2010 Kentucky Wildcats Men's Basketball - 5th edition

[Scrap Irony]

We can agree that most programs commit violations, but "Cheating" assumes intent...

"Dirty" applies more to ethics, and on that we can agree. Coaches mislead (or outright lie), work the AAU system and live right on the edge of the rules. You have to live in the muck to win in big time college hoops, but doing so is not necessarily "cheating".

I don't know a coach in America that abides by the 20-hour per week practice rule. Ditto summer coaching. Same with contacting, lying to, and assisting recruits. Those are all rules that all coaches break.

Many HS recruits-- I'd guess half of them-- have academic or integrity questions in their background. About a quarter of them have serious questions. Every coach looks the other way if a recruit is good enough or if they need him enough. All of them.

Bill Walton smoked pot while at UCLA. Wooden knew and ignored it.

William Avery (among others) would have never been admitted to Duke unless they could also play basketball at a superior level. Roy Williams took a kid who was basically passed through high school after he flunked out at Kansas. John Thompson took a kid who started a race riot on his team and the entire campus cheered. Adolph Rupp paid kids for jobs they never did.

You say it's only Calipari who's cheating? Please.

IF Cal is cheating (and I maintain that he's never been caught doing anything remotely bad) the way fans claim, every prospect in America would go to his team. (Or, at the very least, he'd get his pick of prospects across the nation.)

Are they all going to Kentucky?

Nope.

They go to Kentucky. And Duke. And North Carolina. And UConn. And Kansas. And UCLA. And Butler. And everywhere else.

If one cheats, they all do.

[redsfanmia]

Bill Walton smoked pot while at UCLA. Wooden knew and ignored it.

Don't forget that Sam Gilbert bankrolled the UCLA basketball program for years and Wooden looked the other way.

[guttle11]

I don't know a coach in America that abides by the 20-hour per week practice rule.

I do.

Many HS recruits-- I'd guess half of them-- have academic or integrity questions in their background. About a quarter of them have serious questions. Every coach looks the other way if a recruit is good enough or if they need him enough. All of them.

Bill Walton smoked pot while at UCLA. Wooden knew and ignored it.

50% and 25% are hyperbole, but we're not disagreeing with the overall point here. Problem is, academic issues and issues in life aren't potential violations. No rule against taking a bad student (provided they legitimately meet NCAA standards) or a kid with a police record. It's up to the school.

I can tell you this much, 25% of recruits do not have serious academic issues. Most can meet the minimum NCAA standards with relative ease, because they are "minimum". They're set up so that every kid without a learning disability can meet them if they put forth effort. And many with a learning disability can meet them if they get the proper tutoring and guidance.

William Avery (among others) would have never been admitted to Duke unless they could also play basketball at a superior level. Roy Williams took a kid who was basically passed through high school after he flunked out at Kansas. John Thompson took a kid who started a race riot on his team and the entire campus cheered. Adolph Rupp paid kids for jobs they never did.

Avery being admitted to Duke has nothing to do with the NCAA. If he met the NCAA standards, that's all that matters. Who Duke chooses to admit and the reasons for doing so is entirely up to the school. Every school has a certain number of athletes they'll accept that fall between the NCAA and the school's standards. In no way does that even approach a violation or being "dirty". Schools admit non-student athletes in the same manner all the time. Heck, the most prestigious schools in the country often exempt the most students from the tough admissions requirements.

The diploma factory issue you mention with Williams wasn't an actual violation until the NCAA clamped down. Diploma factories were quite a broad issue for many years, but within the last 5-10 years the NCAA is watching these schools more closely.

Taking a kid that started a race riot - not cheating. Not even close to cheating.

Rupp paying players was cheating. Not at all like the others.

You say it's only Calipari who's cheating? Please.

Um, that's not at all what I said. You're deflecting and reading what you want to read. "Cheating" happens. There's no pattern, no typical case. Sometimes coaches and programs cheat, from the SEC on down to the worst D-3 conference. In fact, I named at least 4 other known cheaters in earlier posts. Of course it happens, but it's not universal.

IF Cal is cheating (and I maintain that he's never been caught doing anything remotely bad) the way fans claim, every prospect in America would go to his team. (Or, at the very least, he'd get his pick of prospects across the nation.)

Are they all going to Kentucky?

Nope.

They go to Kentucky. And Duke. And North Carolina. And UConn. And Kansas. And UCLA. And Butler. And everywhere else.


If one cheats, they all do.

This is quite a doozy. So he can't be cheating because he doesn't get every top 5 star prospect? Is he going to have a roster of 13 one and done freshmen every year? And that would still leave between 10 and 50 top prospects in a given year for other schools.

The truth is that, no, Cal has never been caught and held responsible for violations. But with what I do know about the whole process, it would be very difficult for me to believe he had no knowledge of what went on with Camby and Rose. Coaches know what their recruits and players eat for breakfast, they know their favorite barbers, teachers, uncles, friends, advisers, girlfriends and interests. Basically, they know the kid as well as anyone other than mom, dad, and/or grandma. I'm more inclined to believe that every program is out there committing major violations regularly...and I know with 100% factual certainty that's not true. There's at least one clean program that reports every potential violation that surfaces and never comes close to committing a major one.

