Jubril Adekoya and the Honor Council

[VULB#62]

I know this is water well under the bridge and we all move on, but I just got MLB's Crusader Report email. Besides bringing readers up to speed on all the sports activity for the previous quarter, he usually writes an intro called "AD's INSIGHT."  Below is this issue's Insight. 


In the Valparaiso University Athletics department, character and integrity are indispensable to our mission. They are one of the four core values on which our program is built; student well-being, character and integrity, stewardship, and respect. As administrators, coaches, and mentors we have made a commitment to serve as role models and adhere to the highest standards of moral and ethical values through our personal and professional behavior. We are accountable for our words and actions and hold our student-athletes to the same standard.

In tough situations or when doing the right thing may put us at a competitive disadvantage, I am proud to say our staff and student-athletes demonstrate their understanding of these values and uphold them in their actions and decisions. In light of how our winter season has played out and in witnessing events throughout the national intercollegiate landscape, the principles of honesty and integrity are more entrenched in our programs than ever before.

This culture built on ethical conduct is fundamental to what makes us Valpo and something we take very seriously. I thank you, our most loyal fans, for continuing to support Valpo athletics as we build the character of our students by promoting honesty and fairness in competition and in the classroom.

[wh]

In a nutshell: "We will always practice cautious overkill to protect the image of Valparaiso University athletics, regardless of how unfair the outcome may be to the student athlete who admits his guilt and places himself at our mercy."

[FieldGoodie05]

In a nutshell: "We will always practice cautious overkill to protect the image of Valparaiso University athletics, regardless of how unfair the outcome may be to the student athlete who admits his guilt and places himself at our mercy."

Glad he feels enough pressure from the real world to make a post that so clearly defends his position.  I'm appreciative that we aren't vacating games.  I must admit I'm unaware if that would have been in the cards (as punishment) if we had played him with only a short suspension period?

[VULB#62]

I'm appreciative that we aren't vacating games.  I must admit I'm unaware if that would have been in the cards (as punishment) if we had played him with only a short suspension period?

That's the big question.  Well, actually there are a lot more, but..... 

This was, I'm guessing, a one off situation confronting Valpo (certainly) but also the NCAA. We have not heard of any past precedents.  So......

What if the suspension was for, say, 6 games (more than a domestic abuse or DUI) immediately after UK then a reinstatement while information is gathered. Then the NCAA findings are: he's out for the rest of the year on top of the 6 already served.  Wins forfeited in that scenario?

OR

What if we self-reported the HC violation (based purely on a university rule) and didn't suspend him at all until the NCAA made determination.  Vacated wins?

IMO Unless the NCAA, UP FRONT, specifically notified VU that games would be definitely be vacated if he played at any time after UK, it would be a kangaroo court that should be brought to litigation. I know we are talking about the NCAA, but no one should be able to inflict punishments off the top of their heads with no precedent to support it.  And if this becomes the precedent and it is not enforced going forward (especially for P5 schools) this too IMO should be litigated.

[vusupporter]

This story seems applicable to this thread, not as a true apples-to-apples, but in an overarching sense of the NCAA's ability to impose penalties, including due to a player ruled ineligible after initially being ruled eligible: https://d1baseball.com/news/coastals-weisz-takes-ncaa/

[VULB#62]

Thanks for digging that up.  Didn't read every word but that was an eligibility situation.  In our case the university specifically stated that the student was in good standing.

[a3uge]

In a nutshell: "We will always practice cautious overkill to protect the image of Valparaiso University athletics, regardless of how unfair the outcome may be to the student athlete who admits his guilt and places himself at our mercy."

Cautious overkill is better than being banned from postseason play because we tried covering up an acedemic matter. Considering the NCAA banned him the rest of the year, not the university, I'm not sure how we mismanaged the situation.

[VU2624]

In a nutshell: "We will always practice cautious overkill to protect the image of Valparaiso University athletics, regardless of how unfair the outcome may be to the student athlete who admits his guilt and places himself at our mercy."

Cautious overkill is better than being banned from postseason play because we tried covering up an acedemic matter. Considering the NCAA banned him the rest of the year, not the university, I'm not sure how we mismanaged the situation.

Absolutely. Any games Jubril would have played in would have been forfeited.

[VU2624]

Thanks for digging that up.  Didn't read every word but that was an eligibility situation.  In our case the university specifically stated that the student was in good standing.

This was an eligibility situation as well. The NCAA confirms this.

[VULB#62]

Thanks for digging that up.  Didn't read every word but that was an eligibility situation.  In our case the university specifically stated that the student was in good standing.

