Report: Memphis to vacate Final Four

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by GoldenEagle

If this is true, then Memphis was notified in Jan 2009, after Rose was long gone from the school. I think Memphis was notified that he might have had someone take the test for him right before the Final Four. The official word came down in Jan 2009.

Then I misread what January they were talking about and stand duly corrected.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Sampson wasn't a huge name. Also, Indiana got off with a slap on the wrist.

In what bizarro college basketball universe was Sampson not a big name?

And Indiana is in the top 5 "big name" schools.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Samdari

In what bizarro college basketball universe was Sampson not a big name?

And Indiana is in the top 5 "big name" schools.

Indiana didn't get punished, Sampson did. Sampson was nowhere near the level of Calipari, Pitino, Coach K, etc.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Samdari

In what bizarro college basketball universe was Sampson not a big name? And Indiana is in the top 5 "big name" schools.

Not in quite a while now. They have been, could someday be again, but not right now.

Kansas, Kentucky, UNC, Duke, and any of a half dozen more recent flavors would be top five names right now to anyone except relative old folks who remember Knight's heyday, which is ancient history to any of today's recruits.

[RainMaker]

Coach K could hand his star player a suitcase full of money at mid-court during the Final Four and the school would be put on probation and given a stern warning for it.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Not in quite a while now. They have been, could someday be again, but not right now.

Kansas, Kentucky, UNC, Duke, and any of a half dozen more recent flavors would be top five names right now to anyone except relative old folks who remember Knight's heyday, which is ancient history to any of today's recruits.

I'd add UCLA to your four and call them the clear cut top 5.

I think Indiana is in the top 10 though.

[the_meanstrosity]

I believe the NCAA contacted Memphis in January 2009, but the problem lies in when the SAT center contacted Memphis with regards to the allegations of cheating. These allegations were made in November 2007 and formal letters were sent to Rose in March and April of 2008. Neither Derrick Rose nor Memphis defended themselves against the allegations.

Originally Posted by GoldenEagle

If this is true, then Memphis was notified in Jan 2009, after Rose was long gone from the school. I think Memphis was notified that he might have had someone take the test for him right before the Final Four. The official word came down in Jan 2009.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

UMass still has the Final Four banner hanging in the Mullins Center, fwiw.Coming from a BC fan, irony.

Eh why irony? Have i ever condoned what BC did? Not to mention that it was way before my time.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

I'd add UCLA to your four and call them the clear cut top 5. I think Indiana is in the top 10 though.

FWIW the Bruins were definitely one of the teams I had in mind as at least a solid contender for the other slot.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

FWIW the Bruins were definitely one of the teams I had in mind as at least a solid contender for the other slot.

Heh...that's like me saying, "I had Atlanta in mind when I thought of a solid contender for 'Big Cities in the South" after Memphis, New Orleans, Charlotte and Nashville..." lol

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Heh...that's like me saying, "I had Atlanta in mind when I thought of a solid contender for 'Big Cities in the South" after Memphis, New Orleans, Charlotte and Nashville..." lol

Eh, I don't see them as the clear cut current #5, just one of several possibilities depending on what timeline you apply to their status. Past 10 years, past 20 years, since '84? I think UConn has a legit argument, Arizona could make one perhaps, all depends how wide or narrow you figure it affects the name value.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

Eh why irony? Have i ever condoned what BC did? Not to mention that it was way before my time.

I did say irony, not hypocrisy, since they've had 2 huge gambling scandals the last 30 years. But the 1996 football scandal was before your time? Not to mention star athletes with questionable academic credentials lately like Sean Williams and Nathan Gerbe, and a basketball coach who has actually lost recruits (Kendric Price) because he told their mother he doesn't care or check to see if they go to class.

[DaddyTorgo]

oh man, don't cherry-pick against my school.

their graduation rate for student athletes is like #3 in d1, behind west point and navy but ahead of even the air force academy (or something like that).

and yes, the 1996 scandal was before my time...i would have been...a sophomore in HS at that point.

