The NCAA hits Oklahoma State with a postseason ban in corruption case
Oklahoma State has become the first school to be punished by the NCAA in the fallout from the federal corruption investigation into college basketball. The school plans to fight — and likely won't be the only one.
The Cowboys' men's basketball team was banned from the upcoming postseason among numerous penalties handed down Friday by an NCAA infractions committee panel, which found that former assistant coach Lamont Evans accepted up to $22,000 in bribes intended to help steer athletes to certain financial advisers.
That ruling made Oklahoma State the first to make its way fully through the infractions system, ahead of schools like Kansas, North Carolina State, Louisville, South Carolina and Southern California. Some of those cases have already had contentious exchanges signaling the schools were ready to fight.
That list now includes Oklahoma State, which vowed to appeal after being “stunned by the severity of the penalties."
“I can't tell you what the percentages are for success on this,” athletic director Mike Holder said in a teleconference with reporters. “I just know that I feel as the athletic director that we've been wronged in this case. And we want to stand up and fight for what we believe is right.”
Oklahoma State said the NCAA had agreed with the school that Evans “acted alone and for his own personal gain” while not leading to “any real benefit” for the school. Holder went as far as calling the school a victim in the case after being punished for a top-level violation.
The comments follow forceful responses from Kansas in September and March to charges against the Jayhawks' basketball program. And N.C. State ultimately argued it couldn't get a fair hearing from an infractions committee as its case ended up being accepted into the NCAA's new independent resolution process for complex cases.
“It goes back to everybody would like reasonable rules enforcement and appropriate process and reasonable penalties,” said Stu Brown, an Atlanta-based attorney who has worked with schools on compliance issues.
“And really what we're arguing about or (what) these schools are thinking: the investigation and charging process has now become overhyped and unaccountable. And the penalty process now has insufficient flexibility to allow for schools that ... are cooperative and want to take responsibility, so they shouldn't be punished quite as hard. That's the problem.”