Just looking around on a few other sports sites and reading various threads and posts it seems that most think that this will not affect UK. More of an issue on the high school level, but his lawyer says everything is in order and that the article jumped to conclusions. Evidently there were two transcripts reviewed and the article chose the one that favors their accusations but the lawyer says the other transcript is the accurate one. I don't know all the details but that's what I gathered by reading many of the posts.

Why even have a clearing house, they make a decision and then they can just jump up and say oh we made a mistake, if they clear the student athlete than the University should be clear. Why are we spending all this money on this investigation, he is already in the pros. This is why they should be able to jump from high school to the pros no questions asked.

NCAA needs to redo their whole "eligible" process, once declared eligible they should not be able to change it 2 years down the road. Makes no sense to declare him in the first place.

 

I agree. Once a player is declared eligible that should be the end of the story. Or if he/she is ruled ineligible at a later date then don't allow them to play from that point on but whatever has happened before(games won, championships, etc,) declare that they will stand as is. If the NCAA can't get it right in the first place (and sometimes they have wrong info just like everyone else) then don't try to back up and correct it later. No use making back-to-back bad decisions.

What's the difference between this and Michael Oher? His grades changed quite drastically, I mean high school isn't that hard and teachers give out grades all the time to certain students. It doesn't really matter.

 

 

If Bledsoe and UK are punished then I feel that the high school should be punished as well for even letting him do that and skip him getting an education the correct way just like the other students.

 

All of Oher's grade changes were from the BYU courses, Bledsoe has some of those too but those aren't the ones that are being questioned. Those are also illegal starting this year.

Why even have a clearing house, they make a decision and then they can just jump up and say oh we made a mistake, if they clear the student athlete than the University should be clear. Why are we spending all this money on this investigation, he is already in the pros. This is why they should be able to jump from high school to the pros no questions asked.

The Clearinghouse is constrained with limited employees and a near impossible job of policing 1000s more than they can handle. I understand the idea of "clearing" a kid to play with the caveat they may retroactively enforce punishments if more information is later released. The problem is there is no way anyone can say there is not selective justice with these rulings. And no, I am not a "only Kentucky gets punished" conspiracy theory guy, but I do not subscribe to the notion that only those who get caught are the only ones committing violations. I believe there is a lot more kids getting by with violating than we, or the Clearinghouse, will ever know. If fact, I think you could argue is may be a bigger issue at smaller schools due to many of these kids being JUCO guys with questionable pasts, but we never hear of it. The NCAA is flawed in so many ways.

Or UK should have had the foresight to hold him out if they had completed their due dilligence. At some point, the responsibility goes on the school/head coach. I'm in a management position and if I continually have employees (players) that get my organization (the team/school) I am going to be held accountable. I agree there are many flaws in this process with the NCAA, but we all know this and must act accordingly. I am afraid that UK and Cal didn't do that.

 

You can only put your life on hold for so long, they ruled him eligibile. If there were serious questions they should have made it known at that time before signing off on him. I am not saying what he did was right but UK is in a lose lose situation it seems. As would have UC/Duke/FL or whoever else may have signed him. What if they had found this out 5 years from now, do you still punish UK?

Because they couldn't find evidence that has been intentionally hid from them? By a principal who told the Birmingham paper he would take the secrets over Bledsoe "To his grave." I mean come on the NCAA only works with what they have. Not to mention when Bledsoe enrolled at UK he signed and UK endorsed that he would be fully honest with the NCAA about everything he did. Turns out that might have been a lie, if it was then punishment is the result.

 

The same thought process should make UK exempt from sanctions. Once they ruled him eligible UK should be in the clear. If there is other evidence that comes forward, charge the high school, the high school teacher, even Bledsoe with fraud - but leave the schools alone.

Key passage from the story

 

Yes, I know the rule - and I think it's moronic.

The same thought process should make UK exempt from sanctions. Once they ruled him eligible UK should be in the clear. If there is other evidence that comes forward, charge the high school, the high school teacher, even Bledsoe with fraud - but leave the schools alone.

 

I completely agree with this.

Because they couldn't find evidence that has been intentionally hid from them? By a principal who told the Birmingham paper he would take the secrets over Bledsoe "To his grave." I mean come on the NCAA only works with what they have. Not to mention when Bledsoe enrolled at UK he signed and UK endorsed that he would be fully honest with the NCAA about everything he did. Turns out that might have been a lie, if it was then punishment is the result.

 

Unless you're Duke.

You can only put your life on hold for so long, they ruled him eligibile. If there were serious questions they should have made it known at that time before signing off on him. I am not saying what he did was right but UK is in a lose lose situation it seems. As would have UC/Duke/FL or whoever else may have signed him. What if they had found this out 5 years from now, do you still punish UK?

 

Under the current system....yes. I'm not saying I agree with it, but it is what it is. I think it should be changed too. Until it is, I think you have to pass on kids that are as questionable as he obviously was.

Says that the report is being delayed another week. Either they have nothing and they are delaying it in hopes of finding something or they are receiving new information and are organizing everything before releasing it.

Says that the report is being delayed another week. Either they have nothing and they are delaying it in hopes of finding something or they are receiving new information and are organizing everything before releasing it.

 

It's an independent group of attorneys I don't think it matters to them if they have something or not. If they have nothing the only way I think they would hold up is if they think someone is hiding something an another week might bring out what they are hiding.

It's an independent group of attorneys I don't think it matters to them if they have something or not. If they have nothing the only way I think they would hold up is if they think someone is hiding something an another week might bring out what they are hiding.

 

True, just 2 delays already.

If they let Kansas keep their National Championship with Arthur as a team member, then UK will be just fine. Precedent has already been set in a very similar case (grade changing).