[the_meanstrosity]

Per the NCAA database, Kansas has two major NCAA violations. In that same time the Missouri Tigers have two as well. Look, we all get that you don't like Kansas, Memphis, etc based on your previous posts. But don't you get tired of being the cliche Missouri Tiger fan who is angry at the world? I've got friends and family members who are die-hard Tiger fans, but they don't spew nearly the venom you do. Seriously, less hate and enjoy life.

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I just have a hard time taking the word of a school that is in the top 5 all time amongst Division I schools in major violations. Judging from KU's history in that regard, if they say it's nothing of note, it's probably something of note. They're about as reliable as Calipari in that regard.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Eh, I don't see them as the clear cut current #5, just one of several possibilities depending on what timeline you apply to their status. Past 10 years, past 20 years, since '84? I think UConn has a legit argument, Arizona could make one perhaps, all depends how wide or narrow you figure it affects the name value.

Yup, timeline is huge. Over the last 10 years, Kentucky is off the map as far as a top program(no finals fours since 1998), and Arizona is probably at the bottom of the top 10, but not in consideration for the top 5.

UNC and Florida have two titles in the last decade, Duke/UConn/Kansas/Michigan State all have a title and multiple final fours. In fact, Michigan State has four final fours in the last decade, five if we get to go back 11 years.


Top 5 programs over the last 10 years to me:

UNC, Florida, Michigan State, Kansas, UConn, in that order. Duke #6/UCLA #7.


Until you get back into the early 70s, the further back you go the worse UCLA looks. If you stop *exactly* at 1995 then they've got 1 title and 4 final fours over the last 15 years. But that was their only final four from 1981-2005.


Last 5 years obviously UCLA has been awesome with 3 final fours in a row. But hell that's only good for #3 or #4 depending on how much you value Kansas' title but only 1 final four appearance. UNC has 2 titles and 3 final fours in the last 5 years, Florida has 2 titles, and Kansas obviously has a title.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Radii

Yup, timeline is huge. Over the last 10 years, Kentucky is off the map as far as a top program(no finals fours since 1998), and Arizona is probably at the bottom of the top 10, but not in consideration for the top 5.

And the other thing about the role of timeline when you're talking about the pecking order or at least tiers for what the name value is would be where those programs "feel" like they fall in addition to their actual on court performance.

Even in down years or several down years some teams seem to retain more of their legacy value than others. Kind of like some cars retain their trade-in value better than others.

Florida has a strong resume but there's also a sense that they could turn back into the traditionally weaker basketball Gators unless they get it together fairly quickly. Kentucky on the other hand still has some of that "they'll be back" feeling (with or without the events of this past off-season) about them.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by GoldenEagle

That is not the case. The issue is that the NCAA informed Memphis right before the final four that Derrick Rose might have had someone else take his test. The school administration allowed Rose to play and the NCAA says they should have benched him.

The sanctions were more than just vacating the wins. Memphis also have to give up all money received and is on probation for three years.

I knew someone who had their SAT score challenged for cheating and I'll tell you right now there is no way Memphis didn't know until before the Final Four. They would have know shortly after the test. I will guarantee you that it wasn't the NCAA that challenged the score -- it was the SAT people who flagged it.

The charge was not that Memphis used an ineligible player -- the charge was of "knowing fraudulence or misconduct." That's a completely different charge. That implies that Memphis knew of the of the fraud or misconduct and didn't report it.

Why did Duke get off when Umass and Memphis didn't? It was a self-reported violation.

I'll admit to being a Duke and a Coach K homer. But the reason why is that they try to do it the right way and when they get it wrong they come clean. Calipari has never come clean with anything he's done.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Why should UMass have known, but not Duke?If there were other violations, please list them, because UMass wasn't punished for any.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vau...0875/index.htm

This is a great piece in about the Camby situation. One of the agents involved admitted giving Camby more than $40,000 over two years while he was in school and they provided him with jewelry, cars and prostitutes. Corey Maggette got $2,000 from Myron Piggie before he ever stepped foot on campus.

