Double Standards

There has been a lot of talk lately that the NCAA is not completely fair and equal when handing out punishments to schools and student athletes, and I am inclined to agree. In just one season, we can see the double standard appear twice in favor of a school headed to a BCS bowl game.

Right before Christmas, the news broke that several Ohio State Buckeye football players had been receiving discounted or free tattoos in exchange for autographs and memorabilia. Immediately after the story broke, Buckeye star quarterback Terrelle Pryor tweeted, "I paid for my tattoos. Go Bucks." That statement was proven to be an outright lie the next day, when Pryor and four teammates were found guilty of receiving illegal benefits and suspended for the first five games of next season, but not for this year's Sugar Bowl. The NCAA's explanation for not holding the players out of the Sugar Bowl was that they "did not receive adequate rules education during the time period the violations occurred."

Now let's change that scenario just slightly. Let's say that the team in question does not look like they are headed to a BCS bowl game. Make it one star player instead of five. Keep the details about the sale of memorabilia and a school from a power conference. You may recognize this as the situation surrounding Georgia's star wide receiver A.J. Green, who was suspended for the first 4 games of this season for selling his Independence Bowl jersey for cash. The only real difference between these two situations? Ohio State was appearing in a BCS bowl, and Georgia most likely wasn't. The fact that this incident was well-publicized and occurred less than four months ago blows some major holes in the NCAA's statement about the Buckeyes' players being ignorant of the rule, especially since Green also claimed to be unaware of the same rule. While I don't necessarily agree with the rule itself, the important point here is that the NCAA gave favorable treatment to the better team and allowed them to win a BCS bowl game and the huge payout that accompanies it.

Also this year, Cam Newton, the Heisman Trophy-winning quarterback from Auburn, was accused of soliciting money from colleges hoping to gain his services this season, a clear violation of NCAA rules if true. It has since been proven that his father received an offer of $180,000 from a booster representing Mississippi State University, but that Newton turned down that offer, telling the booster he was going to attend Auburn instead, because "the money is too much." That statement could be read a couple different ways. It could mean that Newton didn't accept the money because someone would surely notice if he suddenly had a lot more money or more expensive things. It could also mean that he was offered more money by somebody representing Auburn, a real possibility that I believe was not fully investigated due to Auburn's #1 ranking at the time the scandal broke. How likely is it that anyone would turn down $180,000 for any reason, especially somebody who has proven dishonesty in his recent past. While Newton was at the University of Florida a couple years ago, he was caught with a stolen laptop computer, which he proceeded to throw out the window when the police arrived. He was also on the verge of academic suspension for repeated attempts at cheating when he left the University. Does that sound like the kind of person who would decide to follow the rules this time?

Once again, let's shift the scenario a little bit. Let's make the situation included multiple starters from a power conference team rather than one Heisman-quality player. Decrease the amount of money received substantially. What we get is the case of North Carolina football players Greg Little and Robert Quinn, who were among several Tar Heel players suspended for multiple games at the beginning of the season on suspicion of receiving illegal benefits. When the investigation was complete, Little and Quinn were declared permanently ineligible for receiving about $5000 each in benefits. Once again, these two events occurred in the same season. North Carolina, who was not a favorite to earn a BCS berth, lost a huge portion of their starting lineup for a huge chunk of the season based solely on suspicion. Even when the evidence against Newton was proven to be accurate, the NCAA avoided suspending him, once again playing the ignorance card, claiming that Newton did not know what his father was doing. Even if he didn't know that his father was trying to make money off him, which is highly unlikely, the rules state that no player or person claiming to represent a player, including a family member, can attempt to solicit money in exchange for a player's services, with our without the player's knowledge. So why wasn't Newton suspended? The only explanation is that he was the clear Heisman favorite, and Auburn was headed toward the BCS national championship game.

The whole situation seems eerily similar to that of Reggie Bush and USC 5 years ago. While he was still in school, rumors started to surface that he may have received illegal payments in exchange for attending school at USC. The investigation started soon after Bush left school a year early, much as Newton is likely to do, and resulted in him forfeiting his Heisman Trophy and USC giving up a national championship and over 20 wins over the time Bush was on the team. Sadly, since it didn't happen until much later, USC was allowed to play in two national championship games, which left other deserving teams (ironically, one of them was Auburn) out of the national championship game, so the national title is awarded to the runner-up rather than the two best rule-following teams from that year actually deciding the winner on the field. This season may be headed to that same result. Whether Auburn wins or loses doesn't really matter. The fact that they are in the national championship game, with the great possibility that the result will be changed in the future, means that a very deserving undefeated TCU team was not given the chance to play Oregon for the national championship, and the title will eventually belong to the Oregon Ducks, win or lose, without having to play the Horned Frogs on the field.

So does the NCAA give preferential treatment to school that are BCS caliber? According to the evidence that I have seen in this season alone, the answer is a resounding YES. The lack of fairness by the NCAA in handing out punishments is just as much of a threat to the integrity of the college football system as the lack of a playoff system.

NBA Player of the Day

Rudy Gay - MEM - 28 pts, 9 reb, 4 ast, 4 stl, 8-14 FG, 3-3 3P, 9-10 FT
Gay scored 28 points on just 14 field goal attempts as the Memphis Grizzlies upset the favored Utah Jazz for their third straight upset win over a playoff team. The Jazz were able to get as close as 6 points late in the game, but Gay scored 6 points in the final 3 minutes to put the game away.