Duke Blue Devils: 2010 NCAA National Champions*

[MoparsRule]

Or maybe not....


Lance Thomas lawsuit could test integrity of NCAA

On Dec. 21, 2009, Lance Thomas, then a senior starting forward at Duke, walked into Rafaello & Co., a boutique jeweler on 47th Street in midtown Manhattan that caters to celebrities and professional athletes.

The 21-year-old Thomas bought a black diamond necklace, a diamond-encrusted watch, a diamond cross, diamond earrings, and a black diamond pendant in the shape of Jesus' head. The grand total: $97,800. He paid $30,000. The bill of sale called for the rest within 15 days.

The payment never came, and when the Associated Press on Friday reported the details of his spending spree in a lawsuit seeking payment from Thomas, it sounded the opening bell to what could be a landmark case that affects all of college athletics.

Not only does the NCAA have a potential infractions case on its hands that could touch Mike Krzyzewski's legendary program and cause the vacating of Duke's 2010 NCAA title, it could serve as proof of whether the NCAA is truly willing to equally enforce its rules no matter the accused.
Or whether its current system is even still viable.

LINK


Surely TOSU Football is keenly interested in the outcome of this one...

[don7031]

On the surface this would appear not to be your typical booster gifting an athlete.

Duke and it's boosters did not do anything wrong here, but Thomas did take advantage of his position as a student athlete to receive preferential treatment. So Duke should receive sanctions.

[Truth Detector]

Wow.

This will be very interesting.

But, Don, I'm not following you.

[jabba19]

Yawn. Seems the only people who really care about this are the blood thirsty Duke haters that want to see them go down. I'm guessing transactions like this happen all over the country, every year.

[Truth Detector]

Yawn. Seems the only people who really care about this are the blood thirsty Duke haters that want to see them go down. I'm guessing transactions like this happen all over the country, every year.

Said the UK fan.

[BADGER]

On the surface this would appear not to be your typical booster gifting an athlete.

Duke and it's boosters did not do anything wrong here, but Thomas did take advantage of his position as a student athlete to receive preferential treatment. So Duke should receive sanctions.

This is a similar situation as when Wisconsin was hit with a Shoegate scandal though the money amount was magnitudes smaller. Wisconsin did not get stripped of any wins, but the football team lost scholarships and was placed on probation for multiple years.

[Ren Butler]

Wait, so who becomes national champion...

[Cri Cri]

Well, here's the precedent:

from the article-

Knowledge matters not when it comes to sanctions, though. At least, that's what the NCAA said when it vacated the University of Memphis' entire 2007-08 season, including its runner-up finish in the NCAA tournament. That was over a sketchy standardized test score from guard Derrick Rose. The NCAA ruled that no one at Memphis knew about the test nor should they have known about the test. Memphis was still stripped of its Final Four. The term the NCAA used was "strict liability."
Rose was ineligible and nothing else mattered.

If Thomas is declared ineligible, precedent dictates that Duke should be stripped of it's title. I don't agree with that sentiment, mind you, but I am just stating it is the precedent.

[Truth Detector]

Precedent also has been set that ESPN will ignore the sanctions.

[MoparsRule]

Where does a Lance Thomas get the $30,000 for the down payment?

[jabba19]

Where does a Lance Thomas get the $30,000 for the down payment?

Does every student athlete have to prove any wealth they have wasn't improperly given to them?

[jabba19]

Precedent also has been set that ESPN will ignore the sanctions.

[Hardscrabble]

I'm not sure I see where this is any different than any other 21 year old that goes in to a store to buy something, puts some money down and then fails to pay the balance...

Unless it's shown that he got the 30K from a "booster", I don't see how this relates to the University at all...

Obviously the store isn't/wasn't granting him any "favors" as their seeking payment for the balance...

[Truth Detector]

Good argument.

Funny that a UK fan would come to the defense of cheating.

Not surprising...but funny.

[Truth Detector]

I'm not sure I see where this is any different than any other 21 year old that goes in to a store to buy something, puts some money down and then fails to pay the balance...

Unless it's shown that he got the 30K from a "booster", I don't see how this relates to the University at all...

Obviously the store isn't/wasn't granting him any "favors" as their seeking payment for the balance...

I think the source of the $30K is obviously the concern.

Hell, had he gone to UK he wouldn't have needed to use the layaway plan.

[BADGER]

I think the source of the $30K is obviously the concern.

Hell, had he gone to UK he wouldn't have needed to use the layaway plan.

Actually, unless they can prove some issue with the 30 k, then that still might not be what gets them in trouble. The issue is, did the player get benefits which are not available to someone walking off the street? I would suggest floating a line of credit worth 67k to a student with no current source of income is not something they would do for someone walking in off the street. If that is deemed special financing not available to other students, then the ncaa rules have already been broken. When Wisconsin was busted for shoe gate, the players got deals on the shoes (which was not actually uncommon at that store), but the athletes were also given lines of credit which other students were not offered.

[nm]

I am not a Duke fan. Because I have friends and acquaintances associated with both Duke and Butler, I had divided loyalty in that title game.

Having said that, I do not understand the philosophy of punishing a college now for something it knew nothing about 2 years ago.

Duke should have its lawyers contact the jewelry store and inform them they will be held responsible for any damage to Duke.

[Frank Capua]

Does every student athlete have to prove any wealth they have wasn't improperly given to them?

They do when the first time they have 30k on them they spend it on 97k worth of jewelry.

[MoparsRule]

Does every student athlete have to prove any wealth they have wasn't improperly given to them?

Absolutely, if...

The first and most obvious question for NCAA investigators: Where did a college senior, the son of a single mother who is a manager at a Ford plant in New Jersey, according to Duke's website, come up with that sort of cash to drop on something as frivolous as jewelry?

Also, just as important is this:

Did Rafaello & Co., a jeweler with a website that touts its client list of rappers and pro athletes, extend an opportunity to Thomas to pay less than a third of the purchase in advance because of who he is? Because, in other words, he played for Duke?

A lot of questions to be answered here.