Welcome to The Holy Land of Hoops

2015 sex scandal (Main article: 2015 University of Louisville basketball sex scandal)

2017 corruption scandal (Main article: 2017 NCAA Division I men's basketball corruption scandal)

LOUISVILLE, Ky. – The NCAA has accused the Louisville men’s basketball program of committing a Level I violation with an improper recruiting offer and extra benefits and several Level II violations, including an accusation that former Cardinals coach Rick Pitino failed to promote an atmosphere of compliance.

The notice released on Monday is the completion of a two-year NCAA investigation following a federal corruption probe into college basketball. Louisville acknowledged its involvement in the investigation related to the recruitment of former player Brian Bowen II, which led to the ousters of Pitino and athletic director Tom Jurich in October 2017.

The school noted those personnel moves and other corrective measures in a statement and subsequent teleconference in which it said it takes the allegations seriously. The school has 90 days to respond. Louisville President Neeli Bendapudi said the school would accept responsibility for violations it committed and “will not hesitate to push back” against allegations it believes are not supported by facts.

How many embarrassments are too many for the Louisville men's basketball program?

Seriously, this is the extent of the outlandish weirdness that the men’s program wears like a retch-inducing cheap cologne: for the second time in a dozen years, the Cardinals say they are the victims of a bizarre blackmail scheme requiring federal intervention. There was Rick Pitino’s extortion at the hands of a woman he had sex with in a restaurant, which put Karen Sypher behind bars for years; and there is the current case that blew up Tuesday when former assistant coach Dino Gaudio was federally charged for allegedly threatening in March to turn over NCAA violations to the media if his demands for money weren’t met. What in the actual hell?

According to NCAA bylaws, one of the “aggravating circumstances” that can ratchet up penalties, is history of violations. And, boy howdy, does Louisville have some recent history. As one lawyer with knowledge of the process put it, the question in a potential hearing setting could well be, “Why is your school here again?”

Which brings us to an existential question that could be germane to both an infractions committee and everyone else with a stake in college athletics: Does the world really need Louisville men’s basketball?

Would it be the worst thing if it went into an NCAA-induced coma and then reawakened in, say, 2024? Would the so-called NCAA Death Penalty be too strict for a program that has become Repeat Violatorville? How many embarrassments are too many? How much is a chronic source of controversy worth? What is the tolerance level for bad headlines?

When your last two full-time head men’s basketball coaches have both been blackmailed, things are not good. And when there were two major scandals in between those extortions, things are worse. Aside from providing prurient interest for a public that is perpetually amused by the underbelly of college basketball, Louisville isn’t contributing much to the sport.

LOUISVILLE, Ky. -- The NCAA has amended its Notice of Allegations against Louisville, adding additional violations committed by the men's basketball program that include impermissible activities and accusations coach Chris Mack did not promote an atmosphere for compliance.

Already under review by the Independent Resolution Panel (IRP) for violations related to a college basketball corruption case detailed in a May 4, 2020 NOA, the school received the amendment on Thursday from the governing body's Complex Case Unit.

The NCAA alleges Louisville:

• Allowed graduate assistants, managers and noncoaching staffers to conduct impermissible activities with current players;

• Produced, showed and personalized recruiting videos to prospects including their names and likenesses;

• Presumed Mack responsible for both allegations. The amendment adds that Mack did not rebut presumption of responsibility.

Louisville said in a statement that it will respond to the amendment after a thorough review.

Though the school acknowledged Mack was the victim of an extortion attempt, athletic director Vince Tyra said the fourth-year coach "failed to follow university guidelines, policies and procedures in handling the matter." Mack accepted the suspension and said he "could have handled matters differently."

All of the talk around the Texas basketball program of late has surrounded the hot seat of sixth-year head coach Shaka Smart. The longtime former head coach of the VCU Rams hoops program is now on one of the hotter seats of any major conference team in the nation.

Texas had a very tough upset loss at the hands of the 14-seed Abilene Christian Wildcats in the Round of 64 in the NCAA Tournament on March 20th.

Not being able to get by the 14-seed Abilene Christian and head coach Joe Goulden when Smart and the three-seed Longhorns entered as a nine-point favorite was a mark that this head coach couldn’t afford. Smart already came into this season on a hot seat, after a vote of confidence last offseason from Texas athletic director Chris del Conte.

On August 27, 2021 in Post #1, a Louisville fan wrote:
Man, painful. Gonna be a rough season.

On October 4, 2021 in Post #1, a Louisville fan wrote:
IMO . Let the coaching search begin. This staff knew that they had to stay squeaky clean. They failed. Guessing the contract was written as such. Most likely would avoid any buyout clause.

