Florida State Scandal: Kudos to President Wetherell

When T.K Wetherell became President of Florida State in 2003, he inherited an athletics program which did not so much resemble a carpet under which a great deal of dirt had been swept as an overflowing cesspool. There is much to criticize about his tenure, but, giving credit where credit is due, that cesspool has now almost completely drained. Even before the cheating scandal broke in the fall, he had taken steps to remove former Athletic Director David Hart Jr., who had been hired under the former regime, action which now appears to display remarkable foresight. Yesterday, Wetherell, and new Athletic Director Randy Spetman announced the self-imposed punishments for the sordid behavour of the Athletic Department's academic support staff. The following piece by Mike Bianchi of the Orlando Sentinel is only slightly hyperbolic:

There was a time when I believed "self-imposed punishment" was the biggest oxymoron in sports since recruiting ethics, fun run and student-athlete. That all changed Thursday.

Did you see what the Florida State Masochists did? They didn't just slap themselves on the wrist; they slashed themselves on the wrist. They took the hammer of justice and hit themselves squarely between the eyes with it. They took the parental paddle and administered several butt-stinging whacks on their own backsides. They looked down at the speedometer, saw they were speeding and suspended their own driver's license.

Good for Florida State for not whitewashing an academic scandal that has created a black cloud over the entire university. Good for school President T.K. Wetherell for refusing to candy-coat a cheating ring that has jeopardized FSU's national reputation as an institution of higher learning. . . .

Admit it, you thought Florida State was going to come out with a list of meaningless, milquetoast sanctions, didn't you? You know, penalties like (1) No postseason appearances by the coed water polo team, (2) The track and field team loses one steeplechase scholarship and, (3) The immediate disbandment of the Darryl Dickey Fan Club. . . .

Hopefully this internal investigation will derail critics of Wetherell who claim he is a university president who meddles too much in athletic affairs. In general, these accusations may have some merit, but in this specific case Wetherell did what he had to do. . . .

It is his responsibility. I applaud him for his 'meddling'. There is too little of it.

He knew he couldn't afford to let athletic department officials handle this matter, because he saw how ineptly they investigated the Adrian McPherson gambling transgressions a few years ago. If Wetherell made a mistake, it was leaving the athletic department hierarchy intact after the McPherson incident was embarrassingly allowed to blow up into a full-fledged federal investigation.

This time, though, Wetherell left nothing to chance. He and his staff took charge of the academic investigation as soon as they got wind athletes were involved. And instead of trying to sweep it under the rug, they took the rug out back and beat the dirt out of it with a baseball bat. . . .

Back in another time during another scandal, former Florida coach Steve Spurrier mockingly referred to FSU as Free Shoes University. But after seeing the course Wetherell charted during this internal investigation, another acronym comes to mind.

FSU -- Forceful, Stringent, Uncompromising.

Perhaps, Dr. Wetherell, it is time to dispose of Bobby Bowden as well?


Series:
1. FSU Cheating Scandal
2. Florida State Scandal: Kudos to President Wetherell
3. STUDENT-Athlete Garrett Johnson Fires Both Barrels
4. No Sunshine in Florida?
5. FSU Scandal: Brenda Monk Breaks Her Silence

Kelvin Sampson: "Time to Cleanse the Slime"

Kelvin Sampson still had his defenders back in October. They have abandoned him. The most remarkable thing about the reaction to Indiana University's release of the NCAA report has been the universal condemnation of his actions. When scandal strikes, most fans on message boards tend to rally around around their team and coach, but significant support for Sampson has been lacking on boards such as Hoosier Basketball Nation. Sports columnists have also been sharpening their pens. Here is as good an example of their activity as any, by Bob Kravitz of the Indianapolis Star:

BLOOMINGTON, Ind. -- This is what happens when you hire sleaze.

If basketball coach Kelvin Sampson is on the Indiana University sideline beyond this morning, then shame on the newly installed school president, Michael McRobbie, shame on the IU trustees and shame on athletic director Rick Greenspan, who will soon learn the hard way that when you hire sleaze, you get covered in the sleaze.

Since Sampson wasn't noble enough to resign after Wednesday night's 68-66 loss to Wisconsin -- he should have done it for the good of the school and specifically his players -- it's up to the IU administration to do it for him. The sooner Sampson is set adrift, the greater the likelihood that the NCAA will soften the blows it figures to land on this program down the line.

He betrayed the university's trust.

And now, he must pay. . . .

If IU won't fire him because it's the right thing to do, maybe it will because it's in the program's best interest.

The damage to this program will be irreparable, and it will make future recruiting impossible. The NCAA hearing will continue throughout the summer, throughout recruiting season, and recruits will have questions: Will Sampson still be the coach in the future? Will the program be sanctioned, maybe subjected to a postseason ban? What player in his right mind would come to Bloomington?

Sampson, whose moral compass is broken beyond repair, thinks the people around him are a bunch of rubes who can be bought off by shiny recruits and 20-win seasons.

