(For the Game Preview, scroll down near the bottom)

Written by Jordan Wells

                As a stats lover, I try to look at all college sports teams with an unbiased look (except for my Hilltoppers of course).  Stats let you look at things without a human bias, and that is what makes them so great.  There is NO arguing against stats.  Same thing applies to some of bigger issues facing college athletics, I look at them in an unbiased way, and most of the time I can make a pretty good argument for my side of the case.

                When it comes to Enes Kanter and his eligibility status, it is literally UNFATHOMABLE to me that the NCAA did not let him play, especially after letting so many other cases slide.  I can understand in some business’s, there is a no-nonsense policy.  You break the rules, you are done, simple as that.  But the NCAA has allowed loophole, after loophole, in certain cases, while not letting any similar loopholes apply for Enes Kanter.

                One of my favorite segments for Selection Sunday is “Blind Resume”, when analysts compare two team’s stats, without revealing the team name.  The analysts argue over which team they feel is better without the human bias of knowing the team, it is interesting to see many times how an unknown program matches up on paper with a well-known school.  Well we are going to play a little “Blind Resume”, NCAA style.  You tell me how fair this seems.

 -

Student Athlete “A”-This athlete plays basketball, and accepted around $6,000 in extra benefits.  The person he accepted benefits from is the business partner of one of the top players in the NBA.   NCAA rules state that if the student athlete agrees to a client-agent relationship with an individual, that athlete is ruled permanently ineligible.  The NCAA ruled that “Student Athlete A” had not entered a contract with the person, saying the athlete only accepted ineligible benefits, with no return benefit for the agent.  (Do any of you readers dish out $6,000 to somebody for nothing in return? Me either…)

Punishment: Sit out 9 games, and pay money back by taking a small sum out of scholarship money monthly to a charity.

-

Student Athlete “B” and “C”-This duo each accepted $300 and $500 dollars (that we know of) from a local department store.  The duo was given discounts on multiple items at the store, simply because they were student athletes at the school.  The difference of the cost and what the students paid is what has been reported as the impermissible benefits. 

Punishment: Student Athlete “B” sits out 3 games for the $300, and Student Athlete “C” must sit out 6 games for the $500.  Student Athlete “B”, a preseason All-American first team candidate, tells the media he “feels like Michael Vick in some ways”.  Classy.

Student Athlete “D”-This student athlete has an interesting past.  Dismissed from his first school after being arrested for reportedly receiving a stolen laptop, he went to a JUCO, then ended up at his final destination this year.  This student was also facing academic expulsion at his original school.

The NCAA received allegations this year that “D”s father was trying to sell him in a “pay for play” scheme while the athlete was playing at his JUCO.  A $180,000 scheme.  Obviously this is against the rules, so “D’s” school ruled “D” ineligible on December 1^st.  “D’s” school appealed to the NCAA their own ruling, claiming that “D” had no knowledge of his father’s actions, and that the school had no contact with his father. 

Punishment: The NCAA agreed to the appeal, stating they had no proof the school and “D’s” father had communication, and that “D” had no knowledge of his father’s actions.  “D” was declared eligible, penalty free.  (Readers, if you were going to involve your son in a similar scheme, would you keep him completely in the dark about it? Riiiiiiight, I’m sure “D” didn’t know anything…)

 -

Student Athlete “E” and pals-My personal favorite.  This athlete reportedly received free tattoos from a local parlor in exchange for signed memorabilia.  This athlete logged on his “Twitter” account, tweeting “I paid for my tattoos”.  Pictures arise showing signed memorabilia all around the parlor.  But the athlete has claimed his innocence, problem solved.

Until it is discovered that this student athlete sold his conference championship ring, Fiesta Bowl Sportsmanship award, and other items for over $1,250.  The ‘tweet’ is then immediately removed.  “E’s” pals (four total, three starters) are also reported for selling memorabilia.

Punishment: Suspended 5 games, but the suspension is postponed until after “E and pals” play in the upcoming BCS bowl game.

An NCAA policy formalized in 2004 allows for suspensions to be scheduled around NCAA championships or bowl games in recognition of “the unique opportunity these events provide at the end of a season.”  Neat.

But it gets better.  The NCAA said the punishment is only 5 games because these student athletes were “unaware” they were breaking rules by selling gear.