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) — Chris Mack will have a lot of time on his hands in November watching Louisville basketball from a distance.

The fourth-year Cardinals coach is suspended the first six games this season by the school for failing to follow university guidelines in the firing of ex-assistant Dino Gaudio last spring. Though Louisville said in release that Mack was “the victim” of an extortion attempt — which culminated in Gaudio receiving a fine and probation after he pled guilty to a federal charge — Mack was still disciplined in the latest embarrassing episode for the men’s basketball program.

A bipartisan group in Congress wants to create a new federal law that would force the NCAA to change the way it investigates and punishes member schools that break the association's rules.

Rep. David Kustoff, R-Tenn., said he believes the NCAA's enforcement process is inefficient and unfair. He has teamed with Reps. Burgess Owens, R-Utah, and Josh Harder, D-Calif., to introduce a bill Tuesday that would create a statute of limitations on NCAA violations, place limits on how long the NCAA has to complete its investigations and give schools an option to appeal any sanctions they receive to a third-party arbitrator. "The NCAA is a monopoly with no oversight," Kustoff told ESPN. "The NCAA acts as investigator, prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner. [Our bill] sets up a framework. The NCAA can still do their jobs, but with more constraints."

The proposal is designed to make the NCAA's process more closely resemble the criminal justice system. It includes a statute of limitations that would prohibit the NCAA from punishing a school for any violation that occurred more than two years earlier in an effort to avoid punishing current athletes for the misdeeds of others.

The proposal also gives schools the ability to ask for a three-person panel of neutral arbitrators to review and adjust any punishments that the school believes are unfair. The NCAA's current rules do allow for an appeal in some cases, but the appeals process is run by a committee that is made up mostly of individuals from member schools.

The bill arrived one day after a group of 75 athletic directors from FBS-level schools sent a letter to the NCAA recommending a long list of changes to its enforcement process. The letter criticized the recently formed unit of the NCAA's enforcement arm that is designed to take on complex cases for its lack of efficiency. It also asked the NCAA to consider changes that would help mitigate the perception that some investigators are biased and to dole out punishments that impact specific "bad actors" instead of the athletes who attend a school where a violation occurred.

The Cowboys' appeal was denied by the NCAA on Wednesday, resulting in this season's team left to suffer consequences

Give the Cowboys anything short of a postseason ban, and I don't think I'd even blink. Whatever. But to rip away a dream from a program so close to the start of a season because of rules that were broken five years ago by a former assistant who created no competitive advantage for Oklahoma State seems excessive.

If you're unfamiliar, here's the backstory: the FBI caught former OSU assistant Lamont Evans accepting at least $18,150 in bribes to steer players at both Oklahoma State and his previous school, South Carolina, to certain agents and financial advisors. There is no evidence that he bought recruits. There is no evidence that he paid student-athletes to remain in school. The only player who is known to have ever received anything from Evans is Jeffrey Carroll -- and what he allegedly received was $300 that was subsequently paid back. Carroll served a three-game suspension for that transgression during the 2018-19 season. That's what happened at Oklahoma State. Does that seem worthy of a postseason ban?

To me, it doesn't.

The fact that Oklahoma State officials said they believe this to be the first postseason ban in NCAA history for a member institution "despite no violations in the areas of institutional control, failure to monitor, recruiting, head coach accountability, participation of an ineligible athlete or academic fraud" suggests OSU's frustration and disappointment is totally reasonable. When you combine that with the fact that similar illegal acts happened at both South Carolina and USC but did not result in postseason bans at either school, well, I completely understand why Oklahoma State coach Mike Boynton went off Wednesday.

"The cases have similar circumstances and the consequences are drastically different," Boynton said. "That's utterly ridiculous."

Again, I agree.

The amount of money Evans accepted at Oklahoma State exceeds the amount of money he accepted at South Carolina, and the amount of money former assistant Tony Bland accepted at USC, and my understanding is that that played a role in OSU getting a harsher penalty. On one hand, I get it. The punishment for driving 120 mph is more significant than the punishment for driving 90 mph, even though in both cases a driver is doing the same thing -- speeding. But I still just do not believe a few thousand dollars worth of bribes here or there should be the difference between one school getting a postseason ban and another avoiding one. Ban them all or ban none of them.

But, like Boynton said, the punishments at these schools shouldn't be so drastically different when the acts committed are so very similar.

In Post #2, a Louisville Cardinals fan wrote:
That’s probably not awesome for us.