This was an eligibility situation as well. The NCAA confirms this.

Source?

[wh]

In a nutshell: "We will always practice cautious overkill to protect the image of Valparaiso University athletics, regardless of how unfair the outcome may be to the student athlete who admits his guilt and places himself at our mercy."

Cautious overkill is better than being banned from postseason play because we tried covering up an acedemic matter. Considering the NCAA banned him the rest of the year, not the university, I'm not sure how we mismanaged the situation.

Yeah, that sounds all noble and everything, until you stop to consider what really just happened here. Two players were accused of receiving assistance from the same source. One pleads guilty and receives the death penalty. The other pleads innocent and walks away. That is not how justice should ever work. It sends the worst possible message about personal accountability and the importance of owning up to your mistakes.

Then to read a message from MLB claiming some sort of institutional moral high ground in regard to how it handled the situation, knowing that the individual who admitted their guilt was destroyed while the denier walked, has an overly defensive, self-serving sound to it.

[vusupporter]

Occam's razor. There's a reason the other name hasn't been connected with this since the one game.

[VUBBFan]

Me not knowing anything about it. along with most everyone else. Could it be possible that one person Was guilty and the other  NOT. I would assume the University would look into both cases and not just the one who pleaded guilty. So evidently the University did not find sufficient proof of malfeasance to further punish the other player. If they didn't that would be a cover up that the NCAA would not go lightly on and something I would think they would have looked into. If someone pleads innocent why is it we assume they are lying?

[VU2624]

Thanks for digging that up.  Didn't read every word but that was an eligibility situation.  In our case the university specifically stated that the student was in good standing.

This was an eligibility situation as well. The NCAA confirms this.

Source?

Was he cleared to play? No.

Therefore he was ineligible.

[VU2624]

In a nutshell: "We will always practice cautious overkill to protect the image of Valparaiso University athletics, regardless of how unfair the outcome may be to the student athlete who admits his guilt and places himself at our mercy."

Cautious overkill is better than being banned from postseason play because we tried covering up an acedemic matter. Considering the NCAA banned him the rest of the year, not the university, I'm not sure how we mismanaged the situation.

Yeah, that sounds all noble and everything, until you stop to consider what really just happened here. Two players were accused of receiving assistance from the same source. One pleads guilty and receives the death penalty. The other pleads innocent and walks away. That is not how justice should ever work. It sends the worst possible message about personal accountability and the importance of owning up to your mistakes. Then to read a message from MLB claiming some sort of institutional moral high ground in regard to how it handled the situation, knowing that the individual who admitted their guilt was destroyed while the denier walked, has an overly defensive, self-serving sound to it.

...and you know this is how it went down how?

[VULB#62]

Thanks for digging that up.  Didn't read every word but that was an eligibility situation.  In our case the university specifically stated that the student was in good standing.

This was an eligibility situation as well. The NCAA confirms this.

Source?

Was he cleared to play? No.

Therefore he was ineligible.

This is a semantics issue, but I disagree that it is an academic eligibility issue -- it may be a discipline/suspension issue, but we don't know what the real basis is.  By violating the HC did he lose sufficient credits to be academically ineligible? In that regard, I go back to the university statement made prior to the NCAA decision and prior to the final release of the results -- "he continues to be a student in good standing."  However, in their official notification the university said "the University proposed a suspension for half of the season, however, the NCAA decided Jubril was ineligible to play in any regular or post-season games."  I believe the university was using these two terms interchangeably, but there is a difference between disciplinary suspension and academic ineligibility and the statement should have read: "however, the NCAA decided Jubril was ineligible to suspended from play in any regular or post-season games."  Yes, being suspended makes you ineligible to play, but there is a difference and I like my interpretation better 

[NativeCheesehead]

Considering the end result of this may have been part or all of what led to Alec being injured, i REALLY hope one of our beat reporters really digs in on this to find out as much of the story as possible. It doesn't seem to me on the surface there was much that could be done by our coaches or AD. Again the perils of a mid major. If this were a major school issuse you'd have 6 local reporters and a couple of national guys digging until they found something.

The NCAA is what it is and that's not going to change. I would just really like to know this wasn't botched on our end.

[vu72]

Me not knowing anything about it. along with most everyone else. Could it be possible that one person Was guilty and the other  NOT. I would assume the University would look into both cases and not just the one who pleaded guilty. So evidently the University did not find sufficient proof of malfeasance to further punish the other player. If they didn't that would be a cover up that the NCAA would not go lightly on and something I would think they would have looked into. If someone pleads innocent why is it we assume they are lying?

