Around the Hall: Reaction to the NCAA’s ruling

  • 11/08/2012 8:19 am in

Around the Hall is recommended reading from the Inside the Hall staff:

· Eamonn Brennan of ESPN.com believes the NCAA’s decision to suspend Peter Jurkin and Hanner Mosquera-Perea for nine games was “just plain silly.”

· Rick Bozich of WDRB.com looks at the ruling from the NCAA from all sides of the spectrum.

· The NCAA’s punishment doesn’t fit the crime, according to Bob Kravitz of The Indianapolis Star.

· Jeff Eisenberg of Yahoo! Sports speculates that the NCAA may be using the suspensions as a way to penalize Adams and Indiana for violations it can’t prove occurred.

· Rob Dauster of NBCSports.com writes that the NCAA whiffed with their decision.

· Mike Decourcy of The Sporting News writes: “If that doesn’t make this the most curious amateurism case in the organization’s history, it’s certainly on the short list.”

· Terry Hutchens of The Indianapolis Star needs someone to explain the logic behind the NCAA’s decision.

Filed to:

  • IUGRADUATE

    NCAA is a joke. In their website, it says NCAA was “founded more than one hundred years ago as a way to protect student-athletes..” Wow. Protect student-athletes? Joke.

  • Nimbi63

    I hear a lot of people are leaving comments at http://www.ncaa.com/contact

  • SCHoosier

    Altho its probably pointless..any idea how long the suspension appeal process might take? The NCAA NEVER admits it made a mistake..so I guess 9 games it is. Terrible distraction to the coaches and players..let’s tip it off and get on with the season. Checking out a number of sports websites last night..most commenters..including those who say they are no fans of anything IU related..really think this deal is dumb. It is..consider the source and let’s play b-ball.

  • dtfreed

    When the current NCAA president said a few months ago they didn’t want to enforce or even have small rules in the “Code” like phone calls and texting limits and as such, I felt IU was held accountable and others now won’t be. With this, it seems somebody didn’t get the memo or really has it in for IU. I mean 20 years before and 4 coaches later, other kids going to other schools during this time period? The NCAA is an embarrassment to simple logical thinking and reason.

  • marcusgresham

    The sickest part of it all is that, to the best of my knowledge, no one from the NCAA has even stood up to exhibit the balls to defend their decision. They simply put out a faceless memo, er, edict, and not one of them has had the backbone to stand up in front of a camera or reporter and defend or explain it. They’d prefer to remain anonymous to avoid obvious public scrutiny. Jay Bilas for NCAA commissioner!

  • AJ_IU_ColtsFan

    I’m getting really tired at the assertions in the above linked articles that this was done to “slap” IU for it’s association with Adams. Fine, the NCAA doesn’t like it. I get that. In fact, simply due to it being AAU, I’m partially sympathetic to it. But asserting that they are hammering IU for violations they cannot prove is de facto saying that the NCAA is prosecuting without evidence. There’s nothing fair about that.

    If you got a $1000 parking ticket, and the explanation is that you’re suspected of speeding but this is all they can nail you on, you’d be pissed too.

    Going unsaid in all of the fan discussion is the point that the athletic department is banned for a year from talking to Adams, excepting discussions pertaining to whichever of the two (Jurkin or Perea) he’s legally the guardian for, and only about things pertaining to his guardianship. As Athletic Director Glass noted, he won’t be getting complimentary access to games and the like for that time period (I admit, I didn’t know he had that). To me, that’s fine. But none of this should affect Perea or Jurkin, though. No matter what, that suspension is simply unfair. And if the idea is to punish IU for its association with Adams and A-HOPE, then make a ruling about that. Doing it this way is not the way to do it. Nothing screams “arbitrary” and “capricious” like punishing the players for someone else’s actions, and nothing screams unfair like doing it for ones that cannot be proven.

  • AJ_IU_ColtsFan

    I’m getting really tired at the assertions in the above linked articles that this was done to “slap” IU for it’s association with Adams. Fine, the NCAA doesn’t like it. I get that. In fact, simply due to it being AAU, I’m partially sympathetic to it. But asserting that they are hammering IU for violations they cannot prove is de facto saying that the NCAA is prosecuting without evidence. There’s nothing fair about that.

    If you got a $1000 parking ticket, and the explanation is that you’re suspected of speeding but this is all they can nail you on, you’d be pissed too.

    Going unsaid in all of the fan discussion is the point that the athletic department is banned for a year from talking to Adams, excepting discussions pertaining to whichever of the two (Jurkin or Perea) he’s legally the guardian for, and only about things pertaining to his guardianship. As Athletic Director Glass noted, he won’t be getting complimentary access to games and the like for that time period (I admit, I didn’t know he had that). To me, that’s fine. But none of this should affect Perea or Jurkin, though. No matter what, that suspension is simply unfair. And if the idea is to punish IU for its association with Adams and A-HOPE, then make a ruling about that. Doing it this way is not the way to do it. Nothing screams “arbitrary” and “capricious” like punishing the players for someone else’s actions, and nothing screams unfair like doing it for ones that cannot be proven.