The cases aren't even the same ballpark. Plus, let's not be naive -- we know it was the tip of the iceberg. It was like getting Capone on tax evasion.

[Swaggs]

Getting away from the Memphis stuff and back to the top programs, I think I would factor in whether or not the program is "made" by the coach or if it is kind of a one coach show (think Penn State and Florida State in football -- they may prove to be great programs without Paterno and Bowden, but 95%+ of their success has been during those coaches' tenures).

I think UCLA, Kentucky, Kansas, and UNC are the top four destination jobs for any coach in America. Every college fan knows who Wooden/Rupp/Allen/Smith are and what they have done and each of those teams have been successful past those legendary coaches. I think Coach K. has been at Duke for so long and had so much success that, even though most of their success has been under him and he is still there, they are the clear cut #5 (if not better).

Then, you get into Indiana (Knight), Syracuse (Boeheim), UConn (Calhoun) and Arizona (Olson) in a situation as to where we don't know if the coach is greater to the program or not (yet), but they are well positioned. Michigan State (Izzo) and Florida (Donovan) are close to or in that class, as well (although I think if both of those guys retired tomorrow, those programs aren't absolutely "elite").

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Eh, I don't see them as the clear cut current #5, just one of several possibilities depending on what timeline you apply to their status. Past 10 years, past 20 years, since '84? I think UConn has a legit argument, Arizona could make one perhaps, all depends how wide or narrow you figure it affects the name value.

20 years is an arbitrary number. Why 20? Fact is, UCLA has the most championships in basketball, is usually mentioned ahead of both KU and Duke in terms of being an all time elite basketball program (Kentucky and UNC and UCLA, that's the top three from most I have heard speak on the matter). And UCLA has been to three F4's in the past four seasons. What's Duke done (as one of your top four)?

The original definition given by Samdari in this discussion was college basketball's "big names", not who's been good the past 20 years (which, FWIW, does include a UCLA champ on top of the recent F4 run), and unquestionably, UCLA is a Big Name in the sport.

My top five "Big Names" would be (combining tradition with recent success):

1. UNC
2. KU
3. UCLA
4. Kentucky
5. Duke

UConn, Michigan State, Arizona, G'Town, & Florida I think you have to consider, too, and Indiana, while down right now, is basically a juggernaut waiting to jump back into the top 5.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

20 years is an arbitrary number. Why 20?

Jon qualified his statements early on, twice actually, saying "which is ancient history to any of today's recruits." and responding to you by saying "I don't see them as the clear cut current #5, just one of several possibilities depending on what timeline you apply to their status."

Current puts a LOT more weight on recent events.

20 years is a pretty important number to an 18 year old. An 18 year who goes to UCLA because they won a lot of championships in the 60s and 70s was probably going to UCLA no matter what. By the same token, an 18 year old who goes to UNC because of Dean Smith or Michael Jordan was probably going there regardless of what's happened this decade. Hell, even Grant Hill and Christian Laettener at Duke are ancient history to a current recruit.

Though obviously, when someone mentions a "top recent program" everyone jumps to completely different forms of measurement.

The only one I take any serious issue with that you guys have mentioned is Kentucky. Kentucky is *down*. Most programs would be pleased to have what Kentucky had this last decade, 4 sweet 16 runs. But when a program that is going to be in a discussion for a top 5 program doesn't sniff a final four for a decade, it stands out, and it stands out *big time*. It can be corrected quickly, but until it is, it stands out. Duke hasn't made the Elite 8 in 5 years and people are talking about their downfall. UNC missed two NCAA Tournaments in a row in 2002/2003 and the sky was falling.