You can blame Sampson for only part of this. A lot of the blame falls on the people who scoured the country and thought the best person to take this plum job was a guy with a terrible graduation rate and an NCAA charge hanging over his head.

Greenspan will probably take the fall for this, whether he fully endorsed Sampson's hiring or not. Still, Greenspan was up there at that introductory news conference, singing Sampson's praises and making the case for his tainted hire, and if you stand with him, you fall with him.

Unfortunately, there's no way to make former school president Adam Herbert accountable for this mistake. But how about the trustees? Where were the school's top decision-makers when Sampson's checkered history was being recounted?

Here's what should happen: Sampson gets fired. Greenspan gets fired. Assistant coach Jeff Meyer gets fired. Assistant coach Dan Dakich, who arrived on the scene this season, has the Bob Knight seal of approval and hasn't been around long enough to have become covered in sleaze. Make him the interim head coach.

There you have it President McRobbie. An immediate action plan. You did not create the swamp, but you inherited it. It is incumbent upon you to drain it.


Update (1) 3:51 PM

Andy Katz is reporting at ESPN that Sampson could be gone before Saturday:

Kelvin Sampson's status as coach of Indiana's basketball team appears it will be decided on a game-by-game basis.

Discussions about whether Sampson would coach Wednesday night's game against Wisconsin went on as late as the afternoon preceding the game, according to a source close to the situation.

A source told ESPN.com that there is an air of uncertainty on the staff regarding Sampson's status and whether he'll finish out the season. Sampson met with his staff Tuesday into the night and again on Wednesday.

Indiana (No. 12 ESPN/USA Today, No. 13 AP) could choose to suspend Sampson from coaching games while it figures out its options without having to fire him. . . .

Larry MacIntyre, the assistant vice president for university communications, said IU president Michael McRobbie has met with the school's legal counsel, the board of trustees and athletic director Rick Greenspan. . . .

MacIntyre said there are no plans for a news conference Thursday or Friday, but he said he's "not going on vacation" and is prepared to quickly organize one if needed.

Indiana is reviewing all of its legal options to avoid a lawsuit similar to what Ohio State went through with former men's basketball coach Jim O'Brien, ESPN.com has learned. . . .

See also Andy Gemmill at the Indy Star:

Indiana University President Michael McRobbie has been consulting with senior administrators about allegations of NCAA rule violations and dishonesty against basketball coach Kelvin Sampson, a university spokesman said today.

The first-year president is weighing his own disappointment over the allegations and the need to handle a personnel matter appropriately, said Larry MacIntyre, assistant vice president for communications.

"The president is very much aware of the public sentiment right now," he said. "He knows that our fans are disappointed and he is equally disappointed. But he has a responsibility to do things in a manner that are legally and ethically right."

The final decisions on the university's response to the allegations rests with McRobbie, MacIntyre said.

Reading the tea leaves, it would appear that Indiana is looking to get rid of Sampson as soon as possible, but at the same time avoid getting sued by him.


Update (2) 4:40 PM

Another detail in an updated version of Katz's story:

Another source said Thursday that a buyout of Sampsons contract could be considered, as well. Sampson doesn't plan on resigning because it could be too much of a financial loss, and he would prefer to coach the Hoosiers this season, a source said.

It would not be to much of a stretch to assume from this that Sampson has already been asked to resign.


Update (3) 9:45 PM

The Indy Star is reporting that Sampson will stay in place for the time being, and that there will be a news conference tomorrow to detail a new, expedited investigation by Indiana University:

Indiana University President Michael McRobbie will announce Friday athletic director Rick Greenspan will review a new IU investigation into NCAA allegations against basketball coach Kelvin Sampson and offer a recommendation within a matter of days, a person close to the situation said this evening. . . .

If Greenspan recommends that Sampson should be fired, Sampson's contract calls for a 10-day appeal process by which he could challenge the termination. At that point, IU would suspend him of his coaching duties.

At Friday's news conference, McRobbie will explain the investigation procedure and name those who will conduct the investigation. The investigation will involve only the new allegations that surfaced in the NCAA’s report which was released Wednesday. . . .

Series:
1. Kelvin Sampson Cheats Again
2. More on the Kelvin Sampson Imbroglio
3. Indiana University's Spin Control. . .
4. The Kelvin Sampson Bomb is Set to Blow. . .
5. Kelvin Sampson: "Time to Cleanse the Slime"
6. In June: Sampson versus Senderoff?
7. Source: Sampson Out, Dakich in at Indiana
8. Commentary on Sampson's Departure

The Kelvin Sampson Bomb is Set to Blow. . .

. . .according to Andy Katz at ESPN.com:

The NCAA sent a notice of allegations to Indiana University last Friday detailing major violations in the men's basketball program, multiple sources told ESPN.com. . . .

Thus contradicting the wishful thinking on the part of the Indiana faithful that this would not turn out to be any big deal.

