Memphis Appealing NCAA Decision, but Is that Enough?

I have never been more disappointed in the University of Memphis basketball program than I am right now.

I feel as if, after all these years, the childlike innocence and blue-tinted glasses have been violently stripped from me.

I’m embarrassed by the role that Memphis fans unwittingly played in the entire ruse.

The NCAA’s hands are scarlet-stained, as well.

And I will never be the same again.

The University of Memphis has basically stipulated to the facts in the latest scandal to rock the school: the Derrick Rose SAT score fiasco.

It is alleged that Rose had someone else take his SAT for him in Detroit on May 5, 2007.

The NCAA Committee on Infractions might have redacted his name in the original documents that they disseminated, and referred to him as “student athlete 1” in their summary report, but no one in the country believes it’s anybody else but Rose.

It has been established and accepted that the student-athlete involved was on the Tiger roster only during the 2007-’08 season; no other member of the program fit that description except Rose.

So, exactly what do we know, what do we not know, and why is it all so distasteful to the author?

Why should anybody really care?

Here, to my eye, is what we know for certain:

The University of Memphis is appealing the penalties assessed on the men’s basketball program by the NCAA Infractions Committee.

“We know the rules,” intoned U of M president Shirley Raines. “We did our due diligence. We did everything we could to determine the student-athlete was eligible and that the rules were being followed. That is the basis for our appeal.”

Notice what was said and what was not said. Dr. Raines said that the school had done everything possible to make certain that Derrick Rose was eligible.

If you read the entire transcript of her press conference here, you will read a polished piece of spin that could fool the uninitiated, or anyone who really does not want to dig beneath the surface for the truth.

The kind of person that I have been up until now.

Comb through the entire statement, though, and never once does Dr. Shirley Raines emphatically state that “student-athlete 1” took his own SAT.

Perhaps R. C. Johnson, the Director of Athletics, would address the root issue, and talk about Rose’s test score?

No, he did not. He, like Dr. Raines, stipulated that the secondary issue—impermissible benefits to Rose by paying his brother’s travel and lodging expenses for three road trips—was an administrative error, that the school performed their due diligence in regard to the athlete’s eligibility, and that the penalties levied were too harsh.

Yeah, R. C., but did Rose take his own SAT? Did the school, at any point in time, do anything more than simply ask the young man that question?

Check Johnson’s statement for yourself; perhaps I missed something.

University General Counsel, Sheryl Lipman, said even less than either of her two employers, and certainly shed no particular light on the matter with her brief sound bite.

I watched the presser that followed, and when one of the members of the media point blank asked, “Are you reasonably sure that Derrick Rose took the SAT for himself?” the damning silence that ensued was both awkward and telling.

No one sitting at the U of M’s table directly addressed the question. There was more rambling about “due diligence,” but nothing close to a “yes” or a “no.”

So, we know that the NCAA is ordering the return of proceeds from the 2008 NCAA Tournament, the wiping out of all wins (38), records, and accomplishments by the coach (John Calipari) and team, and the removal by the school of all vestiges of the season in the school record books, in the media guide, and at the practice facilities and home court.

What we still do not know is: what did Derrick Rose do (or not do), and when did the University of Memphis find out about it? Once they found out, what did they do?

Going back in time a little further, it is a now-known fact that the U of M was made aware that there was a potential problem with Derrick Rose’s SAT results on Oct. 25, 2007 by the Inspector General of the Board of Education of the City of Chicago (IG), just days before the new basketball season was scheduled to commence.

You're currently logged into Facebook

Do you want to share your Bleacher Report activity on Facebook?