The punishment never seemed to fit the crime when the NCAA decided to erase Memphis' entire 2007-08 Final Four season because star point guard Derrick Rose allegedly committed academic fraud by not taking the SAT college admission test himself.Even with no solid proof Rose didn't take the exam and certainly no evidence Memphis played any part in the alleged fraud, the NCAA still took away all 38 of the Tigers' wins.
On Thursday, Memphis filed an appeal of the sanctions according to a story in the Memphis Commercial Appeal.
The school is taking exception with the constant use of the "strict liability" standard used throughout the NCAA's findings this summer. The school paid, while former coach John Calipari, who moved this past offseason to Kentucky, received a slap on the wrist and Rose is enjoying the riches of an NBA career after spending just one season with the Tigers.
According to the newspaper, the law firm Bond, Shoeneck & King filed a 45-page brief as outside counsel on behalf of Memphis on Thursday. The school declares the penalties and the reasoning are unprecedented and improper.
Apparently when looking through past NCAA sanctions, the firm found "strict liability" used often in the case of Kelvin Sampson at Indiana. That would make sense considering that pretty much the same excessive phone call penalties that ultimately got Sampson fired at IU were the same type of penalties he committed at Oklahoma before leaving for Bloomington.
The Hoosiers were dumb for taking on Sampson and his baggage and rightfully paid for it.
"In each case, the institution was held responsible for having allowed the student-athlete to compete, but the consequences of that participation were clearly mitigated by an evaluation of the facts, including the determination that the institution had relied on the NCAA certification and that it did not have a reason to withhold the student-athlete at the time he competed," the appeal states.
Calipari may give the impression of being a little slimy, but he's never been found guilty of committing severe NCAA violations as a head coach anywhere. Sure, UMass got into trouble while Calipari was there but it was due to Marcus Camby dealing with an agent while still using college eligibility. There was no gain for Calipari there.
Furthermore, this case is bothersome because Rose was initially cleared to play through the NCAA Clearinghouse. It was only after the Educational Testing Service invalidated Rose' test score in May 2008 did the NCAA then step in and retroactively declare him ineligible.
Question: Should Memphis have done its own investigation after the NCAA conducted its probe?
As one Conference USA coach told me shortly after the NCAA sanctions were handed down to Memphis, if coaches start going around not trusting their recruits, that's a sure way to sour that relationship very quickly.
The point here is, say Rose's test score was really fraudulent -- then what responsibility should the NCAA take in declaring him ineligible after the governing body's investigators gave him and Memphis the approval the first time?
Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Calamari skips out and is squid free at Kentucky, while Mephis is fried. Pathetic
The trash coach behind this mother lode cheating, who gets off scott free (no chance), is now at KY. He is a marked man. His hx will is becoming the most perused book since the Bible. Sooner or later Cheatamri (probably quite "sooner" from what I hear)will go the way of the Tarkanians of the basketball world -- and probably take KY along the UNLV path. The sad thing is that players at KY are in deep doo--doo (hopefully, not many recruits considering the program tetering on the abyss will be).
What this article omits is that Rose and the University were notified by ETS that they were opening an investigation into his test score in December of 2007. They could have declared him ineligible pending the results of the investigation and ordered him to cooperate fully. Instead they choose to ignore the notice and keep going with business as usual. Finally the statement that the NCAA found no solid evidence that Rose didn't take the test is a complete falsehood. Rose's test was administered not in Chicago but in Detroit, Rose can provide no evidence that he was ever in Detroit during that period of time, no eye witnesses, cannot say where he stayed, no credit card records or receipts. I think that short of fingerprints is as solid of proof that someone wasn't present to take the test.
You know I think the testing people could eliminate all of this controversy by simply snapping a picture of test-takers with their exams at the time of the exam. That's proof positive. This stuff about Rose taking the test in Detroit but having no evidence he was there is interesting but it doesn't prove much. He had not credit card, huh? How many high school students do? I know I didn't. Back then it was all straight cash transactions. I feel what you are saying on Rose, because where there is smoke there almost certainly is fire, but I also think you have to have the proof. That burden needs to falls on the SAT people and the NCAA, not Rose and Memphis.
They had video cameras in the rooms where I took my test back in the 80s. Dont know if they still have that or if the cameras were even recording but they were in there.