OT(ish): SDSU Basketball under investigation by NCAA

Submitted by MainStreetMagic on

So it looks like San Diego State's basketball program is under investigation by the NCAA for potential violations, including possible impermissible benefits to student athletes.  As many know, their head coach is none other than Steve Fisher (YTSF).  Obviously nothing has been proven at this point, but if this is true...come on, Fisher.   

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/25…

jmblue

September 15th, 2015 at 4:25 PM ^

I don't doubt that he's cheating in Lexington, but he's got a lot of ground to catch up to Fish in the money race.  At UMass, Marcus Camby accepted $28K from an agent.  At Memphis, a few thousand dollars in impermissible benefits were granted (plus some grade-fixing).  Now compare that to Webber and his dad taking $280K and Taylor/Traylor/Bullock each getting six figures from Ed Martin.  

Fisher has the largest NCAA scandal in history (in terms of the amount of money changing hands) on his record.  He's lucky to have landed a second head coaching job, much less maintain it 16 years.  He's the last guy I'd bring up in a rant about the NCAA being unfair.

 

 

k.o.k.Law

September 15th, 2015 at 7:27 PM ^

Weber reportedly got $ in middle school and high school, hardly on Fisher's watch.

Ed Martin did not give bucks to kids to go to UM.  He gave to kids who went to Mizou, and, I believe, other colleges.

Ed Martin gave/lent $ to kids to make  himself feel more like a big enchilada.

 

Yeoman

September 16th, 2015 at 9:12 AM ^

I don't think we really know how much money changed hands when prostitutes were being delivered to Camby's hotel room.

I agree with you that it's silly to use Fisher's name in an NCAA-unfairness rant.. But I suspect the reason that scandal was the largest in history, by your metric, was that Martin's legal issues got the feds on the case and pretty much the whole story came to light. Subpoena power goes a long way--ordinarily what can be established is the mere tip of the iceberg.

WorldwideTJRob

September 15th, 2015 at 4:21 PM ^

So does Duke and nobody calls them cheaters. Let's face facts it's easy for kids to look at John Wall, Derrick Rose, Boogie Cousins and Anthony Davis to see where Cal can place them at in the draft. He might have cut corners at a place like UMass but he really doesn't need to at UK he can sell kids on results and they'll buy it.




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Yeoman

September 16th, 2015 at 9:22 AM ^

It's probably true that they don't need to cut corners at UK.

They do it anyway.

I think at some point it's not really about landing the recruit, it's about the rush certain boosters get when they can pass some cash. It makes them feel important, makes them feel like they're part of the program, makes them feel like they're part of the players' lives.

It would take a strong, Bo-like hand to shut that off, as deeply entrenched as it's gotten over the decades there. Any coach that tried it would probably find himself at war with the community and, soon enough, out of a job. They sure as hell don't have to worry about it with Calipari.

FauxMo

September 15th, 2015 at 2:56 PM ^

Honest question, really, but how do you know the NCAA is looking hard at UK? I am no conspiracy theorist, but large organizations are certainly not above selectively ignoring problems with a constituent part, especially if that constituent part happens to be a cash cow?

WolvWild

September 15th, 2015 at 3:09 PM ^

I don't "know", but given what has happened since Calipari went to UK (as well as his time at Memphis and UMass), the NCAA would have to be completely inept or just totally ambivalent to anyone claiming NCAA corruption.

 

Bob Knight openly campaigned against UK during his time at ESPN.  Pat Forde constantly went after UK (even going so far as to look into Eric Bledsoe's high school transcripts), and there were the AD claims by journalists in Chicago.  These are just a few of the things people tried to make stick to UK since Calipari took over.

 

If I recall correctly the NCAA did look into the Bledsoe claims, and ultimately ruled Enes Kanter ineligible as well, in a pretty gray-area decision.

I am certain the NCAA would love to nail UK if they could, but the reality is many of the benefits offered by UK (such as the private athlete housing) are within the rules.  They are either good enough at cheating that the almost annual claims of cheating are incorrect, or they are good at playing in the gray area of the NCAA's odd rules.

 

 

But this is all beyond the primary point I was making.  People constantly make posts like this when a non-major school in being investigated (why isn't the NCAA doing its job and investigating USC, Bama, UK, etc.?)  Why can't other schools be cheating as well?  Why can't the NCAA look at multiple schools?  I hate posts like this.

Mr Miggle

September 15th, 2015 at 6:03 PM ^

overzealous enforcement staff. They have a history of working harder to investigate the big schools and I don't think there's any pattern of punishing small schools more harshly for similar offenses.