The Associated Press reported on Tuesday night that the school will make the allegations public on Wednesday. University trustees president Stephen Ferguson told AP that school officials this week reviewed the report, but that the NCAA is not expected to make its ruling until this summer.

"There won't be a hearing till this June," Ferguson told AP. "It's just been reviewed, and I think everyone is analyzing it now." . . .

But ESPN.com has learned over the last week that the NCAA uncovered new information since Indiana self-reported violations under second-year head coach Kelvin Sampson in October. . . .

Multiple sources told ESPN.com that the NCAA was looking into whether Sampson did not tell the truth about those calls, resulting in the allegations of major violations. . . .

As in so many cases, the cover-up can have greater consequences than the crime.

This new information that helped result in a major violations tag could put the season of Indiana (No. 12 ESPN/USA Today, No. 13 AP) under a cloud of uncertainty and the career of Sampson as well.

ESPN.com made multiple efforts to reach Indiana athletic director Rick Greenspan over the past week and he never returned calls. Sampson didn't return a message Tuesday.

A postseason ban for the Hoosiers would only come into play if IU decided to self-impose such a measure since the committee on infractions won't meet until June. According to multiple sources, a postseason ban would only occur if there were an issue with the eligibility of any current student athletes, which ESPN.com has been told isn't an issue yet.

This sort of talk is premature, but one cannot help but speculate on whether Kelvin Sampson's prize recruit, Eric Gordon, was the target of any of the illegal recruiting. In any case, is is difficult to have any sympathy for what Indiana is going through. After all, they did hire a known cheater.

I will update over the course of the day, weather and classes permitting, should further information come available.

Update (1) 9:46 AM

The Indianapolis Star has PDFs of the letter from the NCAA and the Notice of Allegations. I will read and process them ASAP. Here is the Star's quick take:

Indiana University men's basketball coach Kelvin Sampson provided "false or misleading information" to the school and NCAA investigators, according to a list of five "major" violations the NCAA is alleging against IU.

The "notice of allegations" sent to IU president Michael McRobbie on Feb. 8 and released publicly today alleges that Sampson and his staff violated telephone recruiting restrictions imposed because of the coach's NCAA violations while at Oklahoma, and then lied about it.

Sampson "failed to deport himself ... with the generally recognized high standard of honesty" and "failed to promote an atmosphere for compliance within the men's basketball program," according to the allegations. . . .

Update (2) 10:56 AM Parsing the New Information

The letter:

As indicated in my February 6 letter, the Committee on Infractions review information concerning possible major violations either through the summary disposition process or an in-person hearing. It is my understanding that the enforcement staff has discussed the possibility of processing this case through the summary disposition process and that currently this process does not appear appropriate.

In other words, there were substantial differences between what Indiana reported and what the investigation found.

Your institution should understand that all of the alleged violations set forth in the document attached to this letter are considered to be potential major violations of NCAA legislation, unless designated as secondary.

Self-explanatory. None of the five violations were designated as secondary.


The Notice of Allegations:

Allegation #1 is essentially what we already know about the violations which Indiana self-reported in the fall. The only thing noteworthy here is that they were deemed to be major violations by the NCAA

Allegation #2 details additional impermissible calls made by fired assistant Rob Senderoff, and current assistant Jeff Meyer. Some were merely one extra call made in a month, and would be secondary violations in isolation. Some of them could not have been accidental:

From May 31, 2006, through June 7, 2006, Senderoff placed two impermissible telephone class to prospective student athlete Yancey Gates, the prospective student-athlete's parents or legal guardian(s), prior to June 15 of his sophomore year in high school. . . .

During May 2006, Senderoff placed three impermissible calls to then prospective student-athlete Demetri McCamey. . .

From March 1 through July 17, 2007, Senderoff placed 22 impermissible calls to prospective student-athlete Jonathan "Bud" Mackey. . .

From March 26 through April 15, 2007, Senderoff placed three impermissible calls to prospective student-athlete Philip Jurick. . .

From June 29 through July 10, 2006, Meyer placed six impermissible calls to then prospective student-athlete Robbie Hummel. . .

Allegation #3 represents the specific charges against Sampson:

It is alleged that (a) during the time beginning May 25, 2006, through May 24, 2007, Kelvin Sampson, head men's basketball coach, acted contrary to the NCAA principles of ethical conduct when he knowingly violated recruiting restrictions imposed by the NCAA Committee on Infractions, as penalty for Sampson's prior involvement in violations of NCAA legislation; (b) Sampson failed to deport himself in accordance with the generally recognized high standard of honesty normally associated with the conduct and administration of intercollegiate athletics by providing the institution and the NCAA enforcement staff false or misleading information; and (c) Sampson failed to promote an atmosphere for compliance within the men's basketball program and failed to monitor the activities regarding compliance of one or more of his assistant coaches.

