FBI arrests Assistant Basketball Coaches in Corruption Scheme

[721Comstock]

If our issues are so minuscule then why did they even happen? Every player should have it cemented in their head that they don't take anything from anybody, seems pretty simple. Academic fraud did happen, it's like when the police investigate themselves and find "nothing wrong". The drug testing, that's ignorant, don't make the rule then. You can't use "we'll make sure your kids don't use drugs or they wont play" as a selling point here then ignore it when it happens.

I hope the other schools get nailed to the wall, but I'm not focused on them, I'm focused on our program and want it to rise above the rest, we can't do that if we're going to make stupid mistakes, which we unfortunately did. All of this was avoidable, that's what we should be upset about, not what other schools are doing.

Athletes get free stuff literally all the time. None of them don't take the shoes, clothes, etc - why stop there?
They are brought up expecting to get stuff handed to them, because they do, routinely.

They're not allowed to have jobs, so getting some walking around $ for "volunteering" is probably a lot more common than you might want to believe.

It is completely unrealistic to expect teenagers not to take free stuff when it's offered to them.

As with rules and laws in the real world, there are levels of importance and severity of them, and the corresponding penalties for violating them.

SU's "violations" were equivalent to minor traffic violations - unpaid parking tickets, not coming to a full stop, etc.
Yet we were penalized like it was vehicular manslaughter or a 3rd DUI.

Meanwhile, Llvll and UNC (amongst others not yet publicly announced) have been committing the equivalent of multiple felonies for many, many years - and to date, their penalties are pending, and/or not nearly as severe as ours were.

You don't see the difference there?

 

[reedny]

If our issues are so minuscule then why did they even happen? Every player should have it cemented in their head that they don't take anything from anybody, seems pretty simple. Academic fraud did happen, it's like when the police investigate themselves and find "nothing wrong". The drug testing, that's ignorant, don't make the rule then. You can't use "we'll make sure your kids don't use drugs or they wont play" as a selling point here then ignore it when it happens.

I hope the other schools get nailed to the wall, but I'm not focused on them, I'm focused on our program and want it to rise above the rest, we can't do that if we're going to make stupid mistakes, which we unfortunately did. All of this was avoidable, that's what we should be upset about, not what other schools are doing.

But you made the analogy, instead of staying "focused on our program". I not trying to tee off on you or make escuses, just pointing out that our violations, seen across the college sports landscape, were incredibly minor. Syracuse is the least of the NCAA's problems. As far as what we DID do, you're repeating the obvious .. yes, they were violations. Players were "paid" .. but the context is important -- it was for (what they thought was) legitimate work at a YMCA. It's not like we lined up whores or handed over bags of cash. Kids make mistakes. We should have caught it .. and yes, they shouldn't be smoking pot. Sure. But we have 650 student athletes. It's not going to be perfect. I think we run a clean program. And compared to many schools ... we're like a monastery.

 

[two3zone]

Athletes get free stuff literally all the time. None of them don't take the shoes, clothes, etc - why stop there?
They are brought up expecting to get stuff handed to them, because they do, routinely.

They're not allowed to have jobs, so getting some walking around $ for "volunteering" is probably a lot more common than you might want to believe.

It is completely unrealistic to expect teenagers not to take free stuff when it's offered to them.

As with rules and laws in the real world, there are levels of importance and severity of them, and the corresponding penalties for violating them.

SU's "violations" were equivalent to minor traffic violations - unpaid parking tickets, not coming to a full stop, etc.
Yet we were penalized like it was vehicular manslaughter or a 3rd DUI.

Meanwhile, Llvll and UNC (amongst others not yet publicly announced) have been committing the equivalent of multiple felonies for many, many years - and to date, their penalties are pending, and/or not nearly as severe as ours were.

You don't see the difference there?

Again, why bring up other schools, can't you look at our violations at face value? They took money, they weren't supposed to.

