cecil were recruited by Tennessee, Oklahoma, Mississippi State, and Auburn. On November 27 and 28 of 2009, Cam and Cecil visited Mississippi State. Cecil told an MSU recruiter that it would take more than a scholarship for Cam to sign a letter of intent. It would take $180,000! Was Cam present when the demand was made? Cam says no. Cecil says no. The investigation is still pending. There are said to be tapes proving Cam's presence. They have yet to appear for investigators.
Less than one month later, Cam and Cecil visited Auburn on December 18 and 19. No details of any meetings or demands there have been revealed. Were any demands presented? Assume all was on the level when Auburn offered Mr. Newton a scholarship on December 20. Assume all was on the level when Mr. Newton signed his letter of intent with Auburn on December 31. Assume all was on the level when Auburn named Cam it starting quarterback on April 28, 2010.
In July of 2010, the SEC office notified Auburn of suspected improper recruiting conduct by Cecil Newton. What was done by the school? They started their own investigation, but kept Mr. Newton eligible. When the recruiting stories went national and public on November 4, 2010, the NCAA began its own investigation. Are we to assume the SEC and Auburn did not inform the NCAA office of their own investigations beforehand, or did the NCAA act in its own best interest by staying out of the loop until forced to launch its own query by public demand?
Regardless, it took the NCAA just 25 days to determine there had been a "violation of amateurism rules." The SEC and Auburn had been allegedly investigating since at least July. One day later, Auburn ruled Mr. Newton ineligible for the remainder of the season on November 30. No doubt, more calls were placed. Network executives, bowl committees, BCS committees, SEC officials, and even Auburn officials may have been involved. In any case, the NCAA reinstated Cam Newton a day later, on December 1, 2010, insuring higher ratings for the SEC title game and a possible goldmine-payday for a national championship game with similarly undefeated Oregon.
We know what happened. Cam Newton remained a cash cow for Auburn and the SEC. Cam Newton became, for better or worse, the face of college football in 2010. The BCS was happy, ESPN was happy, bowl organizers were happy, and sponsors were happy. Auburn won the national championship and Cam Newton won the Heisman.
Auburn, if it is proven they did err, erred on the side of profit. Will they lose the bowl game and merchandising revenue generated by a championship season if it is finally determined that Cam Newton was ineligible? No. Will they have to forfeit every game of 2010 and the title game of 2011? Yes.
Hasn't Auburn already erred by eagerly pursuing an athlete with Cam Newton's character? We know Mr. Newton obstructs justice, based on the Florida laptop case. What makes him credible? To Auburn, credibility is based on athleticism.
One cannot say BYU never makes mistakes. Going independent in football in 2012 for a few more dollars to the detriment of other Mountain West member schools and other BYU sports is a black eye to its reputation. Must it emulate the selfishness of another religious football school powerhouse, Notre Dame?
As for Brandon Davies, he will receive an honor code review to determine his status as a student and athlete for next year. He is done as an athlete for the remainder of this season.
BYU got the Brandon Davies and Harvey Unga cases 100% right. When in doubt, err on the side of integrity. Too bad more schools don't follow such a mandate.
Thursday, February 24, 2011
The NBA 2011: Following Baseball's Lead
It's official: Sacramento, Denver, and Utah have become farm teams of major city franchises. Apparently, the NBA has decided to follow Major League Baseball's business model by making small market teams irrelevant and nothing more than minor league teams for the big glamour city franchises. Naysayers to this reasonable observation will say, "But wait! What about San Antonio? What about the NBA salary cap that MLB does not have?" Are you serious?
Yes, San Antonio is an anomaly with great ownership, management, and coaching. They've also been lucky with draft picks and foreign players. More importantly, they have Texas money in a smaller population base and American glamour in its proximity to hipster boomtown Austin. Filling luxury suites is a non-issue for the Spurs.
As for the salary cap, it's true that the NBA has one. However, a rich franchise can easily work around it by paying a luxury tax for excessive payroll (which arena and multimedia revenues take care of). Meanwhile, a relatively poor team has to stay within the cap boundaries to avoid the penalties it can ill afford.
More importantly, by not following the NFL business model which adheres to stricter salary caps, revenue sharing and media exposure equality, the NBA encourages superstar players to flee provincial markets for the big glamour-party central cities where endorsement revenues can be much higher to more than pay for the ultra-luxury lifestyles found in such metropolises.
Yes, even the NFL has problems with spoiled draftees who demand to settle in certain cities (attention Eli Manning and John Elway) or headstrong free agents demanding to be treated like kings. Still, with the NFL most free agents desire a great team over a great city. That makes sense since the contracts don't differ greatly and the season is short enough so they can still live in the glamour city for over half the year if they are stuck in Cleveland or Green Bay.