The various impermissible calls are then detailed. There are a number of points in the document where names of prospective or 'then-prospective' student-athletes are redacted. This might not mean anything. But it does leave open the possibility that Eric Gordon's recruitment was tainted. Then the real explosive point in the report is reached:

Sampson repeatedly provided the institution and the enforcement staff false information regarding his involvement in violations of the Committee on Infractions recruiting restrictions. . . during a November 13, 2007 interview with the institution and the enforcement staff, Sampson stated that at the time of the violations, he was unaware that Senderoff was using three-way calls to allow him to speak with prospective-student athletes. . . . Sampson further stated that he did not engage in three-way conversations. . . . Additionally, Sampson stated that there was never an instance when he was on the phone with a prospective student-athlete when Senderoff also spoke. Finally, Sampson stated that he never spoke with Buford.

In fact Sampson engaged in three way telephone conversations with multiple prospective student-athletes. . . including a June 19, 2006, three-way conversation between himself, Senderoff and Buford. In addition, Sampson participated in speakerphone conversations involving himself, Senderoff and prospective student-athletes.

I have got news for you Coach Sampson. Throwing Senderoff under the bus failed to provide you cover for your cover-up.

Allegation #4 essentially recounts Allegation #3, except it is targeted at Senderoff. While Senderoff is accused of providing 'false or misleading information', his phone logs, he is not, unlike Sampson, accused of dissembling when he was interviewed.

Allegation #5 is new, and details impermissible recruiting contact this summer by Sampson and Meyer involving Derek Elston, along with some minor impermissible benefits (a backpack and a T-Shirt). Absent the pattern of cheating, this may have remained a secondary violation.


The bottom line is that Sampson and Meyer are in serious trouble. It will be interesting to watch Indiana's battle between ethics and success as the basketball season progresses.


Update (3) 12:10 PM

The Indy Star now has a PDF of Sampson's contract up. Amongst the provisions:

Action By University for Just Cause. The University shall have the right to end this Employment Agreement for just cause prior to its normal expiration on June 30, 2013. The term "just cause" shall include. . .any of the following:

5. A significant, intentional or repetitive violation of any law, rule, regulation, constitutional provision, bylaw or interpretation of the University, the Big Ten Conference or the NCAA by a member of the intercollegiate men's basketball coaching staff or any other person under the Employee's supervision and direction, including student athletes in the program, which violation the Employee knew or should have known of and which violation may, in the sole judgment of the University, reflect adversely upon the University and its athletic program, including but not limited to any significant, intentional, or repetitive violation which may result in the University being placed on probation by the Big Ten Conference or the NCAA.

Athletic Director Rick Greenspan commented today that "We are extremely disappointed in these new allegations regarding Coach Sampson. To say the least, we view these allegations with grave concern and will cooperate fully with the NCAA as they adjudicate these charges." Lets hope that he, and IU president Michael McRobbie have the guts to wave Sampson goodbye. With no severance.


Series:
1. Kelvin Sampson Cheats Again
2. More on the Kelvin Sampson Imbroglio
3. Indiana University's Spin Control. . .
4. The Kelvin Sampson Bomb is Set to Blow. . .
5. Kelvin Sampson: "Time to Cleanse the Slime"
6. In June: Sampson versus Senderoff?
7. Source: Sampson Out, Dakich in at Indiana
8. Commentary on Sampson's Departure

Inside Georgetown Athletics

There is an interesting article in today's Hoya about Prof. Wayne Knoll, the Faculty Athletic Representative at Georgetown. It is an excellent illustration of how things should work, but all too often do not:

For instance, he remembers 1982 very well. A young Patrick Ewing had enrolled in Knoll’s literary analysis class shortly after arriving on the Hilltop for his second semester. Ewing, according to Knoll, was shy and respectful, especially given his notoriety. He was also a dedicated student.

The day after a victory against Syracuse in February, Knoll recalls seeing Ewing standing outside his classroom. Ewing had played an integral role in the win the evening before, but at that moment he was visibly crippled by the flu.

“I told Patrick to go home!” recalls Knoll. “There was no reason for him to be in class when he was so clearly suffering.”

But Ewing wouldn’t budge.

“Dr. Knoll, I don’t want to miss class,” the budding superstar replied. “The basketball season has started now, and I’m worried I’m going to miss a lot of classes.”

Knoll was impressed with Ewing’s dedication to academics — Patrick had even turned in the paper that was due that day.

Later that season, the basketball team was in Utah for the opening round of NCAA Tournament games. Ralph Dalton, another player who was serving as the team’s academic captain that season, Ewing and three other team members were all enrolled in Knoll’s literary analysis course.

The five players gathered around to talk to Knoll. Dalton spoke first.

“Dr. Knoll,” he began, “We’ve finished all of your assignments! And we’re going to win! And we’re going all the way! So can you give us the rest of the assignments so we don’t fall behind?”

What was Knoll’s response to his intrepid student-athletes?

Chuckling, Knoll remembers, “I ended up giving them more assignments — all the way up through the National Championship.” . . .