 

[Cusesky8214]

Again, why bring up other schools, can't you look at our violations at face value? They took money, they weren't supposed to.

I get what your saying...but we almost have to bring up other schools. Why wouldn't we? Why compare schools records, roster, recruiting, how they get recruits, championships, violations, sanctions, etc etc...its what we do...and it's safe to say there are many that are interested in seeing what is going to happen with the likes of UNC because of how badly cuse was crucified for what seems like minor violations compared to what's been going on lately. Will they get it like we did? Or will they get slapped on the wrist? And if they do get just a slap on the wrist then why because we certainly didn't get that kind of treatment from the ncaa.

 

[shantydaze]

A couple of thoughts. First, "everyone does it" is not a valid defense and people need to let that argument go. All that matters is whether a rule was broken and whether the NCAA can show the rule was broken.

It is an article from 2011, so I do not know whether it is still accurate, but will assume it is. LINK

"Then again, as noted by Potuto - the former chair of the infractions committee - an NCAA hearing is not a legal proceeding. The NCAA's standard of proof is equivalent to "clear and convincing evidence" in a civil case, such as those involving parental rights, Potuto said."

So, a normal civil case (personal injury, breach of contract, etc.) generally is that the Plaintiff must prove its claim by the preponderance of the evidence, i.e. more likely than not. As I am sure we are all aware from television and movies, the prosecutor in a criminal matter must prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. A "clear and convincing" standard of proof is in the middle of the preponderance of the evidence and beyond a reasonable doubt, so rather than being more likely than not, it must be substantially more likely to be true than not true. Ultimately, the "objective" standard of proof is largely subjective.

The standard of proof does not tell the whole story, however. What can be as important as the standard of proof is the standard (foundation) in which information/evidence is admitted in the proceeding. For instance, in most civil and criminal cases, hearsay is not admitted. In other words, a person can only testify as to what he or she actually saw something. They could not testify, however, as to what their best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with the girl who saw something. In addition, people generally are not allowed to speculate. Non-UK message board posters "know" Kentucky cheats. Unless we could actually testify that we saw Person A paid Player 1 a bagful of money, what we "know" is still just speculation. It should be noted that this is different than making a reasonable inference based on the evidence.

The linked story does not say what foundation is needed for information to be presented to the enforcement committee. Does testimony need to be given under oath? Is hearsay allowed for all purposes, for limited purposes, or not at all? Does physical evidence need to be authenticated? Can information not relevant to the alleged violations be presented? Can information of which the prejudicial effect outweighs its probative value be presented to the committee? What information is allowed before the committee is as much, if not more, important than the burden of proof.

 

[OttoMets]

Circa 2005 any student could go to the writing center for any class and tutors would proofread their paper and basically tell you what to fix.

The only mistake they made with Fab is he went to the AD department instead of the writing center. If Fab went to the writing center he wouldn't have been suspended and it wouldn't have been an "impermissible benefit".

Whoa. I agree with the line that you're better this, no offense. What you wrote is what tutors do. What the basketball program and athletic department permitted (encouraged, if you read the NCAA's take) wasn't proofreading and making suggestions. It involved staff cracking into an ineligible student's paper and composing portions of it under his identity.

It's so disappointing to see so many Syracuse people misrepresent this. And everything else FlyRodder said jibes with my understanding of what happened, too.

 

[realorange]

(Sarcasm Alert) Reed, you must be missing something in detailing the Syracuse transgressions. This doesn't sound like a major institutional control scenario that would lead to such restrictive penalties. Surely there is much more involved!

Obviously it's because that scourge of the NCAA, James Boeheim, is the Syracuse basketball coach.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Whoa. I agree with the line that you're better this, no offense. What you wrote is what tutors do. What the basketball program and athletic department permitted (encouraged, if you read the NCAA's take) wasn't proofreading and making suggestions. It involved staff cracking into an ineligible student's paper and composing portions of it under his identity.

