NC State is copying UNC in case vs NCAA
- Thread starter kyjeff1
- Start date
So. No doubt Penny paid to have his family move to Memphis and play for his high school team which was a violation of Tennessee High School Athletic Association rules. He was declared ineligible but sued and the THSAA never did anything to enforce the suspension while Wiseman continued to play and win a state championship. Wiseman should have been suspended the entire year. Penny and Memphis making a mockery of the NCAA and the THSAA.
North Carolina* had John Skipper and others discouraging the NCAA from dropping the hammer on them. ESPN and the ACC go hand in hand, mess with them and the whole conference and ESPN are against you. The NCAA wanted no part of that, Skipper is gone now so NC State will have to go it alone now.
Did you guys see this? Sooner or later, the NCAA is going to realize they screwed that UNC case up badly. Because now, everyone they try to nail, is going to fight them.
Heck, NCST is even using the same law firms that UNC used.
Now Fighting The NCAA NC State Is Using Lessons It Learned From UNC - Duke Basketball Report
https://www.dukebasketballreport.co...i-north-carolina-academic-fraud-paper-classes
When It Comes To The NCAA, NC State Has A Role Model Just Down The Road
Obscure, obfuscate, deny.
- By JD King
- on December 10, 2019 8:00 am
NEW YORK, NY - MARCH 07: Dennis Smith Jr. #4 and head coach Mark Gottfried of the North Carolina State Wolfpack walk off the court following their 75-61 loss to the Clemson Tigers in the first round of the ACC Basketball Tournament at Barclays Center on March 7, 2017 in New York City.
Photo by Lance King/Getty Images
When UNC escaped NCAA punishment despite decades of academic fraud, NC State fans, like a lot of other people, were disgusted. However, as we’ve seen since UNC’s case ended, a lot of schools have followed their model and simply contested everything.
Apparently testifying under oath and under penalty of perjury in a federal court isn’t proof enough.
And it should be noted that Smith has denied knowing Gassnola or knowing about any payments from Adidas.
NC State also argues that if any payments did happen, the money came from an agent, not from Adidas, so it wasn’t actually a recruiting violation but rather an impermissible benefit.
Good for the them. Don't blame them at all!
If the NCAA had any brains, they would pick on one of these schools that are refusing to cooperate (Kansas or NC State) focus on their case first and hammer them into the ground. Specifically state that their penalty was augmented for failure to cooperate. Then the rest of the schools will fall in line.
Obviously the NCAA didn't make things easy on themselves by the bizarre ruling from the Committee on Infractions in the UNC case. But they have the chance to regain control of their enforcement/discipline process. This is such an easy case I don't think even the NCAA can screw it up. It will be interesting to see if the manage to screw it up anyways.
Obviously the NCAA didn't make things easy on themselves by the bizarre ruling from the Committee on Infractions in the UNC case. But they have the chance to regain control of their enforcement/discipline process. This is such an easy case I don't think even the NCAA can screw it up. It will be interesting to see if the manage to screw it up anyways.
So what set of rules are they following that define these decisions? Where does it say in the rule book that $30K makes you permanently ineligible but $11K is a 13 game slap on the wrist? Because assuming the punishment is linear, Kanter should have been suspended 36 games based on this completely subjective 13 games per $11K. So what threshold did Kanter cross that made him permanently ineligible to ever be a college athlete. $12K? $25K?
Things like this shouldn’t go to a committee to decide a kids future. It should be a clearly defined set of rules that apply to everyone. Instead it’s complete BS where the committee rules differently depending on who their favorite teams are.
Actually, in my opinion, Kanter should have been eligible from the get go.
He didn't receive his money from an agent of the school he was attending. He didn't receive money from an agent period. He was paid by a Turkish national team and not the NBA.
Not to mention, there was another foreign player that applied with the NCAA a few years later that had the same issues Kanter had. He was paid to play somewhere overseas and it might have even been another Turkish kid. He was given a thumbs up by the NCAA.
Wiseman was paid by a Memphis booster, he should be ineligible this year. The amount of money doesn't matter by rule.
Kanter’s case was decided based on Article 12 of the by-laws. Kanter was ruled ineligible because he played on a professional basketball team and was paid by that team. In addition, the amount he was paid far exceeded the amount that was needed to simply cover his expenses.
When the NCAA depends upon the concept of amateurism for its very existence, there’s not going to be much leeway when it comes to involvement with professional sports teams because this directly implicates amateur status.
People need to let the whole Kanter thing go. The rules were crystal clear on his case, so the issue wasn’t the committee that made the decision.