Specifically, Denver, Sacramento, and Utah have become irrelevant in the NBA with recent trades and fire sales. Like the Oakland A's, Florida Marlins, and San Diego Padres, they've confessed they are nothing but farm teams for the big city franchises. If I lived there, I would stop attending games and stop watching or listening on TV or radio. It doesn't matter, unless you live in San Antonio.
Encourage contraction. In the NBA, at least ten teams could go away with no shedding of tears. Of coure, it's the support staff that gets hurt in this. The less talented players can find good-paying work in Europe. The vendors, security, and parking staffers? No such luck.
Denver gave Chauncey Billups and Carmelo Anthony to the New York Knicks. Utah gave Deron Williams to the New Jersey/Brooklyn Nets. NBA toadies like Colin Cowherd say the trades were good for the smaller-market teams. Of course he would say that. He is paid by ESPN which is heavily invested in the league. The propaganda sounds eerily similar to that espoused in defense of the BCS inequities.
Worst of all, Sacramento gave Carl Landry to another troubled franchise, New Orleans, in its continuing quest to reduce the Kings to rubble in order to reduce the public complaints when the Maloof owners declare they are moving the team to Anaheim. A move has been in the works for years. The cash-strapped Maloofs wanted cash-strapped Sacramento to pay for a new arena for the team. You see, Arco Arena is an ancient building of about twenty years. They want more luxury boxes and an excuse for higher ticket prices for general seating during a recession. Hey, Tower Records used to have a luxury suite, and as Napster's founder says in the movie THE SOCIAL NETWORK, try to buy a CD at Tower today.
David Stern must worship Bud Selig when Selig says baseball has never been healthier. Tell that to Kansas City and Pittsburgh fans. The propaganda continues. . .
Yes, San Antonio is an anomaly with great ownership, management, and coaching. They've also been lucky with draft picks and foreign players. More importantly, they have Texas money in a smaller population base and American glamour in its proximity to hipster boomtown Austin. Filling luxury suites is a non-issue for the Spurs.
As for the salary cap, it's true that the NBA has one. However, a rich franchise can easily work around it by paying a luxury tax for excessive payroll (which arena and multimedia revenues take care of). Meanwhile, a relatively poor team has to stay within the cap boundaries to avoid the penalties it can ill afford.
More importantly, by not following the NFL business model which adheres to stricter salary caps, revenue sharing and media exposure equality, the NBA encourages superstar players to flee provincial markets for the big glamour-party central cities where endorsement revenues can be much higher to more than pay for the ultra-luxury lifestyles found in such metropolises.
Yes, even the NFL has problems with spoiled draftees who demand to settle in certain cities (attention Eli Manning and John Elway) or headstrong free agents demanding to be treated like kings. Still, with the NFL most free agents desire a great team over a great city. That makes sense since the contracts don't differ greatly and the season is short enough so they can still live in the glamour city for over half the year if they are stuck in Cleveland or Green Bay.
Specifically, Denver, Sacramento, and Utah have become irrelevant in the NBA with recent trades and fire sales. Like the Oakland A's, Florida Marlins, and San Diego Padres, they've confessed they are nothing but farm teams for the big city franchises. If I lived there, I would stop attending games and stop watching or listening on TV or radio. It doesn't matter, unless you live in San Antonio.
Encourage contraction. In the NBA, at least ten teams could go away with no shedding of tears. Of coure, it's the support staff that gets hurt in this. The less talented players can find good-paying work in Europe. The vendors, security, and parking staffers? No such luck.
Denver gave Chauncey Billups and Carmelo Anthony to the New York Knicks. Utah gave Deron Williams to the New Jersey/Brooklyn Nets. NBA toadies like Colin Cowherd say the trades were good for the smaller-market teams. Of course he would say that. He is paid by ESPN which is heavily invested in the league. The propaganda sounds eerily similar to that espoused in defense of the BCS inequities.
Worst of all, Sacramento gave Carl Landry to another troubled franchise, New Orleans, in its continuing quest to reduce the Kings to rubble in order to reduce the public complaints when the Maloof owners declare they are moving the team to Anaheim. A move has been in the works for years. The cash-strapped Maloofs wanted cash-strapped Sacramento to pay for a new arena for the team. You see, Arco Arena is an ancient building of about twenty years. They want more luxury boxes and an excuse for higher ticket prices for general seating during a recession. Hey, Tower Records used to have a luxury suite, and as Napster's founder says in the movie THE SOCIAL NETWORK, try to buy a CD at Tower today.
David Stern must worship Bud Selig when Selig says baseball has never been healthier. Tell that to Kansas City and Pittsburgh fans. The propaganda continues. . .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)