Knoll is proud to point out that during his tenure as FAR, Georgetown has never had an academic-athletic scandal. He also cherishes the esteem that other schools have for Georgetown.

“Our Jesuit influence and motto is not just lip service, we really value the concept of a healthy mind and a healthy body,” Knoll says. . . .

Many years ago, Knoll remembers an afternoon when several members of the varsity football team came to him frustrated with the state of their program. Recent incidents involving public urination, intoxication and academic difficulties certainly signaled to Knoll that a change in the culture of the team was necessary.

Working with former Athletic Director Frank Rienzo, Knoll says he was shocked to discover that the coach’s response to the difficulties was a simple “boys will be boys” mantra.

That’s not the way we handle things here at Georgetown.

In terms of the problem players, Knoll’s directive to the coach was to “get them all out of there, off the team.” When the head coach was finally fired, Knoll played an essential role on the hiring committee as they vetted new candidates. According to Knoll, the main criterion for the new coach was not an athletic winner, but one “who understood the place of athletics on this campus as a part of Georgetown.” . . .

Its obvious that Knoll would not survive as FAR at any school with FBS football. But, then Georgetown has, in its wisdom, made the principled decision to opt out from that sewer.

It should be noted that student-athletes at Georgetown have a 91% graduation rate, only three percentage points below the overall student body. The football team boasts a graduation rate of 96%. Only the rates for the basketball teams, at 73% for the women and 60% or the men are significantly lower than those for other students. Lets hope that on-court fortunes are not the only thing that John Thompson III is able to turn around.

Completely Irrelevant RPI Data (To the Pollsters) 2-12-08

So, who does better in determining the strength of teams? Sports writers? The secretaries for college basketball coaches? The RPI? Completely Irrelevant RPI Data is here to help you decide. For further poll-bashing, do not miss Goro's rants on Salukitalk.


The Hall of Shame

[Team Record Conference (AP ranking, Espn/USA ranking, RPI ranking) Difference between poll average and RPI]

#1 Purdue 19-5 B10 (19,23, 40) +19

Purdue ‘improves’ one spot to head up this weeks’ Hall of Shame. Granted, Purdue did pick up a quality win this week, on the road at Wisconsin, but Purdue also has a couple awful losses, against #124 Iowa State on a neutral court, and AT HOME versus #165 Wofford. A 10-1 record in the B10 is, to be frank, not too telling this year, and it should be noted as well that Purdue lined up 6 RPI 235+ patsies for home consumption, which is one of the primary reasons that Purdue’s Strength of Schedule stands at 254.

#2 Indiana 20-3 B10 (13,12, 29) +16.5

The Indiana (the state) bias continues this week, with Indiana (the team) holding its #2 position in the Hall of Shame. Indiana did pick up a quality win this week, against Ohio State, but that gives them a grand total of two victories against the RPI top 50. When one looks past the 9-1 record in a Big 10 that is weak this year, to the 5 home victories against RPI 224+ teams, it is clear that Indiana does not belong in the top 15.

#3-T Stanford 20-3 P10 (7,7, 19) +12

Stanford undeservedly climbed a couple spots in the polls this week on the basis of one good, and one entirely expected home win, and they also climb into a third-place tie in this weeks’ Hall of Shame. Should Stanford really be a top 10 team? When their best win came against Arizona at home? When eight of their wins came against RPI 203+ teams, with seven of those wins coming at home? When their Strength of Schedule is #273 of 341 teams? Stanford will, unlike last year, be in the tournament deservedly. They do not, however, deserve a top 10 ranking.

#3-T Texas A&M 20-4 B12 (16,16, 28) +12

After a dishonorable mention last week, Texas A&M joins the rankings this week on the ‘strength’ of two solid, but unspectacular wins this week against average opposition. The win against Texas on January 30 probably makes A&M ranking-worthy. But a ranking within the top 20? When the OOC schedule included 7 RPI 200+ patsies at home and non-DI powerhouse Ouchita Baptist? When a teams Strength of Schedule is #222? Try again. . .

#3-T Kansas State 17-5 B12 (18,22, 32) +12

Like Texas A&M, Kansas State picked up two solid but unspectacular wins against average opposition this week. Like Texas A&M, Kansas State has picked up one excellent win, against Kansas on January 30, but followed that up with a loss against a mediocre Missouri team. Like Texas A&M, and all the other teams in the Hall of Shame, Kansas State lined up the patsies: their fare included #258 Savannah State, #264 Western Illinois, #268 Florida A&M, #326 Winston-Salem State, #331 Sacramento State, and non-DI Pittsburgh State.

Dropped from Rankings: Florida (now unranked); Notre Dame +8; Butler +8.5


The House of Pain

[Team Record Conference (AP ranking, Espn/USA ranking, RPI ranking) Difference between poll average and RPI]

#1 Dayton 16-6 A10 (NR,NR, 16) –24.5

Dayton maintains its top spot in the House of Pain, and the way that their season is progressing, may very well become the team with the highest RPI which is DESERVEDLY left out of the tournament (unlike say Missouri State, which has been repeatedly ****ed for no good reason). This is especially true after the loss at #227 George Washington on Saturday, leaving them with road/neutral record of 4-5. Excellent early season wins against Louisville, Pittsburgh, and Rhode Island are now a distant memory. Just how low can it go for Dayton?