[/b]

Agreed.  I was thinking much the same thing when I read wh's comment, " Two players were accused of receiving assistance from the same source. One pleads guilty and receives the death penalty. The other pleads innocent and walks away. That is not how justice should ever work. It sends the worst possible message about personal accountability and the importance of owning up to your mistakes".  

Not sure he was implying that Max got away with something or not or that he lacked personal accountability.  It could be read that way however.

[crusader05]

As far as my understanding, the manager stated he helped more than Jubril. Looks like maybe the initial belief was Max but that didn't pan out so my theory/assumption is it was someone who graduated last year. If that was true my guess is the department was looking at the possibility of one of our best post-season runs getting wiped away and worked their butt off to keep that from happening. We may never know but I have heard the investigation was really located at top levels which makes me think that, as disappointed as they are in the Jubril situation, they may have been able to avoid a much worse outcome as well. It's easy to look at what did happen but, as someone who has been involve in investigations like this, most times the bigger potential deal is the stuff that didn't happen or was prevented from happening that tells the truer story.

[VULB#62]

As far as my understanding, the manager stated he helped more than Jubril. Looks like maybe the initial belief was Max but that didn't pan out so my theory/assumption is it was someone who graduated [or transferred] last year . If that was true my guess is the department was looking at the possibility of one of our best post-season runs getting wiped away and worked their butt off to keep that from happening. We may never know but I have heard the investigation was really located at top levels which makes me think that, as disappointed as they are in the Jubril situation, they may have been able to avoid a much worse outcome as well. It's easy to look at what did happen but, as someone who has been involve in investigations like this, most times the bigger potential deal is the stuff that didn't happen or was prevented from happening that tells the truer story.

[VU2624]

Thanks for digging that up.  Didn't read every word but that was an eligibility situation.  In our case the university specifically stated that the student was in good standing.

This was an eligibility situation as well. The NCAA confirms this.

Source?

Was he cleared to play? No. Therefore he was ineligible.

This is a semantics issue, but I disagree that it is an academic eligibility issue -- it may be a discipline/suspension issue, but we don't know what the real basis is.  By violating the HC did he lose sufficient credits to be academically ineligible? In that regard, I go back to the university statement made prior to the NCAA decision and prior to the final release of the results -- "he continues to be a student in good standing."  However, in their official notification the university said "the University proposed a suspension for half of the season, however, the NCAA decided Jubril was ineligible to play in any regular or post-season games."  I believe the university was using these two terms interchangeably, but there is a difference between disciplinary suspension and academic ineligibility and the statement should have read: "however, the NCAA decided Jubril was ineligible to suspended from play in any regular or post-season games."  Yes, being suspended makes you ineligible to play, but there is a difference and I like my interpretation better 

Semantics aside, he was ineligible.

You touch on something I've considered which is that there's simply more to the story than having a paper written for the player. Why would the school propose a half season suspension for that? It doesn't make sense. So I'll go with we don't have the full story or perhaps the story at all.

[nkvu]

Just wondering.

If manager attempted to blackmail coach into giving him reference otherwise he would blow whistle on Jubril, have any criminal charges been filed on manager for blackmail? 

[VULB#62]

 

Honor Code violation ---- By contrast.....................

Kansas stays steady while dealing with off-court turmoil

STILLWATER, Okla. — When it was finally over, after top-ranked Kansas had made all the plays down the stretch, again, to win another close game, again, Bill Self took a moment to marvel at the Big 12's final standings.

In handling a good Oklahoma State team 90-85, the Jayhawks continued their dominance of a very good basketball league, putting the bow on their 13th consecutive conference championship — and winning it by four games.

"I thought this year would be as tough a year as we've had to try to win the league," Self said. "And it was. Fortunately, we won several games just like this game. ... The guys have been pretty good finishers."

That's apparent, and it's why Kansas is headed for a No. 1 seed in the NCAA tournament. Despite the program's tendency through the years to fade out in March, they'll be among the favorites to win it all.

But there have been other significant story lines, too. Allegations of off-court misbehavior ranging from vandalism to violence against women loom over the Jayhawks' season, darkening the picture — which is probably why Self didn't seem surprised by a question posed a little later:

"That's not true at all," Self said. "But that may be how people perceived it, but I think it's perceived that way because that's the way some media has reported it. We're not in a position to talk about a lot of that stuff like we'd like to."

