The NCAA: Where Inconsistency Reigns Supreme

It is truly the tale of two recruits, two freshmen, and two very different results.

Subject one is John Wall. Long considered the No. 1 recruit in his class, he inked his letter to join the alleged reincarnation of Adolph Rupp, John Calapari, at the University of Kentucky for presumably his only season in blue and white before jumping into next June's NBA draft.

Our second subject is Deniz Kilicli. Kilicli is a Turkish-born player who spent last year playing at Mountain State Academy in Beckley, West Virginia. He signed with Bob Huggins and the West Virginia Mountaineers, and will spend his career in the Big East.  Kilicli is a much lower-profile recruit, though he was supposed to visit with a number of big schools but cancelled due to his commitment with the Mountaineers.

Wall played on an AAU team that was coached by a registered agent.  

Kiliicli played on a team in Turkey in '07-08 that had a professional player on the roster.  

Both cases appear innocent.  Wall gained no real advantage, neither did Kilicli.  Both had interactions that were not allowed under NCAA rules.

If either case is severe, it is that of Wall, who would benefit from having an agent as a coach and that could influence his future. That really could open the door to cash changing hands or perks being given to ensure the "sure-thing" first rounder signs with him as an agent. He also was paid $800 in some form of expenses.

The most Kilicli would get are some tips on where to eat in certain cities, maybe a few pointers about playing on the road and a couple of new post moves. No real advantage to having a current professional player, and certainly not one that would lead to NCAA violations that would affect the athlete's amateur status, especially when the team was on a different continent.

The punishment for each? 

Wall was suspended for two games by the NCAA for his infraction and ordered to repay $800 that was received for unofficial visits to schools while he was still a prep star. This allows him to continue his one-and-done tour on his way to next year's NBA draft.

Kilicli was suspended for the first 20 contests of the '09-10 season because of his infractions.

Looking at the facts, does this seem fair?  

I'd be the first to admit that Wall's charges seemed trumped up. In fact, when it happened, I wrote that the NCAA could spend their time more wisely.

If we are forced to compare the two infractions, it would appear that Kilicli is the one who suffers in this case and when compared to Wall—and suffers unjustly.  

The NCAA would say something to the effect of "we don't compare cases, we consider each case on a case-by-case basis."

Is this a case of profile, where no one will really care about the Turkish kid that is going to West Virginia? Are they looking to make an example out of him because one of his teammates was a professional?

Or is it a case of the NCAA rules committee'e right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing? In this case, the left dealing out a more harsh punishment than the right.

No matter the answer to the question, an overhaul in the NCAA sentencing committee needs to happen. In this case, different punishments were dealt to players that committed very similar infractions.  

The issue is not the punishment necessarily—the flaw, if found, is in the inconsistency.