Auburn Men's Basketball Put On 4 Years Probation........

#2
#2
- Four years of probation.
- A 2020-21 postseason ban for the men’s basketball team (self-imposed).
- A $5,000 fine plus 3% of the men’s basketball program budget.
- A reduction of one scholarship during the 2020-21 academic year (self-imposed). The program must reduce the total number of scholarships by two during the term of probation.
- A reduction in the number of official visits in men’s basketball to 20 during the 2017-18/2018-19 rolling two-year period (self-imposed).
- A ban on unofficial visits for 19 weeks during the 2017-18 academic year (self-imposed).
- A ban on recruiting phone calls for a 20-week period during the 2017-18 academic year (self-imposed).
- A reduction in the number of recruiting person days in men’s basketball by 82 days during the 2017-18 academic year (self-imposed).
- A 10-year show-cause order for the former associate head coach. During that period, any NCAA member school employing him must restrict him from any athletically related duties unless it shows cause why the restrictions should not apply.
- A one-year show-cause order for the former assistant coach. During that period, any NCAA member school employing him must restrict him from any athletically related duties unless it shows cause why the restrictions should not apply.
- A two-game suspension for the head coach during the 2021-22 academic year immediately following the release of the panel’s decision.
- A vacation of all team records in which student-athletes competed while ineligible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OptimusPrimerib, FïreBall, Volfan1000 and 2 others
#8
#8
rltw1974 said:
- Four years of probation.
- A 2020-21 postseason ban for the men’s basketball team (self-imposed).
- A $5,000 fine plus 3% of the men’s basketball program budget.
- A reduction of one scholarship during the 2020-21 academic year (self-imposed). The program must reduce the total number of scholarships by two during the term of probation.
- A reduction in the number of official visits in men’s basketball to 20 during the 2017-18/2018-19 rolling two-year period (self-imposed).
- A ban on unofficial visits for 19 weeks during the 2017-18 academic year (self-imposed).
- A ban on recruiting phone calls for a 20-week period during the 2017-18 academic year (self-imposed).
- A reduction in the number of recruiting person days in men’s basketball by 82 days during the 2017-18 academic year (self-imposed).
- A 10-year show-cause order for the former associate head coach. During that period, any NCAA member school employing him must restrict him from any athletically related duties unless it shows cause why the restrictions should not apply.
- A one-year show-cause order for the former assistant coach. During that period, any NCAA member school employing him must restrict him from any athletically related duties unless it shows cause why the restrictions should not apply.
- A two-game suspension for the head coach during the 2021-22 academic year immediately following the release of the panel’s decision.
- A vacation of all team records in which student-athletes competed while ineligible.
Click to expand...

UT hoops under Pearl received a got dayum show cause! Unbelievable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider, onevol74 and Voltopia
#10
#10
VolFanNC09 said:
My only question is why Auburn and why not LSU, Kansas, North Carolina, and Duke? Seems weird that the only person on the hook for all of the shenanigans is Bruce Pearl…
Click to expand...

The common denominator with that list minus LSU is all those schools are considered true basketball "blue bloods".
 
#12
#12
If they want to get rid of all the sketchy recruiting then they really need to come down with the hammer on these programs. If you get caught, you lose all your recruiting privileges for an entire year plus the head coach is suspended half the season. You get caught again, it’s the same penalty plus the head coach is suspended the entire season and a 25% reduction in scholarships. 3rd time, it’s the 2nd penalty plus your program doesn’t get to compete that season.
 
#13
#13
Like most NCAA compliance cases, everyone one of those penalties says it’s absolutely worth it to build a program quickly through malfeasance. 2 game suspension for Pearl, let an assistant take all the heat, a few penny’s in financial restitution. Whoopdy do. Auburn fans sure enjoyed themselves during this period and still are and will continue to be. The program is now established.

Too bad the Tennessee administration wasn’t intelligent enough to pull something like this off to restore the football program, say back around 2012 or so.
 
#14
#14
PEPPERJAX said:
UT hoops under Pearl received a got dayum show cause! Unbelievable.
Click to expand...
Pearl received a show cause as did did assistants. The university imposed some self appointed penalties, but no postseason bans. Despite a depleted roster, they still made it to the NIT the next year.
 
#16
#16
volfanbill said:
Pearl received a show cause as did did assistants. The university imposed some self appointed penalties, but no postseason bans. Despite a depleted roster, they still made it to the NIT the next year.
Click to expand...

I believe the penalty at Auburn should be similar to the one UT had to suffer through. Pearl had a damn cookout.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sudden Impact and StarRaider
#19
#19
Can we request that one of the games he's suspended for is ours? Perhaps we'll have better luck then.
 
#21
#21
VolFanNC09 said:
My only question is why Auburn and why not LSU, Kansas, North Carolina, and Duke? Seems weird that the only person on the hook for all of the shenanigans is Bruce Pearl…
Click to expand...

Because the University is self-imposing because Person was involved in a bribery scam. Person is low hanging fruit. 2-games to Pearl isn't even worth going to court over, this isn't a typical pay to play situation.

If the NCAA goes after a coach for pay to play, its a good chance they end up on the other end of anti-trust lawsuit.
 
#24
#24
volmainia2 said:
Now take care of LSU
Click to expand...

Unless the schools self-impose (or go along with it) than all of this can be quite difficult considering NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION v. ALSTON ET AL.

Say Will Wade directly or indirectly provided payments for players to sign/play, the issue is.... why is the NCAA restricting trade? Now, if they convince LSU to go along with it than it might be an easier road. If LSU doesn't like the outcome you don't appeal the ruling (as its not appealable), you filed an anti-trust lawsuit against the NCAA in federal court with a preliminary request for to enjoin them.

If LSU fired Will Wade for cause based on the ruling than Will Wade would most likely have recourse against the school and the NCAA.

Right now the NCAA is looking for schools to self-impose because that is all they really have.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top