He went on to describe "irresponsible actions," saying players had "done some things that we could have handled better." Those things include this list of allegations:

► Freshman guard Josh Jackson faces misdemeanor charges for allegedly damaging the car of a Kansas women's basketball player outside a Lawrence bar in December. McKenzie Calvert's car needed nearly $3,000 in repairs after Jackson allegedly kicked it after an argument. The nation's consensus No. 1 recruit, who is among 10 finalists for the Naismith Trophy as the nation's best player, has not been publicly disciplined.

► That incident apparently grew from a contentious relationship between sophomore guard Lagerald Vick and Calvert, the women's basketball player. The Kansas City Star reported Calvert had thrown a drink on Vick that night, precipitating Jackson's alleged vandalism.

► The newspaper also reported Vick had been the subject of an earlier university investigation that found he "likely hit" Calvert several times during 2015, and recommended a two-year probation.

► Most troubling, there's an ongoing investigation of a reported rape of a 16-year-old girl in the residence hall where the basketball players live, along with other students. Five players, including Frank Mason III — another Naismith finalist — Jackson, Vick, Tucker Vang and Mitch Lightfoot were listed in a police report as witnesses.

► During the rape investigation, police discovered drug paraphernalia in the residence hall. Sophomore forward Carlton Bragg entered into a diversion agreement after misdemeanor possession charges. Bragg was suspended for three games last month for violations of team rules.

► There's even a spinoff to the main plot lines. Calvert, who led the women's basketball team in scoring in five of its first eight games, has seen her minutes dwindle in the remainder of the season. Her father told the Kansas City Star she has been punished for making trouble for the men's players.

Self hasn't said much at all about the off-field issues — in part, he says, because he cannot. During a brief conversation Saturday with USA TODAY Sports, he referenced Title IX — likely in regard to the situation involving Vick and Calvert — and said, "We're not in a position to talk about a lot of that stuff like we'd like to." But last week, Self referred to that stuff as "crap and distractions," framing it in the context of a team playing through adversity and remaining focused on basketball.

"I would say that's a proud thing," he told reporters. "You know, as a coach, you want your team to be — to rally around things. You want them to be tough."

It's what coaches do, and never mind what it looks, sounds or reads like to anyone who thinks just maybe the correct prism isn't wins and losses and championship streaks and tournament seeding. But it's also where Self's reputation as a good guy might be playing a role in insulating Kansas from criticism. Over the years, his media-friendly approach has perhaps built up benefit of the doubt. To his credit, he stood in a hallway Saturday night and talked agreeably with a reporter about a topic he didn't want to discuss.

But take the same set of "crap and distractions" — and remember, we're talking about things that were self-inflicted — and apply it to a program headed by, say, Rick Pitino. Or John Calipari. What happens then? Might the temperature already have been turned up a notch or two?

"I have no idea," Self said. "But what have we done? What have we done that's bad? The kid kicked a car. That was handled. ... I know that we've been irresponsible in some ways, a couple of times irresponsible that we could have handled situations better and that kind of stuff. And I'm not denying any of that or running from any of that.

"But just because I don't talk about it or our players don't talk about it doesn't presume anything other than the fact that we can't talk about it."

So yeah, sure. This team has played through some distractions of its own making. In keeping with his style, Self remained pleasant throughout the conversation. And a few moments later, he was all smiles posing for photos with a small knot of Jayhawks fans in the lobby of the old arena.

In less than two weeks, the Jayhawks figure to be back in Oklahoma for the NCAA tournament. If the seeding predictions are correct — and they are — they'll post up in nearby Tulsa, a little more than 200 miles from Lawrence, for the first and second rounds. Win there and they'd glide to Kansas City, just 45 minutes from campus, for the Midwest Regional. Given their likely path, their obvious talent and their demonstrated ability to finish strong, it's very possible this bunch could overcome the program's proclivity for early NCAA exits. No one should be surprised to see them in Arizona at the Final Four.

But they'll bring baggage.

[SOURCE:  USAToday}

[valpotx]

That is such bullsh!+.  It only proves how other schools attempt to handle their matters internally without NCAA oversight, and how an ethical program gets screwed for the year by self-reporting.

[FWalum]

I know this is old and maybe this was already mentioned here and I missed it, but I guess that it would have been better if Jubril had been caught using Performance Enhancing Drugs rather than having an "academic issue".

Thursday January 19th, 2017

Arizona guard Allonzo Trier has been cleared to play for the Wildcats in the wake of his indefinite suspension for testing positive for a performance-enhancing drug, ESPN's Jeff Goodman reports.

Trier has been cleared by the NCAA to return and can play in Saturday's game against UCLA.

According to Goodman, Trier's most recent drug test was negative, allowing him to now take the court.