It's so disappointing to see so many Syracuse people misrepresent this. And everything else FlyRodder said jibes with my understanding of what happened, too.

I'm not misrepresenting anything. If that's what you guys thought I meant maybe I didn't explain myself. Adults failed Fab. That is factual. If he goes to the writing office they do the same thing for him there that our support staff stupidly did and a kid got suspended who probably didn't know any better.

I stand by my point that the 300,000.00 was in the COI report as I copied and pasted it from there.

 

[OttoMets]

I'm not misrepresenting anything. If that's what you guys thought I meant maybe I didn't explain myself. Adults failed Fab. That is factual. If he goes to the writing office they do the same thing for him there that our support staff stupidly did and a kid got suspended who probably didn't know any better.

I stand by my point that the 300,000.00 was in the COI report as I copied and pasted it from there.

The system and a whole lot of individuals failed Fab. No doubt. (Sounds like Fab failed Fab, too, but I really don't want to get into that.)

If someone went to the writing center and found a staffer or a tutor to engage in plagiarism, I'd be really surprised. And if something like that happened, it would be a case of an individual doing something wrong, not a case of systemic dishonesty on the part of the writing program (I speak with certainty on this one, because I know a number of people in the basement of HBC and know them to be of the highest character). And, again, even that would surprise me. I knew a few tutors in different departments who got pressure from players to do their work for them (not help, but work); these people were grad students who wanted no part of that. It was a real problem in that era. As FlyRodder said, the NCAA scratches the surface on these cases and rolls with a penalty commensurate with the circumstantial evidence they uncover, not with the smoking gun we read about.

BTW, to your last line, perversely, this is why we have independent help like the writing center and shouldn't have AD/hoops operations staff interfering with schoolwork. Even assuming Fab was ignorant of the honor code or academic honesty regulations, getting coursework help at HBC would've helped set him straight and, if he was willing, gotten him assistance without putting him into a bad spot. That's what's so disgraceful about the college sports sham and SU's (AD, basketball program, provost) involvement in this: they're only looking to get an athletic advantage without regard for the player's or the institution's best interest, and in taking a shortcut they brought all the sanctions on themselves.

 

[pearl31]

This could go in a few different threads but I'll put it here... these are apparently copies of texts btwn Hawkins (adidas dude) and Pitino regarding Bowen - notice mention of Nike/Wes...

 

[Cheriehoop]

Again, why bring up other schools, can't you look at our violations at face value? They took money, they weren't supposed to.

Yet look at the this article about scholarship athletes and work. Confused? I know I am.
Student-athletes at work: NCAA work rule will be ‘difficult to monitor.’ – National Collegiate Athletic Association

 

[Fly Rodder]

Yet look at the this article about scholarship athletes and work. Confused? I know I am.
Student-athletes at work: NCAA work rule will be ‘difficult to monitor.’ – National Collegiate Athletic Association

But college athletic officials fear that monitoring jobs is sure to create monumental headaches for every athletic department.

This is the root of the problem. Colleges and the NCAA are too busy trying to figure out how to keep an insanely valuable market closed and rigged.

College athletes are valuable, much more valuable than the actual (not nominal) value of their supposed compensation (i.e., scholarships). There more the NCAA and colleges try to avoid this inconvenient truth, the more cheating happens, and the more restrictions and regulations they have to impose, which leads to more cheating, etc. (until they're down to regulating whether an athlete can have cream cheese on their bagel). Get out of the professional sports business, or just spin it off as a tangential but academically unrelated sports academy, and a lot of the problems go away because athletes can be treated like regular employees - which they are. It gets them out of the title IX issues, academic issues, payment issues, booster issues, etc.

 

[reedny]

This is the root of the problem. Colleges and the NCAA are too busy trying to figure out how to keep an insanely valuable market closed and rigged.

