IUplanet: Indiana Hoosier forums, sports, recruiting, photos, and Indiana University news - View Single Post - Cruel and Unusual Punishment for Indiana Basketball?

Featured Contributor · 07-08-2008, 08:41 PM

Note to reader: This article was contributed by Marc Halbig, a lifelong Indiana fan and IU alum. Marc graduated from IU in 1995 with a BA in Political Science, and currently lives in Rio Rancho, New Mexico.

Cruel and Unusual Punishment for Indiana Basketball?

By: Marc Halbig, 1995 IU graduate

One day, life will seem brighter for Indiana University basketball. In the meantime, we (I am an IU graduate) still await our sentence from the NCAA for Kelvin Sampson’s phone call addiction and now we have the new “failure to monitor” charge against the university. The final decision that was weeks away from being delivered now seems months away. The wild speculation has started anew.

Does IU deserve to be punished? You bet. Will IU be punished? Guaranteed. How bad will the punishment be? That is the question. To gain perspective, I researched five different NCAA cases against NCAA member basketball programs. Then we can make an educated guess as to Indiana’s punishment. This may help some fans step off the ledge of the doomsday scenario.

Who remembers Baylor University? One player murdered another. The head coach told the players to tell investigators that the murdered player paid his tuition by selling drugs, when, in fact, the head coach paid his tuition. Coaches were at player workouts illegally, gave numerous other cash benefits to players, did not report failed drug tests, falsified forms, lied to investigators. Shall I go on?

Baylor lost one season’s worth of non-conference games, had a one year postseason ban, lost 4 scholarships in one year, one scholarship the next. All the coaches were released. Recruiting restrictions similar to IU, but not worse than, were implemented. This was the worst scandal the NCAA had seen in decades, and Baylor was really given one year brutal punishment.

Baylor has been able to recover relatively quickly considering the NCAA pondered giving Baylor the death penalty, which would have shut down the program for one year, but Baylor’s cooperation and own sanctions kept that from happening. Baylor’s reputation suffered greatly, but the coaches were basically barred from coaching in the NCAA from 5-10 years.

The next winner was Michigan. Remember the Fab Five and those great years? Well, they came at a price. Michigan booster Ed Martin paid four Michigan players anywhere from $71, 000 to $208,000 over an extended time. Basketball coach Steve Fischer knew and stopped some assistance given to the players but did not report it to the university.

Michigan had what NCAA Infractions committee chairman Thomas Yeagley said, “…is one of the three or four most egregious violations” ever, yet study the punishments. They received two years probation, a one year postseason ban, loss of one scholarship for each of four seasons (not bad), and had to pay back revenue and wipe the record books clean for the years the four players played at Michigan.

Another major NCAA case was the Minnesota academic fraud case. A tutor and secretary wrote approximately 400 papers for basketball players over a five year period. Head Coach Clem Haskins knew of the activity and even paid the secretary $3,000. Haskins repeatedly tried to hide and mislead the university and NCAA regarding his actions (sound familiar?). The Pioneer Press broke the story, which led to the university investigation.

Minnesota imposed a post-season ban in 2000. For the 2000 academic year, scholarships were reduced from 13 to 10. For the years 2001-2004, Minnesota lost 5 scholarships, with at least one each of the three years. Also, evaluation days were reduced by 25% (less than IU). Official visits to campus were reduced in from 12 to 6 for two seasons. Minnesota held out four guilty players of their first round NCAA game, which they lost. This was shortly after the newspaper broke the story. By the way, the NCAA took the basic sacrifice of Minnesota’s postseason into a favorable account when giving the sanctions. Haskins got a $1.5 million buyout (makes IU look good), and the assistants were not retained.

The Fresno State case probably has the most similarities to IU. Fresno State was already on probation for academic fraud, recruiting eligibility, and lack of institutional control when it hired Ray Lopes as its head coach. Here is where it gets interesting. The head coach before Lopes was Jerry Tarkanian. (Here is the hiring of a man with a notorious reputation with the NCAA.) The probation period was to last until 2006.

