NCAA/Unlimited Calls/Sampson

[SoonerJK12]

If the new NCAA rule allowing unlimited calls had always been around, would Kelvin Sampson ever have gotten in trouble?

 

[SoonerBounce13]

No

 

[Big Old Booger]

Not that it matters now since Kelvin has a good NBA job, but the show clause against him should be ended. I also think the NCAA should apologize for the witch hunt which robbed him of a potentially great career at Indiana.

 

[MsProudSooner]

Not that it matters now since Kelvin has a good NBA job, but the show clause against him should be ended. I also think the NCAA should apologize for the witch hunt which robbed him of a potentially great career at Indiana.

They should also apologize for telling OU not to let him know they were investigating him.

 

[Big Old Booger]

They should also apologize for telling OU not to let him know they were investigating him.

They should apologize to OU for placing us on probation as well as Indiana and whoever else.

 

[WTSooner]

I'm one of, if not the, biggest Kelvin fans out there.

That said, just b/c a rule changes some 5+ years later, doesn't excuse breaking said rule at the time. As for telling OU not to tell Kelvin they were looking, that seems pretty normal to. If you are investigating somebody, you don't want them knowing about it so they can destroy evidence.

Maybe it was a stupid rule at the time. Maybe everybody else was doing exactly what Kelvin was doing or worse. But he was breaking the rules, there is no question about that. And at the end of the day, that is what matters.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

They should apologize to OU for placing us on probation as well as Indiana and whoever else.

not really. It was against the rules at the time. Sampson knew that. It wasn't so much the act that he committed but knowlingly committing it, several times

 

[AdaSooner]

I'm one of, if not the, biggest Kelvin fans out there.

That said, just b/c a rule changes some 5+ years later, doesn't excuse breaking said rule at the time. As for telling OU not to tell Kelvin they were looking, that seems pretty normal to. If you are investigating somebody, you don't want them knowing about it so they can destroy evidence.

Maybe it was a stupid rule at the time. Maybe everybody else was doing exactly what Kelvin was doing or worse. But he was breaking the rules, there is no question about that. And at the end of the day, that is what matters.

^
This. Unfair rule and penalty or not, the fact remains that Kelvin broke the rules.

To answer to the OP's question, I think it's safe to say that KS might still be at OU if the current rule had been in effect back then. He was not someone who would intentionally cross the line too much. I believe he truly felt that he and his staff were "outworking the competition." He didn't seem to think that what he was doing was wrong, because he knew that other coaches were violating rules that were a lot worse than making too many telephone calls.

It's a shame that he had to go out that way, especially now that the rules he broke are perfectly acceptable in the eyes of the NCAA.

 

[DenverSooner]

I'm one of, if not the, biggest Kelvin fans out there.

That said, just b/c a rule changes some 5+ years later, doesn't excuse breaking said rule at the time. As for telling OU not to tell Kelvin they were looking, that seems pretty normal to. If you are investigating somebody, you don't want them knowing about it so they can destroy evidence.

Maybe it was a stupid rule at the time. Maybe everybody else was doing exactly what Kelvin was doing or worse. But he was breaking the rules, there is no question about that. And at the end of the day, that is what matters.

I somewhat agree except for the part about not telling Sampson. OU self reported and it is my understandign the NCAA said don't do anything and let things continue. Then years later the NCAA says you made X number of impermissable calls over several years. That is not really fair because everything after the self reporting date presumably would not have occurred had the NCAA allowed OU to police itself.

All of the evidence from the time prior to the self reporting would have continued to exist. OU simply would not have broken the rule in the future.

 

[stoops4pres]

I'm one of, if not the, biggest Kelvin fans out there.

That said, just b/c a rule changes some 5+ years later, doesn't excuse breaking said rule at the time. As for telling OU not to tell Kelvin they were looking, that seems pretty normal to. If you are investigating somebody, you don't want them knowing about it so they can destroy evidence.