College athletes are valuable, much more valuable than the actual (not nominal) value of their supposed compensation (i.e., scholarships). There more the NCAA and colleges try to avoid this inconvenient truth, the more cheating happens, and the more restrictions and regulations they have to impose, which leads to more cheating, etc. (until they're down to regulating whether an athlete can have cream cheese on their bagel). Get out of the professional sports business, or just spin it off as a tangential but academically unrelated sports academy, and a lot of the problems go away because athletes can be treated like regular employees - which they are. It gets them out of the title IX issues, academic issues, payment issues, booster issues, etc.

It's not a market. It's college. Student athletes make the choice to be amateurs, to get an education. A select few of them also get to showcase their skills to professional teams. But that's the exception. For the majority, it's just wrong to keep claiming that Universities are "suppressing value" without mentioning the education they're giving SA's in exchange. Your "no cash, no value" argument tries to make the exception the model for all student athletes. I would humbly remind you that, for the vast majority of kids, the educational component is their ticket to success. They get a stipend for expenses. They can work part-time. Otherwise, their schedules are packed with practice and studying. It's a great time in their lives to learn and grow up, to be amateurs. The money will come in due time.

 

[Fly Rodder]

It's not a market.

Bull and . How is it not a market? The schools are paid billions for their athletics and they in turn recruit students to play fora form of compensation, which is limited? Keep telling yourself that while ignoring the problem and nothing will change for the better. People want to ignore a century of evidence that says otherwise.

not bother to mention the education they're giving SA's in exchange

I did mention it. The actual value varies based on the person. And, frankly, it's just not that valuable despite what people like yourself want to believe. Otherwise sneaker company intermediaries wouldn't be giving recruits hundreds of thousands of dollars to influence their decision.

 

[reedny]

Bull and . How is it not a market? The schools are paid billions for their athletics and they in turn recruit students to play fora form of compensation, which is limited? Keep telling yourself that while ignoring the problem and nothing will change for the better. People want to ignore a century of evidence that says otherwise.

I did mention it. The actual value varies based on the person. And, frankly, it's just not that valuable despite what people like yourself want to believe. Otherwise sneaker company intermediaries wouldn't be giving recruits hundreds of thousands of dollars to influence their decision.

College kids are not a "market" just because universities have revenue and some schools cheat. They're NFP ... every dime goes back into faculty, facilities, programs, scholarships, etc... Yes, some schools make TV and conference money on one or two sports. But that revenue supports dozens of other (T-IX) programs. It also costs money to pay faculty and construct and maintain academic and residential facilities for students. Most kids pay full or part tuition .. and schools make some interest from their endowments. None of that means every SA is a capital asset/property that must be "compensated". It's their choice to be amateurs. And I think it's a smart choice. Those that don't agree can go the LeBron route, or hit Europe.

 

[Fly Rodder]

every dime goes back into faculty, facilities, programs, scholarships, etc.

Not even close.

... according to a Washington Post review of thousands of pages of financial records from athletic departments at 48 schools in the five wealthiest conferences in college sports. In a decade, the non-coaching payrolls at the schools, combined, rose from $454 million to $767 million, a 69 percent jump. College sports officials long have cited rising costs both to justify mandatory student fees supporting athletics and to argue against paying college athletes. One of the fastest-increasing athletic costs at many of America’s largest public universities, however, is the amount of money flowing into the paychecks of the people running those athletic departments. ...

A former UCLA linebacker, Huma was stirred to action after his teammate — all-American Donnie Edwards — was suspended by the NCAA and ordered to pay restitution for accepting $150 in groceries from an agent. The front office pay surge, Huma said, is the product of college sports operating in an “illegal market that suppresses protections and benefits for players to such a degree that there’s a bubble.”

“The money has to go somewhere,” Huma said. “So it goes into — surprise, surprise — ADs’ paychecks.”

Collegiate revenue sports are about funneling vast sums of money generated by young athletes into the pockets of people who run the athletic department and business partners. It is, by any and all definitions, a market and a commercial enterprise. And, maybe most importantly, it's being run as a non-profit so no taxes are being paid despite being a giant profit making operation (and, as a side benefit, it becomes a great tax writeoff for wealthy boosters through ticket sales and ridiculous "donation" surcharges on season tickets).

