Indiana set to hire Tom Crean

[Chip R]

If Indiana(the university) wanted to send a message, they should have self imposed a ban from tournament play. I think that would keep future NCAA infractions away.

Perhaps. I guess I'm not seeing why people think the NCAA is going to come down hard on IU. They fired the coach who committed the offenses and they've been clean as a whistle for over 40 years. It's not like the players were getting gifts or anything.

[WMR]

I just think the general lack of oversight which is plainly evident at IU should require that the inquiry goes deeper than Kelvin Sampson.

And I would expect a university such as Indiana would want to do such introspection by their own volition...

[Chip R]

I just think the general lack of oversight which is plainly evident at IU should require that the inquiry goes deeper than Kelvin Sampson.

And I would expect a university such as Indiana would want to do such introspection by their own volition...

I'm sure the NCAA will thoroughly investigate the situation but unless there's a charge of lack of institutional control, it's all on Sampson and he's gone.

[WVRed]

And it would also keep future players from wanting to play at Indiana as well.

How would it be any worse than if the NCAA imposed the sanctions? My point was they should have imposed it during the tournament this year. If that happened, only this team would have been punished.

I'm sure the NCAA will thoroughly investigate the situation but unless there's a charge of lack of institutional control, it's all on Sampson and he's gone.

Greenspan knew it was going on apparently, and he is still there.

[BRM]

There simply is no precedent for a postseason ban due to improper phone calls. And the phone calls were the only issue on the table at the time. Now, if these stories about players routinely skipping class and failing drug tests turn out to be true, I can see the NCAA coming down harder on them. That said, I still don't see a postseason ban. Those are typically reserved for programs that get caught paying players, buying them cars, etc. I definitely see a probation period and maybe another scholarship or two taken away.

[BRM]

Crean was asked yesterday about the reports of academic troubles but he wouldn't discuss it. The fact that he didn't outright deny the report is a bit telling though. There is probably some truth in the report.

He was also asked about Jamarcus Ellis and Armon Bassett's status but he wouldn't comment on that either.

[SunDeck]

From this morning's HT:

Crean, who did spend a few days in San Antonio, would not go into detail about the academic troubles that are apparently plaguing some Indiana players.

“I can’t elaborate, but it’s not good,” he said. “We have a lot of work to do. I think you’re going to get sick of hearing me say that, but I have no other way to put it. It’s a situation that needs to be addressed immediately.”

The article makes it sound as though things are worse than IU admitted earlier.

[BRM]

The article makes it sound as though things are worse than IU admitted earlier.

And if that is true, Greenspan and anyone else in the administration with knowledge of it needs to go.

[SunDeck]

Like I said, the article makes it sound that way. Whether that is the truth or not, I don't know.

There was an article in the HT last week, detailing the supposed pressure put on Greenspan to hire Sampson in the first place from above (Herbert and a Trustee or two). And although he has never come out and said it, I believe the implication there is that he didn't want Sampson in the first place. If that is the case, then one could very easily make a case for Greenspan; after all it was his decision to put the monitoring program in place that ultimately brought Sampson down. People say it was a lowly intern, but the kid was doing his job under the authority of the AD.

Obviously, if the academics under Greenspan are not a priority, then he's not in the right place. However, it also has A LOT to do with the coach whether a kid does his homework and takes classes seriously.

[Boston Red]

I'm not sure why it matters if IU gets a postseason ban for next year. They're likely to be awful anyway. Take your one-year post-season ban and ask for a TV ban, too, so no one is forced to watch you play that first year and move on.

[SunDeck]

I'm not sure why it matters if IU gets a postseason ban for next year. They're likely to be awful anyway. Take your one-year post-season ban and ask for a TV ban, too, so no one is forced to watch you play that first year and move on.

Big Ten network is taking care of that quite nicely.

[BRM]

I really don't think they will get a postseason ban.

[WMR]

I don't either. I do think the hammer should fall on more than just Sampson, however.

[BRM]

I do think the hammer should fall on more than just Sampson, however.

So do I.

[fearofpopvol1]

I've just always despised self-imposed post-season bans because they never punish the right people. It's like when Michigan had one some years back (when they actually would've qualified for the tourney). Was that fair for those seniors to have to sit out of the tourney because of some bonehead moves by Fisher, Webber and Rose? Not at all.

Ban Sampson from the NCAA, fire Greenspan, impose sanctions on the Indiana president. Just punish the right people.