Maybe it was a stupid rule at the time. Maybe everybody else was doing exactly what Kelvin was doing or worse. But he was breaking the rules, there is no question about that. And at the end of the day, that is what matters.

Well put. I've always thought it was one of the dumbest rules around, and these new changes validate that stance. With that being said, Sampson still should've abided by those rules.

 

[Big Old Booger]

I'm one of, if not the, biggest Kelvin fans out there.

That said, just b/c a rule changes some 5+ years later, doesn't excuse breaking said rule at the time. As for telling OU not to tell Kelvin they were looking, that seems pretty normal to. If you are investigating somebody, you don't want them knowing about it so they can destroy evidence.

Maybe it was a stupid rule at the time. Maybe everybody else was doing exactly what Kelvin was doing or worse. But he was breaking the rules, there is no question about that. And at the end of the day, that is what matters.

I can agree with this, however, since the rule no longer exists, Kelvin's punishment should not exist either.

 

[WTSooner]

I somewhat agree except for the part about not telling Sampson. OU self reported and it is my understandign the NCAA said don't do anything and let things continue. Then years later the NCAA says you made X number of impermissable calls over several years. That is not really fair because everything after the self reporting date presumably would not have occurred had the NCAA allowed OU to police itself.

That is something I hadn't heard. If true, I certainly agree with you.

 

[MsProudSooner]

I somewhat agree except for the part about not telling Sampson. OU self reported and it is my understandign the NCAA said don't do anything and let things continue. Then years later the NCAA says you made X number of impermissable calls over several years. That is not really fair because everything after the self reporting date presumably would not have occurred had the NCAA allowed OU to police itself.

All of the evidence from the time prior to the self reporting would have continued to exist. OU simply would not have broken the rule in the future.

If I remember correctly, the NCAA didn't simply say, "Don't say anything to Kelvin." They said that if the Athletic Department let him know, the NCAA would punish the university for letting him know.

 

[AdaSooner]

If I remember correctly, the NCAA didn't simply say, "Don't say anything to Kelvin." They said that if the Athletic Department let him know, the NCAA would punish the university for letting him know.

Wouldn't the results be the same either way?

 

[MsProudSooner]

Wouldn't the results be the same either way?

I don't know. It seemed like the NCAA was blackmailing the university. A university should be able to handle matters like that without the threat of sanctions from the NCAA for doing the right thing.

 

[scrybe]

I don't know. It seemed like the NCAA was blackmailing the university. A university should be able to handle matters like that without the threat of sanctions from the NCAA for doing the right thing.

I agree, MsProud. I always felt like there was something that wasn't quite right with that rule and the way the NCAA dogged our then-coach. I suppose he was guilty (technically), but in my opinion Sampson deserved better treatment. And now it turns out that the NCAA has suddenly decided that, "Hey, that rule really was bad, so we guess it's time to change it." Well, a fat lot of good that does Kelvin. Anyway, I hope he can at least feel somewhat vindicated. Just my 2¢.

 

[AdaSooner]

I don't know. It seemed like the NCAA was blackmailing the university. A university should be able to handle matters like that without the threat of sanctions from the NCAA for doing the right thing.

Good point, MsP, and one I agree with.

 

[j2d2]

The national communists against athletes should apologize for existing.

 

[BCSooners]

^
This. Unfair rule and penalty or not, the fact remains that Kelvin broke the rules.

To answer to the OP's question, I think it's safe to say that KS might still be at OU if the current rule had been in effect back then. He was not someone who would intentionally cross the line too much. I believe he truly felt that he and his staff were "outworking the competition." He didn't seem to think that what he was doing was wrong, because he knew that other coaches were violating rules that were a lot worse than making too many telephone calls.

It's a shame that he had to go out that way, especially now that the rules he broke are perfectly acceptable in the eyes of the NCAA.

I still think he would of went to Indiana.

 

[MsProudSooner]

I still think he would of went to Indiana.

He might have. It was the type of job most coaches dream of. But I think the way that the entire situation came down made it easier for him to go.