A program like Kentucky not going to a final four for a decade has to drop, at least until they recover, below a program like Michigan State, a perfect example of a solid program with a good but not great long term history(compared to the rest of these super elite programs only of course), combined with a top coach and a far far superior past 10 years.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

UConn, Michigan State, Arizona, G'Town, & Florida I think you have to consider, too, and Indiana, while down right now, is basically a juggernaut waiting to jump back into the top 5.

Oh I didn't notice this, I would take pretty serious issue with Georgetown being in any sort of discussion that isn't centered around 1982-1985

Georgetown has only made the NCAA tournament 4 times in the last 10 years. They have been to 5 final fours in their entire history, 3 of those in the Patrick Ewing era.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Radii

Jon qualified his statements early on, twice actually, saying "which is ancient history to any of today's recruits." and responding to you by saying "I don't see them as the clear cut current #5, just one of several possibilities depending on what timeline you apply to their status."

Ah, but he is defining his own argument then, instead of responding to Samdari, who only brought up what are the "Big Names". I am fine with putting a timeline on things if that's what you want to do, but if you're responding to another's hypothetical, it's my assumption you are agreeing to the context of that hypothetical.

Current puts a LOT more weight on recent events.

20 years is a pretty important number to an 18 year old. An 18 year who goes to UCLA because they won a lot of championships in the 60s and 70s was probably going to UCLA no matter what. By the same token, an 18 year old who goes to UNC because of Dean Smith or Michael Jordan was probably going there regardless of what's happened this decade. Hell, even Grant Hill and Christian Laettener at Duke are ancient history to a current recruit.

Though obviously, when someone mentions a "top recent program" everyone jumps to completely different forms of measurement.

Agreed completely. And if we're talking "what have you done for me lately" exclusively, then those points you and Jon bring up are perfectly relevant. I don't argue your opinions within that context, I argue that that wasn't the context that was set up to initiate this part of the thread. Any discussion of "Big Names" has to take into consideration a number of factors, and tradition--even decades ago--is as big as recent success. Heck, look at Notre Dame in college football. They haven't really done much of anything for decades, and they're still one of the most talked about programs.

The only one I take any serious issue with that you guys have mentioned is Kentucky. Kentucky is *down*. Most programs would be pleased to have what Kentucky had this last decade, 4 sweet 16 runs. But when a program that is going to be in a discussion for a top 5 program doesn't sniff a final four for a decade, it stands out, and it stands out *big time*. It can be corrected quickly, but until it is, it stands out. Duke hasn't made the Elite 8 in 5 years and people are talking about their downfall. UNC missed two NCAA Tournaments in a row in 2002/2003 and the sky was falling.

A program like Kentucky not going to a final four for a decade has to drop, at least until they recover, below a program like Michigan State, a perfect example of a solid program with a good but not great long term history(compared to the rest of these super elite programs only of course), combined with a top coach and a far far superior past 10 years.

I agree to a point. Indiana has been even less successful than Kentucky in this stretch (other than the first year Mike Davis run), and yet everyone still acknowledges the position it can hold in college basketball and how "big" that job is. Kentucky's much the same way. They have actually done much less than any of the other hypothetical "Big Five" in the past 10 years, but from Rupp to Pitino to Tubby, you can't deny the prestige that comes with Kentucky and college basketball. Look how down they have been, and yet, they still attract names like Calipari and Donovan. IU has been down, and they get Sampson (big at the time) and follow him with Crean.

Recent success is very important, yes, but when it comes to prestige, it's more than just what have you done for me lately.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Radii

Oh I didn't notice this, I would take pretty serious issue with Georgetown being in any sort of discussion that isn't centered around 1982-1985

Georgetown has only made the NCAA tournament 4 times in the last 10 years. They have been to 5 final fours in their entire history, 3 of those in the Patrick Ewing era.

Yeah, I was pulling teams out of the air. Although when you think about it, how many D1 teams have been to 5 F4's in their history? My guess is not that many.