#2 Arizona 15-8 P10 (31,34, 14) –18.5

A home loss to an average Arizona State team naturally did Arizona no favors with the pollsters this week. But it is criminal that a team with four quality wins (three more than #13 Indiana) and the #1 Strength of Schedule in the country is not even close to sniffing the top 25.

#3 Mississippi 16-5 SEC (35,36, 21) –14.5

Mississippi is another team which started out great guns this season, picking up four quality wins in the process, and have since run into some serious difficulties, including losing on the road to an Auburn team for whom ‘mediocre’ would be a compliment. This weak, they picked up another ‘good loss’, on the road at Arkansas. Running the table from here would, however, be a strong possibility, and it is more than likely than Mississippi will not only rightfully regain a ranking, but will dance with a reasonably high seed as well.

#4-T Vanderbilt 20-4 SEC (24,19, 11) –10.5

Vanderbilt stopped the rot this week by picking up two road wins, and actually managed to drop one spot, to #24, in the AP poll, and maintain its spot in the House of Pain. QUE!? This is a team with two wins versus teams in the top 50 of the RPI, and no losses to any team lower than #87. Their midseason slump increasingly appears to be just that. A midseason slump. Time for the pollsters to give them some love.

#4-T Clemson 16-6 ACC (33,38, 25) –10.5

Clemson were edged on the road, in double overtime, by North Carolina on Sunday. They were rewarded with a grand total of seven votes in the two polls combined. Clemson does not deserve a ranking. But lets compare them with a Florida team which nearly got there. Top 50 Wins: Clemson 2, Florida 1; Top 100 Wins: Clemson 7, Florida 5; Number of wins versus RPI 150+: Clemson 6, Florida 12; Strength of Schedule: Clemson 141, Florida 303; Number of recent National Championships: Clemson 0, Florida 2; Number of votes in the polls: Clemson 7, Florida 47.

Dropped from rankings: Massachusetts (out of RPI top 25); Drake –8.5


Average Conference (or State) Bias

Teams from Indiana: +13 (Butler, Indiana, Notre Dame, Purdue)
Big 10: +11.1 (Michigan State, Indiana, Wisconsin, Purdue)
Big 12: +6 (Kansas, Texas, Texas A&M, Kansas State)
All Others: +.5 (Memphis, Butler, Drake, St. Mary’s)
Pac 10: -.8 (UCLA, Stanford, Washington State, Arizona)
Big East: -1.5 (Georgetown, Connecticut, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Louisville, Marquette)
ACC: -4.2 (Duke, North Carolina, Clemson)
SEC: -9.3 (Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Mississippi)
Atlantic 10: -10 (Xavier, Rhode Island, Dayton)

The Big 10 and the Atlantic 10 remain the outliers, although it should be noted that the pollsters are also engaging in a Hoosiers love fest. THE MOVIE WAS OVER 20 YEARS AGO FOLKS!


Teams with closest correlation between ranking and RPI:

1-T. Duke, Georgetown (+/-0)
3. Xavier (-.5)
4-T. UCLA, St. Mary’s (+1; -1)


Teams included in analysis:

[Any team in the top 25 of the AP Poll, the Coaches Poll, or the RPI.]

Memphis 23-0 CUSA; Duke 21-1 ACC; Kansas 23-1 B12; Tennessee 21-2 SEC; North Carolina 22-2 ACC; UCLA 21-3 P10; Stanford 20-3 P10; Georgetown 19-3 BE; Butler 21-2 Horz; Michigan State 20-3; B10 Texas 19-4 B12; Xavier 20-4 A10; Indiana 20-3 B10; Drake 22-1 MVC; Wisconsin 19-4 B10; Texas A&M 20-4 B12; Connecticut 18-5 BE; Notre Dame 18-4 BE; Kansas State 17-5 B12; Washington State 18-5 P10; Purdue 19-5 B10; Vanderbilt 20-4 SEC; St. Mary’s 20-3 WCC; Pittsburgh 18-5 BE; Louisville 18-6 BE; Marquette 16-6 BE; Rhode Island 20-4 A10; Arizona 15-8 P10; Clemson 16-6 ACC; Mississippi 16-5 SEC; Dayton 16-6 A10

More on NCAA Compliance

There is a good critical article on NCAA Compliance by Brent Schrotenboer in today's San Diego Union Tribune. While many NCAA rules seem to be foolish we cannot lose sight of the fact that many of them are there because so many coaches, schools, and boosters have found creative ways to cheat.

A college soccer prospect was visiting the University of Washington in 2004 when she was offered some free candy inside a nearby hospitality tent.

She accepted and took about $2 worth of treats.