Last edited:
The NCAA doesn't have a black and white set of rules. It says it's an infraction for impermissible benefits in the rule book. When you have infractions you go before the COI, committee on infractions and they rule on your case. The committee's are made up from commissioners, presidents, attorneys from member institutions. The committee's change and dont rely on precedent like our court system does, each independent committee does their own investigation and makes their own independent rulings. That's how "the NCAA" works, that's how they always have.
The NCAA is basically all the member institutions presidents chancellors and leaders. Just like politicians they gave yall somebody to hate while they escape blame and have all the power. The evil "NCAA" gets all the blame when leaders at NCAA schools make all the rules, all the rulings, then escape blame because it's "the NCAA's" fault for the rules and rulings. They are the NCAA, yall think it's Mark Emmert and some guys in an office in Indianapolis. Mark Emmert doesn't make rules, doesn't rule on cases, he'll explain the decision for the NCAA but doesn't rule on eligibility matters or infractions. When UNC got away with 20+ years of academic fraud SEC commissioner Greg Sankey and his committee who ruled on the case and gave them a pass for cheating, they got zero blame, it was "the NCAA's" fault.
Kanter's money was put into an account with the idea of paying it back if there was an issue with his eligibility. It was not money he had used at the time the NCAA ruled him ineligible. They offered to return the money immediately.
What Kanter ultimately did with the money is irrelevant.
What’s relevant is that Kanter played for a pro team, that pro team paid him, and the amount that they paid Kanter far exceeded the amount that is permitted by NCAA by-laws.
The NCAA rules on this are pretty straightforward. If you don’t like the decision, then you should be taking issue with the rules and not the committee charged with applying them.
The rules are crystal clear in the wiseman case too. He was paid by an agent of the university he is attending.
Here's the thing, the NCAA has proven, time and time again, that they will find a loophole in their own rules or simply give a BS reason to clear certain players, but then turn around and declare other players ineligible for lesser offenses.
If the NCAA was consistent, this wouldn’t be a big deal.
The Kanter's offered to pay the money back, that should have been an option, but no. The Kanter's did what they thought was legal. The amount of money shouldn’t matter.
Why are certain players allowed to transfer and play immediately (Jemarl Baker) and others told they have to sit (Hauser brothers)?
Is it about the kids or not? The NCAA is a farce of an organization.
Who said I didn't like the decision. The decision I don't like is the ruling on Wiseman. It is evident what Penny did. He paid to get him to Memphis to play for his High School team and used that influence to recruit him to Memphis. Wiseman should be like Kanter and be ineligible for the entire season instead of just a slap on the wrist.
Sorry, my statement about not liking the decision was meant more as a general statement towards those who complain about it, and not meant to be directed specifically to you. The was sloppy writing on my part.
As to Wiseman, anyone who is arguing that precedent should matter should then also be fine with the fact that Wiseman was not declared permanently ineligible. The NCAA handled Wiseman like they typically handle any extra benefits case.
Kanter was permanently ineligible because, under NCAA rules, Kanter was a professional athlete. Under those same NCAA rules, Wiseman is not a professional athlete, he simply received extra benefits. That is why Kanter was permanently ineligible and Wiseman was not.
Okay, explain this one to me than:
Omer Yurtseven being ruled eligible (with suspension) a reminder of the NCAA's bungling of Enes Kanter's case | Kentucky Sports Radio
https://kentuckysportsradio.com/basketball-2/omer-yurtseven-being-ruled-eligible-with-suspension-a-reminder-of-the-ncaas-bungling-of-enes-kanters-case/
-------------
Omer Yurtseven being ruled eligible (with suspension) a reminder of the NCAA’s bungling of Enes Kanter’s case
By Mrs. Tyler Thompson | October 31, 2016 | 8
Remember Omer Yurtseven? He’s the 7-foot Turkish basketball player that Kentucky expressed some interest in last season. Yurtseven ended up going to NC State, and like Enes Kanter, has had some problems with his eligibility because he received money while playing for Fenerbahçe basketball club in Turkey; however, unlike Enes, he’ll actually be allowed to play this season. Today, the NCAA announced they’ve suspended Yurtseven for nine games and he will be required to pay $1,000 to the charity of his choice. After that, he’s in the clear.