A former player at the school was asked by the school’s newspaper if administrators and coaches had warned athletes about selling gear.  The former player responded “Oh yeah, they [OSU athletic director Gene Smith and the coaches] talked about it a lot”.  Before the big BCS bowl game, Athlete “D” even shot the school and NCAA’s claim down, saying “I already knew what I shouldn’t have done back two years ago”.  Oops.

BUT IT GETS EVEN BETTER.  Athlete “D” has reportedly been pulled over 3 times in 3 years by local police, driving “loaned” cars from a local dealership.  A famous former athlete is quoted as saying “I always had a car when I needed one”.  Pictures emerge of the dealership with signed memorabilia everywhere. No NCAA investigation into these claims.  This school goes on to beat Arkansas, a school with no NCAA allegations against them, in the BCS bowl game.  One of the guilty players made the game ending interception, and Player “E” won MVP.

 -

Student Athlete “F”-Grew up in a foreign country.  “F” played for a professional team when he was 16, but had no professional contract.  This is standard in European countries for elite young players, and is now acceptable under NCAA rules as long as you only accept necessary money.  “F” accepted $33,000 over the “necessary expenses” standard by the NCAA over 2 years, most of it going to academic costs…very similar to private schools in the US (Oak Hill’s tuition is $27,000, but “financial aid” is available).

“F” moved to America and enrolled in a prep school in California in 2009.  “F” had a dream to play college basketball, and chose one of the top programs after a heated recruitment.

Punishment: Permanently ineligible.

·         Doesn’t matter that “F” was 16 at the time he was playing in Europe, and “F’s” Dad handled his budget, similar to Athlete “D’s” defense.

·         Doesn’t matter that “F” moved to America for a “unique opportunity”.

·         Doesn’t matter that “F” probably didn’t know every single NCAA rule, being in a foreign country and 16, similar to Athlete “E and pals” defense.

·         Doesn’t matter that “F”s path is incredibly similar to the one that many high profile American athletes follow, by enrolling at schools like Oak Hill or Findlay Prep.

If you didn’t already know…

Student A-Kansas’s Josh Selby

Student B and C-Kansas State’s Jacob Pullen and Curtis Kelly

Student D-Auburn’s Cam Newton

Student E and pals-Ohio State’s Terrelle Pryor and teammates

Student F-Kentucky’s Enes Kanter

Conclusion: Sound fair to you? Me either…

Now for the quick preview of UK vs Georgia…this will be shorter than most previews, I’m sure if you are still reading your attention span is growing short.

Story: A lot of analysts are predicting an upset in Athens tomorrow.  The arena has been sold out for a while, and Georgia has likely had this game circled all year.  The CATS will need there “A” game to pull out the win.

Having said that, I don’t get all the Georgia hype.  I think this is a classic case of comparing records, not teams.

• Georgia has played two teams in the Kenpom top 50 this year, both losses (Notre Dame by 6 in 2 OT’s, Temple by 7, both on neutral courts).
• Strong frontcourt with Trey Thompkins and Jeremy Price.  Thompkins takes 35% of Georgia’s shots when he’s in the game, the 11^th highest ratio in the country.
• Georgia’s strengths logically are blocking and rebounding.  Georgia’s block rate of 16% is 10^th highest in the country, which helps their 2pt fg% defense (holding opponents to 41% from 2’s, 17^th in the country).  They are strong on the O glass, 37% O rebound rate (29^th in the country).
• They are relatively pedestrian at most other statistics, miserable at 3’s and FT’s (270^th and worse in the country miserable)
• While this game is in Athens and not a neutral court like Georgia’s other big games, the CATS are much better than Notre Dame and Temple.

Gameplan:

• Hold Trey Thompkins to a low shooting percentage.  UK suffered a loss last year at the hands of a one man show (Devan Downey), and hopefully for UK this will not be a repeat.
• Keep Travis Leslie off the glass-Despite playing at guard, Leslie has the highest rebound rate on Georgia’s team (yes, higher than the frontcourt players), and one of the highest rebound rates at guard in the country.
• If UK does both of these things, it should be an easy win…If UK ends up on the losing side, expect at least one of the above two reasons to be a cause.

Prediction: UK by 7, 75-68.