PDA

View Full Version : Trouble at Kansas???



CMS2478
05-16-2008, 09:24 AM
Seems there will be an investigation on the eligibility of Darrell Arthur and if the NCAA rules him ineligible KU could forfeit all games including the national championship game. Highly unlikely, but something to watch anyway. :eek:

http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dws/wfaa/latestnews/stories/wfaa080515_jh_gradechange.1047fd860.html

AnotherNYCDukeFan
05-16-2008, 09:45 AM
Perhaps someone could answer this for me. If Arthur were ineligible, wouldn't it only have applied to his freshman year, thus making him eligible for the 2007-08 season (sophomore year)?

ugadevil
05-16-2008, 09:50 AM
Would Memphis be named national champions if Kansas had to forfeit the game? It seems ironic that a John Calipari coached team would win a national championship because of another school's NCAA violations.

Ignatius07
05-16-2008, 10:20 AM
Would Memphis be named national champions if Kansas had to forfeit the game? It seems ironic that a John Calipari coached team would win a national championship because of another school's NCAA violations.

Interesting question. I guess they would have to be. I personally feel there is very little chance of the NCAA vacating a national championship. There would have to be a major (read: OJ Mayo) scandal to do that. As much as the NCAA harps about "student-athletes," academics are not important to it. Whether it should be is another issue.

crimsonandblue
05-16-2008, 12:00 PM
The NCAA Clearinghouse certified Arthur and ruled him eligible to play. This relates to an allegation that grades were changed in Arthur's sophomore and junior years in high school. Had the teacher come forward back then, Arthur would, no doubt, have simply made up the classes.

Anyway, there seems to be no risk that the NCAA would take action against Kansas for something that happened in high school that the NCAA Clearinghouse then certified over.

Ignatius07
05-16-2008, 12:09 PM
The NCAA Clearinghouse certified Arthur and ruled him eligible to play. This relates to an allegation that grades were changed in Arthur's sophomore and junior years in high school. Had the teacher come forward back then, Arthur would, no doubt, have simply made up the classes.

Anyway, there seems to be no risk that the NCAA would take action against Kansas for something that happened in high school that the NCAA Clearinghouse then certified over.

...he said with quivering hands (?).

It does sound like this would have more of an impact on Arthur's HS state championships than college national championship.

sagegrouse
05-16-2008, 12:16 PM
The NCAA Clearinghouse certified Arthur and ruled him eligible to play. This relates to an allegation that grades were changed in Arthur's sophomore and junior years in high school. Had the teacher come forward back then, Arthur would, no doubt, have simply made up the classes.

Anyway, there seems to be no risk that the NCAA would take action against Kansas for something that happened in high school that the NCAA Clearinghouse then certified over.

If there is an allegation that a teacher in the high school "papered over" his grade, there is no NCAA issue at all -- or even a KU issue. The high school issued a diploma and, I am sure, an official transcript that met KU and NCAA standards.

I suppose this alleged incident could be an issue in the school system, but I can't believe that any retroactive action it might consider would have any effect on an NCAA ruling. Moreover, the tendency would be to nail the teacher, not the student.

La vie, c'est marche. There is much less here than meets the eye.

sagegrouse

crimsonandblue
05-16-2008, 12:20 PM
Not so much quivering hands as exasperation. Kid supposedly just got a 3.0 at KU this semester when he's been out the door the whole time to the NBA. So, it's not like he's an idiot.

And I thought the state title had already been wiped off the board for using a different ineligible player. Yeah, sounds like a quality HS program...

Ignatius07
05-16-2008, 12:39 PM
And I thought the state title had already been wiped off the board for using a different ineligible player. Yeah, sounds like a quality HS program...

I think the 2005 title had been vacated because of another player, but that 2006 - when they won again - could also be affected. Perhaps the years are reversed.

ugadevil
05-16-2008, 12:44 PM
This sounds like a situation Mario Chalmers' dad should have known about!

mgtr
05-16-2008, 01:32 PM
Once again, we can all be thankful for the way that Coach K recruits. That way we are more certain not to end up with "student-athletes" who show up with suitcases full of trouble.

davekay1971
05-16-2008, 01:38 PM
As long as this doesn't invalidate the 40-12 butt-whoopin' the Jayhawks laid on the 'Holes for those glorious 13 minutes...

tbyers11
05-16-2008, 03:31 PM
Once again, we can all be thankful for the way that Coach K recruits. That way we are more certain not to end up with "student-athletes" who show up with suitcases full of trouble.