It's a shame that they let Youngstown State investigate itself when there were allegations against Tressel. They would not have done that at a major school. Of course, Tressel made sure nothing came of their internal investigation. By the time the charges were corroborated, the statute of limitations had passed. Tressel might never have gotten hired by OSU otherwise.

Yeoman

September 16th, 2015 at 9:34 AM ^

Read the transcript of Tressel's interview with NCAA enforcement after the Cicero revelations. He was out of control, kept going off-message, several times he seemed on the edge of letting something slip...and each time they allowed his counsel to steer the conversation back to safety. A couple of times they even suspended proceedings so the lawyers could take Tressel out of the room, talk with him off the record and get him back on track.

True, that's not quite "letting OSU investigate itself." But it also wasn't like any legal deposition I've ever seen. The most generous spin I can give it is that it was the behavior of an investigator that cares far more about not antagonizing a member institution than he cares about investigating the case. And maybe that's not entirely absurd, given that he's completely dependent on the cooperation of that institution to make his case.

----

(I'm not suggesting that OSU got special treatment here. I suspect this is standard practice; I haven't read other NCAA depositions to know.)

Tater

September 15th, 2015 at 3:13 PM ^

The NCAA is doing what they typically do: harvesting low-hanging fruit while letting prolific cheaters like UK, Duke, and Kansas do whatever they want.  They will hammer SDSU and force the coach I call "The Ostrich" to retire.  Then, they can beat on their chests and brag about how "tough" they are.

Fuck the NCAA.  If they can't go after the "big boys," they need to just get rid of their "enforcement" division, burn 95% of the rulebook and let players take money from whoever wants to give it to them as long as it doesn't involve point-shaving or game-fixing.

I don't really give a shit about Fisher or SDSU; I just get tired of UK and Duke buying whoever they want while Michigan pretty much can't recruit the top tier recruits because they don't want to play dirty.

All Day

September 15th, 2015 at 3:26 PM ^

Curious as to why everyone is so quick to label every successful program a cheat? Not saying they aren't, just not saying they aren't necessarily. Under this, would the Michigan football teams of the 90's and 00's "prolific cheaters"?

Btown Wolverine

September 15th, 2015 at 3:40 PM ^

This is my thought when discussions like this happen.

It quickly devolves into "Kentucky/Duke/Alabama/whoever get all the best players because they cheat. Michigan doesn't get them because they're clean."

As if there's no other reasons to choose to go to a school other than Michigan. I get it, Michigan's awesome...I chose to go there, after all. But if I were a high school basketball player, UK would be pretty damn tempting. Same with Alabama for football. Even if they offered me very late. 

BornSinner

September 15th, 2015 at 9:48 PM ^

Umm... Calipari has a reputation now meaning he doesn't need to cheat anymore to gain top grade talent... 

 

Back in the day at schools like UMass and Memphis he had to in order to get the Cambys and Roses of the world. 

 

Nowadays his reputation for getting talent to the NBA precedes him. No need to cheat. 

BornSinner

September 15th, 2015 at 3:42 PM ^

You're talking to Tater. He's up there with the most delusional posters of MGoBlog. In his world view, any school more successful than Michigan is a cheater. 

beedub93

September 16th, 2015 at 8:18 AM ^

enjoy a nice big circle jerk with the rest of those morons. The fanbase there rivals osu in terms of being obnoxious and uninformed.

If you're too blind to the fact that cal isn't a scumbag, then I don't know what to tell you.

Question - why was cal not considered a suitable candidate when Billy Gillispie was hired, but then two years later he's all of a sudden as clean as a whistle?

Once a cheat, always a cheat.

Bando Calrissian

September 15th, 2015 at 2:43 PM ^

If true... Why start now? Or, rather, how did the guy who oversaw a good portion of the then-largest financial scandal in NCAA history manage to not attract attention for 15 years?

Ugh.

MI Expat NY

September 15th, 2015 at 3:23 PM ^

The size of the scandal isn't just about dollar figures.  The SMU scandal had everything.  Multiple boosters, assistant coaches directly paying recruits.  A slush fund that was operated by the athletic department and kept operational after SMU went on probation because it wouldn't be fair to the players promised money to end those payments.  And those are just the parts that have been proven.  The entire SWC at the time was more corrupt than the SEC and their bagmen could ever be, yet the rest of the conference still thought SMU was going way above and beyond.  It just doesn't compare to a scandal featuring one rouge "booster" who was far more concerned with being nice to detroit basketball players and finding a means to launder his money than he was with the success of Michigan basketball. 

As for the current story, lets see how it plays out first.  The report is so vague as to be worthless.  The range of impermissible benefits can be pretty extreme.