Lopes came to Fresno in 2002 from…drum roll please…Oklahoma. Yes, he was one of the assistants named in 2006 for making impermissible phone calls under Kelvin Sampson. Granted, Fresno did not know this when it hired Lopes.

Guess what Lopes’ staff did while at Fresno? They made 457 impermissible phone calls in a two-year period. It does appear Lopes cooperated a little better than Sampson. Lopes and the Athletic Director both resigned. Lopes was given a 3 year show cause by the NCAA, meaning if a NCAA school wanted to hire Lopes, it had to have an infractions hearing and get any penalties Lopes received. Fresno State banned itself from post season play in 2006. Phone calls restrictions were put in place. Official visits were reduced by 50 percent during a two year period. Recruiting days were reduced by 33 percent from 2005-2007. Everything I found indicated the restrictions were less than or the same as IU has already done.

Remember this. Fresno, the institution, was a repeat offender. Indiana is not. The part of being in a probation period is similar for both. If the NCAA really punishes IU just for hiring Kelvin Sampson, research this case. They hired Tarkanian, and during his time, violations occurred. Then the new guy also committed violations. Double whammy.

Last, the good school in the group is Long Beach State. They were not on probation. Two assistants committed impermissible phone calls. In addition, they helped six players get admitted into school who were not academically eligible. Some improper benefits and academic violations also occurred. Similar to IU, the school was hit with a “failure to monitor” charge.

Long Beach was given probation for 3 years, loss of one scholarship for each of two seasons, and they were not allowed to recruit junior college players for two years. Long Beach had more violations, but IU has the priors from Sampson that Long Beach did not.

Overall, how does Indiana compare? Indiana’s infractions are not severe compared to Baylor, Michigan, or Minnesota. All the schools who received a post season ban were found to have a “lack of institutional control.” That is one step further than Indiana. A postseason ban would seem excessive. Baylor and Minnesota were really punished hard for one year. Michigan’s loss of scholarships was not horrible considering the violations. I would look for a punishment in between Fresno State and Long Beach State.

Indiana has taken one scholarship away for one year. Those will most likely increase in years. Many of the recruiting restrictions such as phone call limits, off campus contact days, official visits to campus, are as harsh or more so than the preceding cases. Tom Crean and his staff are under fairly harsh sanctions.

Those are some of the official sanctions and possibilities. But which of the previously mentioned schools have felt the fallout quite like IU? All the coaches are gone. All but 2 players are gone. The AD is going to be gone. IU lost two more scholarships due to APR penalties (lack of academics achievement). A possible Final Four team lost 4 of its last 7 games. Oh yeah, a once clean, proud institution’s name has been dragged through the mud. Do not forget that part. Indiana has been clean much longer than Purdue (Major violators in 1999 and 1960) and Illinois (Major violators in 1990, 1974, and 1967), whose schools’ fan bases are calling for our head.

My final question is, “What does the NCAA want?” IU should not have hired Sampson. It wasn’t necessary to hire someone with his record. That is what the real punishment will entail. We are going to be much better off with Crean at the helm than we ever would have been with Sampson (not just wins and losses).

The NCAA should step back and be careful though. It does not want to come across as having a vendetta and a “We’ll show you” response. If they do, IU fans won’t have to go far to voice their displeasure. We won’t even have to make a phone call. If Indiana gets a punishment as severe as some of these cases, Miles Brand may find another angry mob at his doorstep.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Will IU escape a postseason ban? Will the NCAA come down harder on IU than it has on schools in the past, or will IU's punishment fall in line with other programs that were in similar situations? We want your thoughts!

More IU basketball discussion in the forums

Special thanks to Marc Halbig for this excellent piece. Remember that IUplanet is dedicated to expressing the views of all Hoosiers. If you'd like to contribute, send an e-mail to dburkart@iuplanet.com.

