The NCAA will likely release it's decision soon.  Here is some food
for thought.
 
An interesting happening today gave me at least cause for some hope.
New Mexico State basketball program was put on three years probation,
along with some other minor penalites.  The NCAA did *not* impose any
further post-season sanction other than NMS' own self-imposed one
year post-season sanction.  They imposed a ban on junior college
recruiting which isn't really applicable to the Maine situation.
 
The reason I cite this is because what NMS did seems to me to make
what Maine did pale in comparison to NMS.  Without going into too
much detail, here's some of the things the NCAA found:
 
* academic fraud.. some coaches were providing test answers to
athletes.. never did this occur at Maine, and this is a serious
difference IMHO, but this might equate Maine's case with NMS since
Maine likely had more infractions.
 
* ethical conduct.. this is comparable to what the NCAA accuses Shawn
Walsh of.  The difference is that NMS' coach has been required to go
to all NCAA rules meetings by the NCAA, and was *not* banned or
suspended by NMS prior to this.  Considering this is somewhat comparable
 to Walsh there is enough to suggest it may not be a forgone conclusion
 that Walsh is banned considering he is serving a one-year suspension
without pay.
 
* recruiting, transfer eligibilty, and institutional control.. all
comparable to Maine with some recruiting practices, Cal Ingraham's
eligibilty and the lack of institutional control.
 
That all said remember that New Mexico State received 3 years
probation, but also remember probation does not automatically equal
post-season sanction.  This means that the NCAA will watch over NMS
like a hawk, but they can still play in the basketball tournament.
 
I think that it is fair to suggest that Maine did no worse, and
perhaps less than what New Mexico State was found guilty of and that
 it would also seem that if Maine received a higher penalty than the
 above that they would have a good appeal case given this case.  The
 NCAA also cites that the academic fraud was the key to the case, and
 thus could also suggest Maine should receive no worse than this, but
I think it might be a trade-off since Maine likely had more overall
violations even if the "serious" violations tradeoff.
 
Finally, it would also be good news if the same committee that heard
this case, also decides on the Maine case, which would seem likely
considering that the NCAA likes to have all decisions released before
a new committee hears and decides on cases.
 
I'm also not under the dellusion that this case impacts what will
happen to Maine, but since we are waiting for word I thought this
might be something to consider given it's likely the same committee
who decided on this case will decide on Maine's case.
 
---
Deron Treadwell - [log in to unmask]
Orono, Maine
 
- deron