There are other programs that should probably be mentioned ahead of G'Town, but they are not without their impact, and even if it's based on Ewing era-forward, the G'Town name carries weight in basketball circles.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Yeah, I was pulling teams out of the air. Although when you think about it, how many D1 teams have been to 5 F4's in their history? My guess is not that many.

Yeah, this is true. The top of the list when you judge a program's entire history is short. We'd all skew the rankings to put our favorite teams in a good light I'm sure, but... in terms of all time:

UCLA, UNC, Kansas, Kentucky, Indiana, Duke, in some order. What's #7? And more importantly, how wide is the gap between #6 and #7.

These 6 teams are the top 6 in national titles won(and the entire list of teams with 3 or more). these 6 teams are 6 of the top 8 in terms of most final fours(Ohio State has more than Indiana, Louisville and Indiana are tied). These 6 teams are the top 6 in NCAA Tournament games won all time. There are some teams up there in terms of all time wins, though Kentucky/UNC/Kansas/Duke are the top 4 there as well(UCLA 8th/Indiana 11th, though UCLA's all time winning percentage would put them tied with Duke at 4th, so they just have fewer games played in their history).


I guess Louisville is probably #7, trying to throw everything together.


Erm, not much point to that post I suppose, I just enjoy looking these things up

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Not in quite a while now. They have been, could someday be again, but not right now.

Kansas, Kentucky, UNC, Duke, and any of a half dozen more recent flavors would be top five names right now to anyone except relative old folks who remember Knight's heyday, which is ancient history to any of today's recruits.

In terms of accomplishments they aren't in the top 5. But in terms of name I'd still put them pretty high. They may not be seen like much across the country, but Michigan State and Indiana are huge in the Midwest when it comes to college hoops.

I'd also add that no one put Michigan State in the mix. 5 Final Fours in the last 12 years is a resume that few schools can match.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

In terms of accomplishments they aren't in the top 5. But in terms of name I'd still put them pretty high. They may not be seen like much across the country, but Michigan State and Indiana are huge in the Midwest when it comes to college hoops.

The same things I've been saying about Kentucky would hold true for Indiana as well in my mind. They are a legendary program whose name has lost its shine a little over the last decade. OK, more than a little with the Sampson debacle, but really it would just take one good season/tournament run under Crean to put them right back up near the top.

I'd also add that no one put Michigan State in the mix. 5 Final Fours in the last 12 years is a resume that few schools can match.

From a few posts above:

Originally Posted by Radii

Top 5 programs over the last 10 years to me:

UNC, Florida, Michigan State, Kansas, UConn, in that order. Duke #6/UCLA #7.

[RainMaker]

Sorry I missed it.

I agree about the legendary status. When I think of top programs, I think of the most prestiguous. Kentucky Basketball is a million times bigger than Memphis Basketball.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I'd also add that no one put Michigan State in the mix. 5 Final Fours in the last 12 years is a resume that few schools can match.

I think I debated mentioning them by name in each & every post I made on this tangent. The recent success clearly puts them in the conversation but I couldn't quite get over the hump to name them outright for the simple reason that if someone says "college basketball" they don't pop to my mind immediately the way the clear first four do. And they don't pop up immediately if you say "classic college basketball programs" either.

For me they just aren't on the same street as the others, but they're definitely one of the houses on the cross street at the end of the block.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

The debate has obviously shifted away from the topic at hand. If you're going to debate the 'top' teams in a thread about vacating Final Fours, you should probably be debating the programs who are some of the best cheaters in NCAA history. Interestingly enough, Kansas and Kentucky are among the top teams of all time.

5 Major Violations
Cincinnati (1956, 1959, 1978, 1988, 1998)
Kansas (1957, 1960, 1972, 1988, 2006)
Minnesota (1976, 1976 again, 1988, 1991, 2000)

4 Major Violations
Bradley (1953, 1966, 1986, 2006)
Florida State (1968, 1970, 1983, 2009)
NC State (1955, 1957, 1972, 1989)
Kentucky (1953, 1976, 1988, 1989)
UTEP (1968, 1973, 1992, 1996)
Wisconsin (1975, 1982, 1986, 2001)
Wichita State (1956, 1963, 1974, 1982)

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Sorry I missed it.