It's their choice to be amateurs. And I think it's a smart choice. Those that don't agree can go the LeBron route, or hit Europe.

No, it's not a choice in any meaningful sense of the word. The NFL or NBA can't draft highschool students. If anyone wants to be a professional football or basketball player they have, in essence, a single choice as a result of de facto collusion between professional sports leagues and college sports leagues. Players don't go the Europe route because they're probably already being illegally compensated in college at a level greater than they would be in Europe. College sports is huge market built on exploiting the dreams of 18-22 year old kids with some athletic talent. Since its inception, 95% of what the NCAA does is try and prevent their primary labor force from being compensated based on their value, which in the end just results in more problems.

Converting revenue sports into a non-academic business would change nothing, other than letting athletes earn something from their labor and giving them the same rights that all employees receive. The best get paid more, the others get paid some, all gets some form of labor protection. They could even have the option of retaining amateur status in exchange for a lifetime scholarship. There are ton of options that would take magnitudes of less effort than trying to continue some charade that colleges aren't in the professional sports business so that they don't have to compensate their players.

 

[reedny]

Not even close.

Collegiate revenue sports are about funneling vast sums of money generated by young athletes into the pockets of people who run the athletic department and business partners. It is, by any and all definitions, a market and a commercial enterprise. And, maybe most importantly, it's being run as a non-profit so no taxes are being paid despite being a giant profit making operation (and, as a side benefit, it becomes a great tax writeoff for wealthy boosters through ticket sales and ridiculous "donation" surcharges on season tickets).

No, it's not a choice in any meaningful sense of the word. The NFL or NBA can't draft highschool students. If anyone wants to be a professional football or basketball player they have, in essence, a single choice as a result of de facto collusion between professional sports leagues and college sports leagues. Players don't go the Europe route because they're probably already being illegally compensated in college at a level greater than they would be in Europe. College sports is huge market built on exploiting the dreams of 18-22 year old kids with some athletic talent. Since its inception, 95% of what the NCAA does is try and prevent their primary labor force from being compensated based on their value, which in the end just results in more problems.

Converting revenue sports into a non-academic business would change nothing, other than letting athletes earn something from their labor and giving them the same rights that all employees receive. The best get paid more, the others get paid some, all gets some form of labor protection. They could even have the option of retaining amateur status in exchange for a lifetime scholarship. There are ton of options that would take magnitudes of less effort than trying to continue some charade that colleges aren't in the professional sports business so that they don't have to compensate their players.

"Labor", nonsense. Others have made a similar argument (that the NCAA is an employer/anti-trust violator) and it hasn't gained traction in the Courts (beyond stipends) because it doesn't give proper credence to the legal limitations on NPF corporations or the amateur bargain that is struck between athletes and universities. Student athletes on scholarship at educational institutions are, by "definition", amateurs -- even if you insist there's a "market" for a few of them. Maybe some prospects will dismiss college/education the way you do. If so, they can go to Europe and come back to the NBA in a year. The choice is theirs, even if you don't think it's lucrative enough. The rest of your post is disappointingly dismissive of what goes on in the classroom at SU and other legitimate universities. But even putting education aside, I still can't accept your theory that college is a "market" (and all student athletes are professional assets) simply because Universities charge tuition and accept TV revenue. That's ludicrous ... as many NPF's (from hospitals to the red cross) operate the same way, and use volunteers extensively. You have offered no reason to scrap the whole amateur model just for a few hundred "valuable" prospects, when there are hundreds of thousands of SA's benefiting - and appreciating - the education they're receiving.

 

[cbcuse3]

Did anyone read Griff quote in this article? Hopefully Forde just trying to stir the pot.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

The system and a whole lot of individuals failed Fab. No doubt. (Sounds like Fab failed Fab, too, but I really don't want to get into that.)