I agree that Coach K seems to recruit good "character" kids that are also great basketball players, but before we get too high and mighty we should remember the Myron Piggie-Corey Maggette incident. With all of the shady characters and hangers-on involved in the AAU circuit, it is becoming nearly impossible to assume that everyone we recruit is clean as a whistle.

The Maggette affair seems like a close parallel to this Darrell Arthur situation. Both had incidents that allegedly took place well before their arrival at college (Arthur's grades and Maggette's receiving "gifts" from Piggie) that had nothing at all to do with Kansas or Duke.

Nothing happened to Duke for the Piggie-Maggette situation nor, in my opinion, should anything happen to Kansas for this situation.

Stray Gator
05-16-2008, 03:38 PM
I agree that Coach K seems to recruit good "character" kids that are also great basketball players, but before we get too high and mighty we should remember the Myron Piggie-Corey Maggette incident. With all of the shady characters and hangers-on involved in the AAU circuit, it is becoming nearly impossible to assume that everyone we recruit is clean as a whistle.

The Maggette affair seems like a close parallel to this Darrell Arthur situation. Both had incidents that allegedly took place well before their arrival at college (Arthur's grades and Maggette's receiving "gifts" from Piggie) that had nothing at all to do with Kansas or Duke.

Nothing happened to Duke for the Piggie-Maggette situation nor, in my opinion, should anything happen to Kansas for this situation.

I agree--unless and until there is reliable evidence that Kansas recruited and signed Arthur with knowledge of this academic issue, I see no greater justification for faulting the Kansas program now than there was for faulting Duke's program when the Maggette controversy surfaced.

hc5duke
05-16-2008, 07:37 PM
so... does this mean I actually won my office pool? I was in the lead going into the final game, and lost because Kansas won. :)

snowdenscold
05-17-2008, 03:40 AM
so... does this mean I actually won my office pool? I was in the lead going into the final game, and lost because Kansas won. :)

Negative, ghostrider.

speedevil
05-18-2008, 01:24 AM
Seems there will be an investigation on the eligibility of Darrell Arthur and if the NCAA rules him ineligible KU could forfeit all games including the national championship game. Highly unlikely, but something to watch anyway. :eek:

http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dws/wfaa/latestnews/stories/wfaa080515_jh_gradechange.1047fd860.html

does this mean i have to forfeit my ncaa tournament pool?

i won because i picked kansas over memphis.

dukemomLA
05-18-2008, 01:31 AM
The NCAA is to blame....again and again. They make a FORTUNE off these kids. Create blowoffs in the media when it benefits them, and NONE of this helps our student/athletes coast-to-coast. Sorry, folks, but I've been around long enough, and a sports enthusiast for a lifetime. The NCAA is only interested in THEMSELVES!!!!

MChambers
05-18-2008, 07:47 AM
I agree--unless and until there is reliable evidence that Kansas recruited and signed Arthur with knowledge of this academic issue, I see no greater justification for faulting the Kansas program now than there was for faulting Duke's program when the Maggette controversy surfaced.

I dimly remember that when Arthur was a high school senior, he was a late signer, and there were rumors that he wouldn't be eligible for college. Note that I don't follow recruiting very closely at all, so these rumors must have been pretty widespread. I don't remember the same level of whispering about Maggette.

grad_devil
05-18-2008, 08:36 AM
The NCAA is to blame....again and again. They make a FORTUNE off these kids. Create blowoffs in the media when it benefits them, and NONE of this helps our student/athletes coast-to-coast. Sorry, folks, but I've been around long enough, and a sports enthusiast for a lifetime. The NCAA is only interested in THEMSELVES!!!!

I know is often looks like this, but I really beg to differ.

I'm the Faculty Athletics Representative at a small D2 school, and I've been involved with the NCAA for the past three years. This involves attending the last three NCAA conventions as well as multiple other rules seminars/etc.