I agree about the legendary status. When I think of top programs, I think of the most prestiguous. Kentucky Basketball is a million times bigger than Memphis Basketball.

I also mentioned them. Very smooth Rain.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

The debate has obviously shifted away from the topic at hand. If you're going to debate the 'top' teams in a thread about vacating Final Fours, you should probably be debating the programs who are some of the best cheaters in NCAA history.

Actually at FOFC threads tend to go where they go, sometimes interesting tangents appear as the conversations wind their way along.

I don't get a sense that the sidebar is denying anyone an opportunity to take a shot at Memphis or the NCAA or major collegiate sports in general, so I really don't see where the side conversation is doing any harm nor do I believe it's one that warrants a separate thread.

And I damned sure don't need anyone telling me what I "should" be debating or discussing.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

And I damned sure don't need anyone telling me what I "should" be debating or discussing.

Well I 'damned sure' didn't tell you what you should be discussing since I 'damned sure' wasn't responding to any of your posts, so you can be 'damned sure' that you can say whatever you please.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Well I 'damned sure' didn't tell you what you should be discussing since I 'damned sure' wasn't responding to any of your posts, so you can be 'damned sure' that you can say whatever you please.

Note the absence of the or the in my post?

I seriously doubt there's anyone in this conversation that doesn't know the legacy of rule violations for a number of programs, from UK to UNLV and most of the ones in between. Hell, I bet there's a decent percentage of people in the thread even know who Ricky Clemons was.

Your attempt to turn the thread into a pissing contest by taking shots at other programs was neither subtle nor cute, nor was it particularly necessary since there doesn't seem to be anyone denying there's a whole lot of shady shit that happens in college sports.

It's getting to the point where someone really just needs to bitch slap some sense into you.

[the_meanstrosity]

Amen!

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

It's getting to the point where someone really just needs to bitch slap some sense into you.

[Logan]

It might be time for me to add a sig of I <3 JIMG.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Note the absence of the or the in my post?

I seriously doubt there's anyone in this conversation that doesn't know the legacy of rule violations for a number of programs, from UK to UNLV and most of the ones in between. Hell, I bet there's a decent percentage of people in the thread even know who Ricky Clemons was.

Your attempt to turn the thread into a pissing contest by taking shots at other programs was neither subtle nor cute, nor was it particularly necessary since there doesn't seem to be anyone denying there's a whole lot of shady shit that happens in college sports.

It's getting to the point where someone really just needs to bitch slap some sense into you.

Somebody got spooned by Obama last night. Geez.

[Pumpy Tudors]

How come nobody ever talks shit about my school? I feel so left out of these threads.

[Dr. Sak]

Originally Posted by Pumpy Tudors

How come nobody ever talks shit about my school? I feel so left out of these threads.

Because Seton Hill is full of lesbians. Lesbian = good

[larrymcg421]

I hear Seton Hill was reported to have excessive contact with potential recruits, but Seton Hill denied the claims, saying it's just a coincidence that the cul-de-dac where they play their home games is attached to a recruit's driveway.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

I hear Seton Hill was reported to have excessive contact with potential recruits, but Seton Hill denied the claims, saying it's just a coincidence that the cul-de-dac where they play their home games is attached to a recruit's driveway.

ohhh...SNAP!!!!

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Coach K could hand his star player a suitcase full of money at mid-court during the Final Four and the school would be put on probation and given a stern warning for it.

Nah, he usually just does this with the refs

SI

[Pumpy Tudors]

guess i'm done here

[chesapeake]

I think Swaggs has it right. A very few programs have such a rich history that good to great coaches will leave their existing programs to coach there -- UNC, UK, UCLA and KU. They may have down years, but recruits want to play there and these down periods are only temporary.