07-08-2008, 08:41 PM	#1 (permalink)
Featured Contributor This could be you! Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 1	Cruel and Unusual Punishment for Indiana Basketball? Note to reader: This article was contributed by Marc Halbig, a lifelong Indiana fan and IU alum. Marc graduated from IU in 1995 with a BA in Political Science, and currently lives in Rio Rancho, New Mexico. Cruel and Unusual Punishment for Indiana Basketball? By: Marc Halbig, 1995 IU graduate One day, life will seem brighter for Indiana University basketball. In the meantime, we (I am an IU graduate) still await our sentence from the NCAA for Kelvin Sampson’s phone call addiction and now we have the new “failure to monitor” charge against the university. The final decision that was weeks away from being delivered now seems months away. The wild speculation has started anew. Does IU deserve to be punished? You bet. Will IU be punished? Guaranteed. How bad will the punishment be? That is the question. To gain perspective, I researched five different NCAA cases against NCAA member basketball programs. Then we can make an educated guess as to Indiana’s punishment. This may help some fans step off the ledge of the doomsday scenario. Who remembers Baylor University? One player murdered another. The head coach told the players to tell investigators that the murdered player paid his tuition by selling drugs, when, in fact, the head coach paid his tuition. Coaches were at player workouts illegally, gave numerous other cash benefits to players, did not report failed drug tests, falsified forms, lied to investigators. Shall I go on? Baylor lost one season’s worth of non-conference games, had a one year postseason ban, lost 4 scholarships in one year, one scholarship the next. All the coaches were released. Recruiting restrictions similar to IU, but not worse than, were implemented. This was the worst scandal the NCAA had seen in decades, and Baylor was really given one year brutal punishment. Baylor has been able to recover relatively quickly considering the NCAA pondered giving Baylor the death penalty, which would have shut down the program for one year, but Baylor’s cooperation and own sanctions kept that from happening. Baylor’s reputation suffered greatly, but the coaches were basically barred from coaching in the NCAA from 5-10 years. The next winner was Michigan. Remember the Fab Five and those great years? Well, they came at a price. Michigan booster Ed Martin paid four Michigan players anywhere from $71, 000 to $208,000 over an extended time. Basketball coach Steve Fischer knew and stopped some assistance given to the players but did not report it to the university. Michigan had what NCAA Infractions committee chairman Thomas Yeagley said, “…is one of the three or four most egregious violations” ever, yet study the punishments. They received two years probation, a one year postseason ban, loss of one scholarship for each of four seasons (not bad), and had to pay back revenue and wipe the record books clean for the years the four players played at Michigan. Another major NCAA case was the Minnesota academic fraud case. A tutor and secretary wrote approximately 400 papers for basketball players over a five year period. Head Coach Clem Haskins knew of the activity and even paid the secretary $3,000. Haskins repeatedly tried to hide and mislead the university and NCAA regarding his actions (sound familiar?). The Pioneer Press broke the story, which led to the university investigation. Minnesota imposed a post-season ban in 2000. For the 2000 academic year, scholarships were reduced from 13 to 10. For the years 2001-2004, Minnesota lost 5 scholarships, with at least one each of the three years. Also, evaluation days were reduced by 25% (less than IU). Official visits to campus were reduced in from 12 to 6 for two seasons. Minnesota held out four guilty players of their first round NCAA game, which they lost. This was shortly after the newspaper broke the story. By the way, the NCAA took the basic sacrifice of Minnesota’s postseason into a favorable account when giving the sanctions. Haskins got a $1.5 million buyout (makes IU look good), and the assistants were not retained. The Fresno State case probably has the most similarities to IU. Fresno State was already on probation for academic fraud, recruiting eligibility, and lack of institutional control when it hired Ray Lopes as its head coach. Here is where it gets interesting. The head coach before Lopes was Jerry Tarkanian. (Here is the hiring of a man with a notorious reputation with the NCAA.) The probation