  • cheeseman18

    I wouldn’t say they NEVER change their minds. Just yesterday the ruling on Dez Wells was overturned. It’s totally different circumstances, but still, after they ruled that he must sit out a season there was an appeal and they reversed the ruling to allow him to play this year. Maybe there’s hope?? 🙂

  • yes…pointless….nine games will be up before archaic NCAA rules on an appeal.

  • Arch_Puddington

    As with so many of the NCAA’s rulings, this is punishment for a victimless crime. No one has been harmed, no competitive advantage has been given, and nothing dishonest was done.

    Obviously this ruling is based on a ridiculous technicality, but let’s pretend for the sake of argument that the NCAA’s worst fears were true and A-HOPE was somehow a “pipeline” for players to go to IU. Even then: so what? Who would be the “victim” in that scenario? And please don’t tell me that this would represent an “unfair” advantage for IU, because their are always advantages and disadvantages in recruiting. Some schools have more tradition than others, or better facilities, or a more famous coach, or better graduation rates, any of which gives them an advantage of some sort. There is nothing unfair about such advantages, it’s part of the nature of things. Association with a particular AAU program would just be another such advantage, and would, as with all things, have drawbacks as well.

    I know it’s kind of far out there to say such a thing, but seriously, the rules that ostensibly protect recruits are much more likely to hurt them than help them. In the case of AAU, the rules that limit the association between college programs and AAU programs give the AAU coaches, who are unlicensed and unregulated, huge influence over their players. It is a breeding ground for unscrupulous hangers-on and shady behaviors, none of which can the NCAA or its coaches do anything about. The NCAA serves no one but itself, and its actions are ALWAYS about protecting its own interests, not the players.

  • Taskmaster75

    Let’s keep legal opinions to a minimum please. Accusing a guy of rape with no evidence (since the case wasn’t deemed worthy of trial) is a little much.

  • Taskmaster75

    Let’s keep legal opinions to a minimum please. Accusing a guy of rape with no evidence (since the case wasn’t deemed worthy of trial) is a little much.

  • already left one….just commented about their organization…not the IU case.

  • already left one….just commented about their organization…not the IU case.

  • but…”It’s Indiana”..LOL…NCAA on a witch hunt.

  • smartybucket

    If you want to protect athletes give Adams guidance when he asks for it, don’t give him the run around and then suspend the guys 3-4 days before the first game because of your own incompetence. They will probably decide the appeal sometime next summer. Totally inept organization.

  • smartybucket

    Sometime in April! LOL

  • DarkSouth

    I thought that was a good decision by the NCAA. Wish they could get this one right.

  • DarkSouth

    I thought that was a good decision by the NCAA. Wish they could get this one right.

  • smartybucket

    I left 3.

  • I posted this before, but it seems that this means no A-HOPE players who receives financial help from it can come to IU so long as Adams is part of it without a penalty being levied; true? Can someone tell me I’m wrong? And can IU give the $ back to make him not a booster?

  • of course I don’t have to tell people that the NCAA makes up rules as they go along…but I did anyway..!!

  • of course I don’t have to tell people that the NCAA makes up rules as they go along…but I did anyway..!!

  • IUeconAlum

    If players get 9 games and have to pay money for not doing anything wrong, then Duke better have a championship vacated. They had a player put down $30k on $100k worth of JEWELRY!!! Come on NCAA!

  • HoosierDD

    The thing that really bothers me about this is the fact that Hanner and PJ have to pay back money. Yeah, the suspensions suck, but in the grand scheme of things we will fight through it and be okay. But to essentially fine a college kid $1250 or whatever it was is ludicrous. I know I sure as hell didn’t have $1250 laying around when I was in school. And its not like he can get a job. As far as I know the kid can barely speak English, is a full-time student, and basketball player. Where is he supposed to find the time to get a job. You’re a big man NCAA, picking on 18 year old kids. Grow a backbone and go after the real cheaters.

  • I have more concern on the NCAA decision of making these two kids pay a fine. I guess if they had been at least born at the time of the infraction……..It’s crazy. The 9 game thing…This IU team can handle that and they will be better because of it. Not saying it fair

  • I have more concern on the NCAA decision of making these two kids pay a fine. I guess if they had been at least born at the time of the infraction……..It’s crazy. The 9 game thing…This IU team can handle that and they will be better because of it. Not saying it fair

  • I did admit buying an IU t-shirt. With a 6 month old grandson who may end up playing at IU….How could I clear my name.

  • BrianS

    I hope this ends up being extra motivation for the squad. If they can find a way to use this screw job the NCAA just perpetrated on them as some type of extra motivation it might just backfire on the NCAA who obviously has something against Indiana the rest of us don’t understand and is hoping this will hurt the team. Maybe they are so petty as to still be PO’d about all the criticism they received over the years (99.9% of it legit) from Bob Knight. There has always been something fishy about IU & the NCAA ever since the man that fired Bob Knight was given the top job there. Not wishing death on anyone, but I don’t miss that SOB Myles Brand one little iota! As far as I’m concerned the NCAA can pack up and move to Wyoming. Having them in Indiana has been nothing but a pain in the butt!