Big mistake.

It was a violation of NCAA rules, so she was busted for it. . . .

In 2007, six sports at Cal were busted for using summer camp brochures that exceeded 17 by 22 inches. They were written up for it because it violates another bylaw in the NCAA, whose initials sometimes seem to stand for “Never Condones Anything Anytime.”

The NCAA published its first rule book in 1952. It was 25 pages. Half a century later, the NCAA has three separate rule books of 440, 349 and 316 pages, mostly governing off-the-field activity for its three divisions. Besides that, the NCAA has game rule books for football (255 pages), basketball (212) and other sports. . . .

From 2001-06, the number of minor violations reported to the NCAA, like those above, have increased 65 percent to more than 3,400, including a 20 percent increase since 2005. Major rules cases have gone up, too. From 1953-85 (32 years), there were 284 major infractions cases, according to the NCAA's database. In 23 years since, there have been 312. . . .

In other words, it cannot just be about a expanding rulebook. It is also about an expansion in cheating.

The NCAA's Kevin Lennon said “changes in technology required us to go back and look to see if some of our rules make sense.” The athletes-image proposal was referred to a committee for further study. Another vote upheld a rule banning coaches from text-messaging recruits on cell phones.

Meanwhile, the old rules can't just be eliminated because they might seem trivial, NCAA experts say. A line has to be drawn somewhere. Otherwise, they say, schools seeking recruiting advantages will provide even bigger summer camp brochures and more free candy. . . .

Bingo. The big programs WILL find ways to spend every possible cent to their advantage.

Chuck Smrt, a former NCAA enforcement official, now works at a business in Kansas, The Compliance Group, which provides consulting expertise to schools and conferences on NCAA rules.

When he makes presentations, he tells clients the rule book isn't as complicated as it might seem, in principle at least. The main concepts haven't really changed: Athletes must pass a certain amount of classwork, no extra benefits for athletes, no recruiting enticements.

“When I make presentations to coaching groups, I say that if you know two basic pieces of legislation, you're never going to be on probation,” Smrt said. “If you know you can't give anything to a recruit at any time, you'll never have recruiting violations. Once an athlete enrolls, you can't do anything for him even though you can do it for the general student body.” . . .

The first comment is completely correct, and does capture the spirit of how it SHOULD be. While the second is also correct, it is also pure sophistry, consider the immense extra benefits which student-athletes received, especially at the DI level.

Completely Irrelevant RPI Data (To the Pollsters) 2-5-08

The turmoil in my personal life is slowly resolving itself, and the opening of semester rush is behind me, so it is time to revive my blogging. Today I introduce what will be a weekly feature until Selection Sunday, which will expose both underachieving but highly reputed teams, and the follies of the pollsters. Now that the mid-point of the conference schedules has been reached, the much-maligned RPI serves as an excellent tool to achieve this end. In some cases.


The Hall of Shame

[Team Record Conference (AP ranking, Espn/USA ranking, RPI ranking) Difference between poll average and RPI]

#1 Florida 18-4 SEC (26,22, 49) +25

Florida, with an average ranking 25 places higher than its RPI, heads up this weeks’ Hall of Shame. Florida has only one win against a team higher than 69 in the RPI – last Sunday against a ranked Vanderbilt team. But does that make them deserving of a ranking themselves? The strength of Florida’s out of conference schedule was #300 out of 341 teams in DI, and included home wins against such powerhouses as Jacksonville, Vermont, North Dakota State, High Point, Florida A&M, Stetson, North Carolina Central, Tennessee Tech, Charleston Southern, and 1-21 North Florida, which has a grand total of 0 wins this year against DI opposition. Sorry, two recent national titles should not gain a team any preference in the polls when there has been a lack of achievement THIS year.

#2-T Indiana B10 18-3 (14,13, 38) +24.5

There is a strong Midwest bias in the polls this year, of which Indiana is the preeminent example. Indiana has a grand total of one win against RPI top 50 opposition - #48 Illinois State. Its only other ‘Quality Wins’ came against #77 Georgia Tech, #82 Southern Illinois, and #90 Minnesota. 5 of their wins were versus RPI 200+ teams at home. Sure, Indiana has a 7-1 conference record this year, but the Big 10 is the weakest of the so-called Power Conferences, this year.

#2-T Purdue 17-5 B10 (24,27, 50) +24.5

Purdue, another Big 10 team, ties Indiana this week in the Hall of Shame. To be fair, Purdue has picked up two top-25 wins, versus Louisville and Wisconsin, but these must be balanced against a loss to #102 Iowa State, and a HOME loss to #152 Wofford. Purdue also lined up 6 200+ RPI patsies for home consumption, and has no business sniffing the top 25.

#4 Notre Dame 16-4 BE (22,21, 40) +18.5

Another conference. Another over-rated Midwest team. While Notre Dame has picked up wins against ranked Connecticut and Kansas State teams, in addition to a West Virginia team which is no slouch, these all came on home or neutral courts. Their two road games against top opposition have resulted in slaughters: 84-65 versus Georgetown and 92-66 versus UNRANKED Marquette. A top 25 ranking makes no sense.