What’s the difference between Yurtseven’s case and Enes’ case? Great question. Both played for Fenerbahçe and both received money from the club, but for some reason, Omer was ruled eligible (albeit with a nine-game suspension) and Enes was not. Omer claimed that the team paid him for the last three years, putting the money into an account they opened in his name, but that he didn’t want or ask for it. Meanwhile, Enes played for Fenerbahçe for the same amount of time, turned down a $6 million contract from the club when he was 16, and the NCAA ruled that because he received more money in expenses for housing, transportation, food, etc. ($33,000, about the same as tuition at a really nice prep school) than they deemed necessary, he wasn’t allowed to play college basketball. Stop me if any of this makes sense.
I’m happy for Omer Yurtseven that he’s able to play college ball, but man, I wish we could still #FreeEnes.
[AP]
Article written by Mrs. Tyler Thompson
Why was Omer given eligibility, but Enes was not? Only difference here is Omer went to NCSU, Enes spurned Washington to try to play for UK. There's a reason I brought up Wasington.
Which NCAA by-law stipulates that offering to pay back funds received from a professional team is relevant to the committee’s decision?
Which NCAA by-law stipulates that the amount of money involved shouldn’t matter?
Which NCAA by-laws were misapplied to either the Kanter or Wiseman cases?
See my last post. Which NCAA bylaw allowed Omer to play?
Again, the NCAA finds reasons to clear some, then will turn around and rule others, in very similar cases, ineligible.
You got nothing on the Hauser and Baker rulings I brought up? Why was Baker cleared and the Hauser's not?
Who opened and controlled the account containing the funds paid to Omer?
Who opened and controlled the account containing the funds paid to Kanter?
While I do not disagree with your position I seem to recall and it is totally just memory at this point a couple of things pertinent to this issue. 1) The Kanter family had inquired with the NCAA about the process and were told what to do for him to maintain eligibility and they followed that guidance. 2) There was another player a year or two prior to Kanter who did essentially the same thing and was granted eligibility.
Could be poor memory on my part but that is what I recall. Of course I may have cherry picked the memories I recall subconsciously.
Why does that matter? Money was paid. Again, if the NCAA was about the kids, like they say they are, then Enes could have paid the money back and played.
This is exactly correct. The Kanter's did exactly what the NCAA said they could do. But then they ripped the rug out from under them.
The problem with the Kanter’s is that they did not comply with restrictions imposed by the by-laws. Had they done that, it wouldn’t have been an issue.
Actions beyond the control of the student athlete are relevant to consider in the context of mitigating factors.
Similarly, control of funds is important when evaluating when a payment does or does not cross the line. For example, that’s the reason by-law 12.1.2.1.3.1.1 even exists.
Except the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission, which is responsible for accrediting UNC actually put the school on probation for these classes for non-compliance with the principle of academic integrity. The president of the Southern Association also said every student who took the infamous classes "had an extra benefit." The president also said, "there was no case similar to North Carolina's investigated by the Southern Association going back at least 40 years."
So the NCAA wasn't ruling on the rigor of the classes, they didn't have to, the Southern Association did.The board found deficiencies in UNC compliance with its standards for academic policies, student services, student records and class credit hours. It required the university to offer students and graduates free courses to make up for the phony classes.
Much like the NCAA depended on the SAT company to certify the score of Rose, it appears to me they could depend on the institution that accredits its member school when it determined the classes were phony.
Please don’t feed the UNC trolls. He’s just over here repeating the same inaccurate narrative you hear from all UNC fans that don’t understand what actually happened and why.
Point made and I concur. I just did not want the statement to go without rebuttal.
Any way that you slice that it is just wrong. What you are saying is, that there are a different set of rules for everyone. Does law cases use the same jury and foreman every time? You have to have standards or you have chaos
I didnt create the NCAA, and I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying that the way it is. People are acting like they're a court of law or use the same standards that the the courts do. They do not.
Court cases deal with laws that are more black and white, use precedent, and has sentencing guidelines. The NCAA does not.
This not true. The NCAA has rules, considers precedent and has penalty guidelines.
People simply think that they don’t because:
- NCAA by-laws change more frequently than laws typically do (i.e., precedent is no longer relevant if the underlying rule changes)
- People don’t know what they’re talking about (I.e., they don’t now the rules, the relevant facts, or the extent of discretion granted to committees)
Hmm... well the rules must have changed between the Derrick Rose, strict liability case and the Lance Thomas Duke didn't know case. It must have changed between the Georgia Jim Harrick academic fraud-Minnesota Clem Haskins academic fraud case and the UNC academic fraud case. There were vastly different rulings in these cases and hundreds more for a group that uses precedent and guidelines.
You can pick and choose all you want but we all know the NCAA is very inconstitant in their rulings. The NCAA ruling.on the UNC 20 year cheating scheme is evident of that.