Indiana could have been one of those programs, and may be again, but they have mismanaged the post-Knight period pretty badly and have fallen back into the pack of second tier schools. I think folks forget that IU won 2 NCAA titles before Bobby Knight got there.

Duke will face the same problem when Coach K retires in the next decade or so.

[GoldenEagle]

This article explains the situation:

NCAA let Rose play, so why does Memphis have to pay? - Mike DeCourcy - College Basketball - Sporting News

Here are the high points:

1. Memphis was notified in May 200 that the test score could be invalid
2. The NCAA cleared Rose to play, so Memphis played him
3. Rose failed to respond to letters sent to his home in Chicago, because he was in Memphis at the time

The more I think about it, this is about nailing Calipari and World Wide Wes. I just don't see why Memphis has to be punished when there is no concrete evidence that Rose did not take that test.

[molson]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vau...0875/index.htm

This is a great piece in about the Camby situation. One of the agents involved admitted giving Camby more than $40,000 over two years while he was in school and they provided him with jewelry, cars and prostitutes. Corey Maggette got $2,000 from Myron Piggie before he ever stepped foot on campus.
.

Interesting story. This has to be norm rather than the exception. Is there any reason to think that EVERY star college basketball player isn't getting cash and cars from potential agents? I doubt that Camby is just the worst human being ever in this regard.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by GoldenEagle

3. Rose failed to respond to letters sent to his home in Chicago, because he was in Memphis at the time

I don't know about his home situation, but when I was in college my parents made sure I got any mail that came to the house instead. That part of this story does not add up.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by GoldenEagle

This article explains the situation:

NCAA let Rose play, so why does Memphis have to pay? - Mike DeCourcy - College Basketball - Sporting News

Here are the high points:

1. Memphis was notified in May 200 that the test score could be invalid
2. The NCAA cleared Rose to play, so Memphis played him
3. Rose failed to respond to letters sent to his home in Chicago, because he was in Memphis at the time

The more I think about it, this is about nailing Calipari and World Wide Wes. I just don't see why Memphis has to be punished when there is no concrete evidence that Rose did not take that test.

How did they "nail" Calipari? Seems to me no one got punished at all.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by chesapeake

Duke will face the same problem when Coach K retires in the next decade or so.

This could get very interesting if Oklahoma is consistently successful during the remainder of Coach K's career and Jeff Capel's reputation continues to grow, or if Johnny Dawkins is wildly successful at Stanford.

Hopefully neither of those things happen(or, if they do, they don't want to leave to follow coach K) and the program completely falls apart in Durham for a decade instead, of course.

[the_meanstrosity]

I'm with gstelmack that if I received mail from the EST group and I knew they were reviewing my SAT then my parents are calling me with regards to that letter.

As for taking the SAT in Detroit, there was research done by someone that negated the Bulls playing Detroit argument. The Bulls vs Pistons was a second round playoff match-up that had not yet been decided when Rose would have been eligible to sign up for the SAT in Detroit. So how did Rose know he would be in Detroit to watch the Bulls play when the series had not even been set?

As for DeCourcy's article, he never even mentions the fact that Memphis knew prior to the season that the EST was questioning Rose's test. That's a pretty big hole to leave unfilled for a columnist trying to state an opinion on the topic.

Originally Posted by GoldenEagle

This article explains the situation:

NCAA let Rose play, so why does Memphis have to pay? - Mike DeCourcy - College Basketball - Sporting News

Here are the high points:

1. Memphis was notified in May 200 that the test score could be invalid
2. The NCAA cleared Rose to play, so Memphis played him
3. Rose failed to respond to letters sent to his home in Chicago, because he was in Memphis at the time

The more I think about it, this is about nailing Calipari and World Wide Wes. I just don't see why Memphis has to be punished when there is no concrete evidence that Rose did not take that test.