#5 Butler 19-2 HOR (10,11, 24) +13.5

Butler is one of several teams from outside the so-called Power Conferences who deserve a ranking. But a top 10 ranking? Hardly. Their only significant win came against a good, but rightfully unranked Ohio State team. Their two losses came against teams from outside the top 50 in the RPI. The press always rallies behind an over-rated darling. With Gonzaga under-achieving this year, it looks like Butler is it.

Dishonorable Mention: Texas A&M 18-4 B12 (18,18, 29) +11


The House of Pain

[Team Record Conference (AP ranking, Espn/USA ranking, RPI ranking) Difference between poll average and RPI]

#1 Dayton 15-5 A10 (NR,40, 13) –29.5

What does an RPI of 13 get Dayton? A grand total of 3 votes in the two polls. Combined. While they have struggled recently, their only troubling loss was on the road at Richmond. Balancing that are wins against a ranked Pittsburgh team, a Rhode Island team that SHOULD be ranked, and a Louisville team that WILL be ranked should they knock off Georgetown on Saturday. Bottom line. Dayton is far more deserving of a ranking than Notre Dame, Purdue, and Florida.

#2 Arizona 14-7 P10 (31,30, 7) –23.5

Perennially, Arizona plays a ridiculously tough schedule, which this year included only one out of conference team outside the RPI top 200. Perennially, and unfairly, they are overlooked in the polls. Arizona’s scalps this season include ranked Washington State and Texas A&M, along with good teams from UNLV and USC – wins against 4 better teams than #14 Indiana has achieved. While the losses are mounting, none will cause them much trouble come Selection Sunday.

#3 Massachusetts 14-7 A10 (NR,NR, 25) –19.5

Does Massachusetts deserve a ranking? Probably not. Is Massachusetts more deserving of a ranking that some other teams in this weeks poll? Absolutely. They have proven that they can defeat top teams on the road, such as Dayton and Syracuse. Given the shaky conference record and the mounting losses, they will, however, be in significant trouble on Selection Sunday should they not turn things around. Quickly.

#4 Vanderbilt 18-4 SEC (23,20, 12) –9.5

After a stunning 16-0 start, Vanderbilt have dropped four out of their last six, and their ranking has reflected that downward spiral. To be frank, the pollsters have got things just about right. The 16-0 run included 5 200+ RPI patsies, but only two top 50 teams, Massachusetts and surprising Sun Belt leader South Alabama. With only three remaining chances to pick up quality wins, Vanderbilt could be left out in the cold come March.

#5 Drake MVC 20-1 (15,15, 8) –7

Like Vanderbit, Drake really does not have much cause to be upset, but as a Valley partisan, I cannot resist including them in the discussion. Here, the pollsters have got things just about right, considering the weakness of their schedule, which included two non DI opponents. While Drake’s only loss came against ranked St. Mary’s, their one ‘quality win’, like Indiana, came against Illinois State. Despite the Valley’s weakness this year, their sweep of Creighton may play in to seeding decisions as well.


Average Conference Bias

Big 10: +13.4 (Wisconsin, Michigan State, Indiana, Purdue)
Big 12: +4.1 (Kansas, Texas, Texas A&M, Kansas State)
SEC: +3.8 (Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Florida, Mississippi)
Big East: +2.5 (Georgetown, Marquette, Connecticut, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh)
All Others: +1.6 (Memphis, Butler, Drake, St. Mary’s)
ACC: +1 (Duke, North Carolina)
Pac 10: –1.5 (UCLA, Stanford, Washington State, Arizona)
Atlantic 10: -13.4 (Xavier, Rhode Island, Dayton, Massachusetts)

The performance of the Atlantic 10 has been this years biggest surprise, as they have improved from tenth to seventh in conference RPI. It will take a while for the sports writers and coaches to notice. . .


Teams with the closest correlation between ranking and RPI:

1-T. North Carolina; Georgetown (+/- 0)
3. Kansas (+.5)
4-T. Memphis; Texas; Marquette; St. Mary’s (+1; -1; +1; -1)


Teams included in analysis:

[Any team in the top 25 of the AP poll, the Coaches poll, or the RPI.]

Memphis CUSA; Duke ACC; North Carolina ACC; Kansas B12; UCLA P10; Georgetown BE; Tennessee SEC; Wisconsin B10; Stanford P10; Butler HOR; Michigan State B10; Texas B12; Xavier A10; Indiana B10; Drake 20-1; Marquette BE; Washington State 17-4; Texas A&M B12; Connecticut BE; Notre Dame BE; Vanderbilt SEC; Kansas State B12; Pittsburgh BE; St. Mary’s WCC; Florida SEC; Purdue B10; Rhode Island A10; Mississippi SEC; Arizona P10; Dayton A10; Massachusetts A10