For example, our school pays < $10k a year for our NCAA membership dues, then RECEIVES well over $10k a year back from them through an NCAA grant program. This money must be used to support STUDENT-athletes, and can be used at the school's discretion. We use it to create a tutoring system to support student-athletes who struggle with their courses.

At the end of the day, you must remember that the NCAA is made up of the member schools. Member schools vote on and set the rules. Committees made up of member schools decide on penalties when these rules are broken. Other like-composed committees decide how to spend membership dues, etc..


So your last sentence was correct in some sense -- the NCAA is interested in themselves, because "themselves" are the individual schools that comprise the membership. If you don't think that translates to also being about the student-athlete, then I guess the finger needs to be pointed at the individual academic institutions.

--grad_devil

K24U
05-18-2008, 12:13 PM
I can’t sit here and say that this would never happen at Duke because people are scammed all the time.

South Oak Cliff High School, its representatives and Darrell Arthur intended to dupe others for their personal gains. Most scams finally are brought to light and dealt with through legal avenues. The problem with scams is they tend to hurt quite a few innocent people. The biggest problem with sports scams is to figure out who the innocent are.

The innocent are definitely other players on South Oak Cliff Basketball Team, right? I mean South Oak Cliff High School wouldn’t change the grades of others players would they? Ok, so maybe I was wrong maybe it could happen more than once. Surely Kansas Bill Self and others representatives of Kansas are innocent. I know for a fact that when a player is being recruited the last item they take a look at grades and SAT scores. I know for a fact they like to have a player sign an LOI before they know anything at all about him/her academically. What’s that you say; you say; I don’t know what I’m talking about. You say that academic concerns are one of the first items recruiters look at if not the first. What’s that you say; you say; recruiters do this so not to waste their time on someone that is never going to make the grade; or they do this so they can help counsel the player, family and school on what is needed to insure a player is eligible.

I say; I don’t believe you! I don’t believe you because that would strongly indicate that Kansas and its representatives knew Darrell Arthur had possibly had his final grades changed in some manner. I say there is no way a college such as Kansas would do this. I know for a fact that cheating like this never occurred before at any other college. I could go on and on but I think maybe we all get the point.

At the end of the season this past year Duke Fans were criticizing Coach K for not going after the likes of Darrell Arthur and others. They are exactly the type of player Duke needs to recruit to bring the program back to where it deserves to be. Maybe now; maybe some of you that were criticizing Coach K might understand why Duke doesn’t recruit certain players. I’m extremely proud of Duke Basketball and extremely proud of the players Duke puts on the floor year after year. I’m probably one of very few avid Duke fans that would gladly forsake a national championship than to ever have a player the likes of Darrell Arthur on a Duke team.

Duke usually (I won’t say never because I don’t know that to be true) won’t recruit players that come from the sports farms like Oak Hill Academy and others like them because of academic concerns. I was looking on a recruiting service a few days ago and I sat there and had to laugh at one of the schools a recruit was from. The recruit was from Veritas Sports Academy. Someone actually had the gull to name a school for what it really was a sports facility not a high school.

Stray Gator
05-18-2008, 12:44 PM
... Duke usually (I won’t say never because I don’t know that to be true) won’t recruit players that come from the sports farms like Oak Hill Academy and others like them because of academic concerns. ...

I'm not sure I understand the first part of your post, but as for the above-quoted statement, I believe both William Avery and Nolan Smith came to Duke from Oak Hill.

K24U
05-18-2008, 03:22 PM
I cut and pasted what others were saying on this subject from this thread and also had cut and pasted what posters were saying from other web sites. In my response to the thread on here I hit the submit button by mistake before I had a chance to take out all that I had cut and pasted from other threads and sites. The first and last paragraph were something that I cut and pasted from other sites. I have edited post on this site before but for some reason there is no edit icon on my first post. I was able to edit this post but for some reason I can't edit the other one.

A little help would be appreciated.

mgtr
05-18-2008, 04:23 PM
I have no idea what you are trying to say in either post. I am guessing that you didn't mean much of what you said in your first post, but that is not at all clear. Why don't you start over and spell it out for the rest of us?