period was to last until 2006. Lopes came to Fresno in 2002 from…drum roll please…Oklahoma. Yes, he was one of the assistants named in 2006 for making impermissible phone calls under Kelvin Sampson. Granted, Fresno did not know this when it hired Lopes. Guess what Lopes’ staff did while at Fresno? They made 457 impermissible phone calls in a two-year period. It does appear Lopes cooperated a little better than Sampson. Lopes and the Athletic Director both resigned. Lopes was given a 3 year show cause by the NCAA, meaning if a NCAA school wanted to hire Lopes, it had to have an infractions hearing and get any penalties Lopes received. Fresno State banned itself from post season play in 2006. Phone calls restrictions were put in place. Official visits were reduced by 50 percent during a two year period. Recruiting days were reduced by 33 percent from 2005-2007. Everything I found indicated the restrictions were less than or the same as IU has already done. Remember this. Fresno, the institution, was a repeat offender. Indiana is not. The part of being in a probation period is similar for both. If the NCAA really punishes IU just for hiring Kelvin Sampson, research this case. They hired Tarkanian, and during his time, violations occurred. Then the new guy also committed violations. Double whammy. Last, the good school in the group is Long Beach State. They were not on probation. Two assistants committed impermissible phone calls. In addition, they helped six players get admitted into school who were not academically eligible. Some improper benefits and academic violations also occurred. Similar to IU, the school was hit with a “failure to monitor” charge. Long Beach was given probation for 3 years, loss of one scholarship for each of two seasons, and they were not allowed to recruit junior college players for two years. Long Beach had more violations, but IU has the priors from Sampson that Long Beach did not. Overall, how does Indiana compare? Indiana’s infractions are not severe compared to Baylor, Michigan, or Minnesota. All the schools who received a post season ban were found to have a “lack of institutional control.” That is one step further than Indiana. A postseason ban would seem excessive. Baylor and Minnesota were really punished hard for one year. Michigan’s loss of scholarships was not horrible considering the violations. I would look for a punishment in between Fresno State and Long Beach State. Indiana has taken one scholarship away for one year. Those will most likely increase in years. Many of the recruiting restrictions such as phone call limits, off campus contact days, official visits to campus, are as harsh or more so than the preceding cases. Tom Crean and his staff are under fairly harsh sanctions. Those are some of the official sanctions and possibilities. But which of the previously mentioned schools have felt the fallout quite like IU? All the coaches are gone. All but 2 players are gone. The AD is going to be gone. IU lost two more scholarships due to APR penalties (lack of academics achievement). A possible Final Four team lost 4 of its last 7 games. Oh yeah, a once clean, proud institution’s name has been dragged through the mud. Do not forget that part. Indiana has been clean much longer than Purdue (Major violators in 1999 and 1960) and Illinois (Major violators in 1990, 1974, and 1967), whose schools’ fan bases are calling for our head. My final question is, “What does the NCAA want?” IU should not have hired Sampson. It wasn’t necessary to hire someone with his record. That is what the real punishment will entail. We are going to be much better off with Crean at the helm than we ever would have been with Sampson (not just wins and losses). The NCAA should step back and be careful though. It does not want to come across as having a vendetta and a “We’ll show you” response. If they do, IU fans won’t have to go far to voice their displeasure. We won’t even have to make a phone call. If Indiana gets a punishment as severe as some of these cases, Miles Brand may find another angry mob at his doorstep. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Will IU escape a postseason ban? Will the NCAA come down harder on IU than it has on schools in the past, or will IU's punishment fall in line with other programs that were in similar situations? We want your thoughts! More IU basketball discussion in the forums Special thanks to Marc Halbig for this excellent piece. Remember that IUplanet is dedicated to expressing the views of all Hoosiers. If you'd like to contribute, send an e-mail to dburkart@iuplanet.com.