[Scrap Irony]

Do tell, guttle. Who's the one?

Because I know every Division I coach I've met, talked to, or talked about with those that would know (close to 50, fwiw) treat the 20-hour rule as a joke. They know its wrong. They know it's cheating. They do it anyway.

All. Of. Them.

[Scrap Irony]

So he can't be cheating because he doesn't get every top 5 star prospect? Is he going to have a roster of 13 one and done freshmen every year? And that would still leave between 10 and 50 top prospects in a given year for other schools.

No, I don't think Kentucky is clean. I think they're all dirty.

All of them.

I think, if only Kentucky was cheating (as some seem to think), they'd get not only Knight and Canter, but Barnes, Irving, and Selby as well. And, if KU, UNC Duke and UK are the only ones cheating, then how to explain the UCLA haul from two years ago or the OSU haul this year?

If one is true, all is.

Logic says so.

[WMR]

MM and others are verifying the report that Eric Bledsoe is filing a suit. He'll probably name the Times and Pete Thamel at least... glad to see the kid fighting back. It's got to be very embarrassing to have things that are supposed to be protected and private published nationwide.

[guttle11]

No, I don't think Kentucky is clean. I think they're all dirty.

All of them.

I think, if only Kentucky was cheating (as some seem to think), they'd get not only Knight and Canter, but Barnes, Irving, and Selby as well. And, if KU, UNC Duke and UK are the only ones cheating, then how to explain the UCLA haul from two years ago or the OSU haul this year?

If one is true, all is.

Logic says so.

You don't seem to understand the difference between wading through the sliminess and actually cheating to get players, or not reporting violations that do pop up. That is not a fine line. It's a Grand Canyon.

Nor do I think you really understand why programs do cross the line into "cheating". Pete Bell was a movie character, there aren't many real life Pete Bell's out there, doing whatever necessary to build that superstar team. The big time classes happen because kids develop friendships playing with and against other top level players in the AAU circuit and every year a handful of them stick together for college. That trend seems to be growing as the landscape changes due to the one and done rule. It's evolved from the Kevin Durant/Michael Beasley mold of dominating on your own to the Thad 5 mold of coming together to play for a title while you have to be there. Matta and Calipari are masters at cultivating that culture. Oden, Conley and Cook decided to play together as HS sophs. Matta was just the guy to win them over. You can be sure Matta didn't and isn't cheating. In the past 5 years Ohio State has transformed itself into the industry leader in openness and honesty with the NCAA. They'd probably report a kid picking up a quarter off the ground at this point.

Again, every program pushes the edge. Every program reports violations. They happen, most of them are completely honest mistakes or out of the blue randomness. It's designed to be a self-policing society, and thus over 99% of violations are self-reported. The book is so large with so many changes each year that most fall under the ".... happens" column. Overall they number well into the thousands each year in D-1 alone. The Compliance Office at the NCAA has fax machines that almost never stop rolling. However, major violations that can lead to ineligibility and big punishment are actually rare for a 347 program D-1 field. The truly dirty programs are the ones that hide, cover up, or play the plausible deniability card.

[Hoosier Red]

MM and others are verifying the report that Eric Bledsoe is filing a suit. He'll probably name the Times and Pete Thamel at least... glad to see the kid fighting back. It's got to be very embarrassing to have things that are supposed to be protected and private published nationwide.

He'll lose if he sues the Times. He may win if he sues his high school. But there is nothing in the Times story that is inaccurate. I would ask you to find me one thing the Times stated was a fact that wasn't.

I agree with Guttle, it's a weak deflection to say, "everyone cheats." Everyone doesn't cheat. Some schools have cheated in the past and been caught. Some schools have probably cheated in the past and not been caught.

It's true that William Avery never would have been admitted to Duke had he not been able to play basketball, but the Cincinnati Conservatory of Music probably admits a number of students who couldn't get into UC if they couldn't play the Flute, Violin, or Sing, or Dance, or Act. None of those things are NCAA violations.

[WMR]

Wow, so you're telling me you think the Times should be allowed to co-opt illegally obtained documents and use them as a part of their hatchet job without paying any consequences?

[Hoosier Red]

Wow, so you're telling me you think the Times should be allowed to co-opt illegally obtained documents and use them as a part of their hatchet job without paying any consequences?

Freedom of the press is absolute. It is not their responsibility to ensure that the school takes care of the kid's rights(which I'm not sure the school isn't forbidden from providing the information. I wouldn't think so but I'm not a lawyer.)

Unless they paid the school for the information or used other means of illegally obtaining the information, than sorry as long as they have access to the information than I'm not sure what they did wrong?

If they ask the school for Bledsoe's transcripts through his junior year and the school provides them, why shouldn't the Times be able to report on the transcripts?

And it's not as if the information of his academic issues is new. Google search Eric Bledsoe Transcript, and set the date range of say 4/1/09-5/30/09. You get a number of links(some reputable, some not.)

