College Basketball: NCAA will not be on trial Apr. 22 but it should be

Judge rules LSU head coach Will Wade and Arizona head coach Sean Miller do not have to testify in Apr. 22 trial about bribery in college basketball.

Let’s talk college basketball and the mess it has become. The mess is not new. It has existed for decades. Make no mistake, the game itself is strong and played at a high level a joy to watch. It is important to add a belief there are programs and coaches who do it right. Right as defined by ethical and moral standards and accountability.

For over a year, college basketball has been under the microscope of an FBI investigation. Several months ago ESPN reported the investigation involved as many as three dozen Division One schools.

Three men, Jim Gatto, Christian Dawkins and Merl Code have been found guilty of

"conspiracy to commit wire fraud and wire fraud in connection with a pay-to-play college basketball scheme involving the University of Louisville, the University of Kansas and NC State University"

Former Auburn and NBA great, and more recently assistant coach on Bruce Pearl’s staff, Chuck Person pled guilty to bribery charges. The FBI reportedly discovered Person obtained payments from a financial advisor for guarantees Auburn players Danjel Purifoy and Austin Wiley would sign with that advisor after college. Person is expected to be sentenced to a minimum of two years of jail time.

Other assistant coaches and basketball staff members have been fired or negotiated plea deals. Staff member Kobie Baker at Alabama was forced to resign. Another Bruce Pearl assistant, Ira Bowman was suspended indefinitely after reports of alleged bribery while Bowman was at Penn.

What do Person, Sean Miller and Will Wade have in common? The answer is not fully known but so far they share one common bond. None of them will have to testify in court. Person’s guilty plea negates the need for court testimony.

Miller and Wade had been subpoenaed to testify for the defense in the Apr. 22 case against Christian Dawkins and Merl Code. Apparently, the defense for Dawkins and Code wanted to show the defendants had relationships “with coaches who they did not bribe.”

The judge in the case agreed with the prosecuting U.S. Attorney that testimony by Miller and Wade could put “the NCAA and the NCAA’s rules on amateurism on trial.” Further, reported by nola.com the judge said,

"the question of whether Arizona’s Sean Miller paid his players is “irrelevant” to bribery charges against former hoops consultants Christian Dawkins and Merl Code. The same logic applies to Wade."

From a legal basis, even a non-lawyer can understand the testimony being ‘irrelevant’ in this one criminal case. The defense was apparently attempting to garner jury leniency by showing cheating is widespread in college basketball.

Agreeing with the Judge does not mean truth was served. The legal system had three opportunities to hear direct testimony from three coaches about cheating in college basketball.

Chuck Person will not have to answer was ‘pay-for-play’ involved in recruiting Purifoy, Wiley or other players to Auburn. He will not have to answer if Bruce Pearl was aware of, or involved in, any criminal activity or NCAA violations at Auburn. Sean Miller will not have to testify about accusations of Arizona buying a recruit. Will Wade will not have to explain an FBI wire-tapped conversation about buying recruits.

College basketball fans who want the game cleaned up must wait – for the NCAA to act. That is if it ever does. In fairness to the NCAA, federal authorities discouraged any concurrent NCAA investigation until January 2019. Ostensibly, considerable information has been shared with the NCAA by the FBI since then.

NCAA President, Mark Emmert said recently the organization is “aggressively pursuing evidence.” In terms of timetables, aggressive NCAA investigations could still take years. The NCAA does not currently have the enforcement resources for major investigations into even ten schools, much less, possibly more than thirty.

What lingers is doubt. Based on admitted and alleged, seemingly pervasive ‘pay-for-play’ activity, cheating is perceived by many fans as a given. As in, everybody does it, so why punish anyone for it. So the doubt in the minds of fans is not, do schools cheat. The doubt is whether the NCAA wants to actually clean it up.

One result is schools being willing to risk possible, future NCAA consequences in exchange for winning. Auburn made the choice and gained a Final Four appearance. LSU may or may not be headed toward the same conclusion.

Some may think concerns about college basketball and cheating are naive. A few others may believe winning cures all ills. Some argue paying college athletes is the answer. We may disagree over the solutions but most fans will agree much change is needed.