If someone went to the writing center and found a staffer or a tutor to engage in plagiarism, I'd be really surprised. And if something like that happened, it would be a case of an individual doing something wrong, not a case of systemic dishonesty on the part of the writing program (I speak with certainty on this one, because I know a number of people in the basement of HBC and know them to be of the highest character). And, again, even that would surprise me. I knew a few tutors in different departments who got pressure from players to do their work for them (not help, but work); these people were grad students who wanted no part of that. It was a real problem in that era. As FlyRodder said, the NCAA scratches the surface on these cases and rolls with a penalty commensurate with the circumstantial evidence they uncover, not with the smoking gun we read about.

BTW, to your last line, perversely, this is why we have independent help like the writing center and shouldn't have AD/hoops operations staff interfering with schoolwork. Even assuming Fab was ignorant of the honor code or academic honesty regulations, getting coursework help at HBC would've helped set him straight and, if he was willing, gotten him assistance without putting him into a bad spot. That's what's so disgraceful about the college sports sham and SU's (AD, basketball program, provost) involvement in this: they're only looking to get an athletic advantage without regard for the player's or the institution's best interest, and in taking a shortcut they brought all the sanctions on themselves.

James Southerland told someone he could not have failed a paper, because he didn't write it.

 

[ssbriefcase]

Did anyone read Griff quote in this article? Hopefully Forde just trying to stir the pot.

Since Griff said his suits sucked, I don't think he's worried about getting rolled on.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

It's not a market. It's college. Student athletes make the choice to be amateurs, to get an education. A select few of them also get to showcase their skills to professional teams. But that's the exception. For the majority, it's just wrong to keep claiming that Universities are "suppressing value" without mentioning the education they're giving SA's in exchange. Your "no cash, no value" argument tries to make the exception the model for all student athletes. I would humbly remind you that, for the vast majority of kids, the educational component is their ticket to success. They get a stipend for expenses. They can work part-time. Otherwise, their schedules are packed with practice and studying. It's a great time in their lives to learn and grow up, to be amateurs. The money will come in due time.

If Jodie Foster was on scholarship at Yale, she could make movies and receive money for her skill.
The school could have paid her to advertise for the school.
She could have used her likeness to bring in money.
There should be no difference.

 

[reedny]

If Jodie Foster was on scholarship at Yale, she could make movies and receive money for her skill.
The school could have paid her to advertise for the school.
She could have used her likeness to bring in money.
There should be no difference.

All those grad' student researchers at Yale that come up with amazing ideas ... yep, you guessed it, Yale gets the benefits. The same general pattern appears in the private sector. If you work at Kodak and invent a process (and even patent it) ... Kodak keeps the money that patent brings in. So back to the University context, on the surface it might seem unbalanced, but it's understandable when you start factoring in that the researchers were students using University equipment in U facilities getting U instruction.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

All those grad' student researchers at Yale that come up with amazing ideas ... yep, you guessed it, Yale gets the benefits. The same general pattern appears in the private sector. If you work at Kodak and invent a process (and even patent it) ... Kodak keeps the money that patent brings in. So back to the University context, on the surface it might seem unbalanced, but it's understandable when you start factoring in that the researchers were students using University equipment in U facilities getting U instruction.

Well, they are often employees, are they not? Plus, they can make money on the side, they can look for a better deal and transfer without sitting out of the lab for a year.

 

[reedny]

Well, they are often employees, are they not? Plus, they can make money on the side, they can look for a better deal and transfer without sitting out of the lab for a year.

At EK they're employees. At University, they're students. And as such, they accept the benefits and trade-offs of their bargain.

 

[Delmar]

At EK they're employees. At University, they're students. And as such, they accept the benefits and trade-offs of their bargain.

Whose bargain? The schools and the coaches (and the NCAA) are the ones pulling down the big bucks. The students have the terms of their agreement dictated to them.