[Hoosier Red]

What I don't understand here WMR is why you insist on killing the messenger. It's not as though the Times made up a bunch of lies and is sending the NCAA to hound Kentucky.

The Times found out that the NCAA is investigating. The violations if proven true would be MAJOR violations which would if nothing else more than likely require Kentucky to forfeit all their wins from this year.

If a neutral observer was reading that article, I don't think they would be swayed one way or the other, so it's not like the NY Times wrote a hatchet piece with a bunch of unfounded allegations by the writer with no corroboration. They gave both sides to the story where possible, explained what is making the NCAA skeptical of Bledsoe and Parker HS's side, and gave the Parker HS coaches side of it.

If a "hatchet" piece is any article that brings up something potentially unpleasant about Kentucky, than I guess this is a hatchet piece.

If the concern is that because of this piece, Calipari will be stained by the "guilty until proven innocent" crowd, that's probably true. But it's also part of what Kentucky knew they were getting when they hired Calipari.
If the article had been written about a recruit going to UC, tOSU, Xavier, or Butler, there would be less presumption of guilt because those coaches do not have the public history that Calipari does.

[WMR]

I was over at the Ohio State athletic offices and we were talking about Bledsoe and a certain higher of up in the football program reminded me that the NYT did this in the summer of 2004 about OSU and Clarett. Now Clarett had other problems which led to his dismissal but what they reported was completely untrue. They said in the article that Clarett was having grades changed at OSU and in HS. They said that he had left a midterm exam before finishing yet still got a passing grade. Again it was found out later to be total bull. Their source was a jilted OSU faculty member who was the one giving them the information.

Now like I said Clarett was an idiot for other reasons but as far as the NYT article they were completely wrong and off base. This is something to remember for anyone who has already leaped to a conclusion of truth. The further this plays out I have a good feeling the more people will question the article as a whole. Its just funny how its the same type of story from the same paper about another top program. So to those I have seen that say well this writer from the NYT is known to get things correct I would like to remind those people of this NYT article that getting the facts straight and checking their sources when its comes to Universities and their academic control was completely wrong..

Remember I am only talking about the academic issues of the story. Not the individuals as a whole. So don't connect the players. Thats not the point here.

Hmm.

[WMR]

Freedom of the press is absolute. It is not their responsibility to ensure that the school takes care of the kid's rights(which I'm not sure the school isn't forbidden from providing the information. I wouldn't think so but I'm not a lawyer.)

Unless they paid the school for the information or used other means of illegally obtaining the information, than sorry as long as they have access to the information than I'm not sure what they did wrong?

If they ask the school for Bledsoe's transcripts through his junior year and the school provides them, why shouldn't the Times be able to report on the transcripts?

And it's not as if the information of his academic issues is new. Google search Eric Bledsoe Transcript, and set the date range of say 4/1/09-5/30/09. You get a number of links(some reputable, some not.)

It's dirty pool, plain and simple. But that seems to be the MO of the New York Times.

[Hoosier Red]

It's dirty pool, plain and simple. But that seems to be the MO of the New York Times.

How is it dirty pool? I really don't understand what's dirty about what they did? What ethical standards did they break?

Show me the article with regards to Ohio State, because I can guarantee you that they emphatically did not say he was having his grades changed, or that he walked out of a mid term exam, or anything of the sort.
They may have reported that the NCAA was investigating such an allegation. AS THEY SHOULD.

Just like in this article, the New York Times writer at no point stated that Eric Bledsoe had his grades changed in high school or that he had his rent paid, or that his coach was demanding money from college coaches. They don't even imply that these allegations happened. They reported that the NCAA is investigating, these are the allegations.

This isn't semantics. Accuracy is very important in journalism. And my frustration as a former journalist is that lazy readers will read this, and if nothing comes of the investigation, they'll say "The New York Times said Bledsoe had his rent paid, and had his grades changed. And they were proven wrong. The New York Times sucks. I wouldn't wrap my bird cage with it."

Anyone who reads that story and says "The New York Times said Bledsoe was receiving money either a)believes Bledsoe was receiving money and only read what they wanted to in order to confirm this or b) believed the New York Times is out to get Kentucky basketball to either cover up some UCONN recruiting violations or because they personally dislike Coach Cal.

[Hoosier Red]

Show me the article with regards to Ohio State, because I can guarantee you that they emphatically did not say he was having his grades changed, or that he walked out of a mid term exam, or anything of the sort.
They may have reported that the NCAA was investigating such an allegation. AS THEY SHOULD.

To be fair, I actually went back and found the original tOSU/Clarett article.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/13/sp...l?pagewanted=2
and I found out that while the article did state Clarett skipped out of a mid term exam, that point was not disputed. To my knowledge it wasn't proven "wrong" either.


Both the professor and teacher's assistant actually agreed that Clarett hadn't finished his mid term exam.
The associate professor in charge of the course and the graduate student who oversaw Clarett's work agree on these details, but they differ markedly on the meaning of what happened.

As for the tutor's writing papers for Clarett, the Times again does not assert this as fact. It points out that the teaching assistants and professors have their suspicions, it points out one particular player who the teacher specifically accused of cheating, and it details the efforts to reach that player.