Skip to content

Kentucky Sports Radio

University of Kentucky Basketball, Football, and Recruiting news brought to you in the most ridiculous manner possible.

Question: Why doesn’t the NCAA go ahead and name who was ineligible?

I need an explanation on something…

If the NCAA already knows the three ineligible players, why does Louisville have 45 days to identify them and prove which games they played in?

We have box scores. I assume the NCAA does too. So why is the NCAA relying on Louisville to tell us who played and in what games? The NCAA should already know, right?

I guess we’ll find out soon when the NCAA holds its press conference to discuss its findings.

But if you already know and understand this process, please enlighten us.

Article written by Drew Franklin

I can recite every line from Forrest Gump, blindfolded. Follow me on Twitter: @DrewFranklinKSR

25 Comments for Question: Why doesn’t the NCAA go ahead and name who was ineligible?



  1. kbo24
    11:51 am June 15, 2017 Permalink

    I was just going to pose this same question in the comments section on the topic below…I have no idea. Is the NCAA making UL hang themselves?



    • Suffering Fools
      11:56 am June 15, 2017 Permalink

      Maybe they just don’t want to deny UL a chance to contest what’s shown in the box scores if they want to. What basis there’d be for doing so, I can’t imagine.



  2. secrick
    11:52 am June 15, 2017 Permalink

    Drew, I think the NCAA is trying to find out if L-ville can tell the truth about anything.



  3. Mc12
    11:54 am June 15, 2017 Permalink

    You can’t triple stamp a double stamp



    • Jnet389
      12:27 pm June 15, 2017 Permalink

      Lmao



    • Mathlete
      12:33 pm June 15, 2017 Permalink

      can you double stamp a tramp stamp though?



  4. Ridge Runner
    11:57 am June 15, 2017 Permalink

    NCAA is so bizarre. Another example



  5. J-Dub421
    12:02 pm June 15, 2017 Permalink

    Russ Smith, Chane Behanan, Montrezl Harrell. I’m pretty sure these are the three players. Don’t know for certain though.



  6. CVL123
    12:05 pm June 15, 2017 Permalink

    This whole thing just makes me all the more pissed off about North Carolina

    Why do they get a free pass on everything?!?!? 20 years of academic fraud? Crickets

    NCAA is more corrupt than WASH DC



  7. CatsfaninFL
    12:06 pm June 15, 2017 Permalink

    NCAA really doesn’t want to vacate a title….hoping Louisville will essentially admit they had players on the title team and FF team….NCAA trying to see if L’ville will flinch first.



    • CatsfaninFL
      12:06 pm June 15, 2017 Permalink

      I should say they really don’t want to vacate a title but know they should… ergo they’re hoping Louisville will flinch first.



  8. Mathlete
    12:07 pm June 15, 2017 Permalink

    There are (probably) privacy laws that keep the NCAA from naming names because technically they were minors at the time and were never arrested or charged with any crime in a real court.

    Also, if the NCAA announced on the record that Russ Smith, Chane Behanan, and Montrezl Harrell were all customers of a prostitution ring when they were minors and at other times while at Louisville they could be sued for slander because there’s no evidence other than Katina Powell’s testimony (who, let’s face it, has credibility issues in real court).



    • Sentient Third Eye
      1:36 pm June 15, 2017 Permalink

      I think that’s really it. Agreed.



    • damage_control
      1:55 pm June 15, 2017 Permalink

      I think that’s a stretch- First of all, I’m assuming they have more evidence than just Powell’s word or UofL wouldn’t be getting punished at all. Secondly, solicitation of prostitution is a misdemeanor and I’m almost certain wouldn’t be punishable due to statute of limitations. Thirdly, even if it were punishable, if they have hard evidence of these players crimes then how in the world would it be slanderous to reveal their names??



    • damage_control
      2:01 pm June 15, 2017 Permalink

      It seems far more likely that they just don’t want to give Louisville any wiggle room to get out of the ruling by claiming that they were unjustly punished for games that didn’t include ineligible players. It’s basically so that the NCAA can say “This is the games that YOU told us included the ineligible players! Don’t cry about it now that we took your banner down!”.



  9. NMcKendree
    12:09 pm June 15, 2017 Permalink

    Perhaps a courtesy to the players involved. If I read it right, they only have to give the games. It allows the school to release the information they deem appropriate. Or it could simply be a formality standard that would make more since in a similar, but different case.



  10. Humdittydiddycatsbyfiddy
    12:12 pm June 15, 2017 Permalink

    Can someone tell me what the 4 years probation means? Does it refer to the tournament or something else?



    • ukjaybrat
      12:17 pm June 15, 2017 Permalink

      essentially nothing. if they get caught doing even the slightest infraction in the next four years the punishment gets compounded and it coincides with the forfeiture of scholarships.



    • ukkatzfan
      12:30 pm June 15, 2017 Permalink

      So it is double secret probation made public ?



    • Humdittydiddycatsbyfiddy
      12:19 pm June 15, 2017 Permalink

      Ok thanks



  11. mrwayne
    12:22 pm June 15, 2017 Permalink

    The real question is does the tattoo get removed?



  12. kvltclassic
    1:20 pm June 15, 2017 Permalink

    The NCAA relies on the schools to self report and handle a lot of things in house. This is essentially that. NCAA knows which games will be vacated because they have the participation reports and they know who was ineligible. This is just the process they go through, particularly for sports that may have more complicated participation reports (football, track, etc).



  13. satcheluk
    3:09 pm June 15, 2017 Permalink

    If the NCAA names the athletes and games, then UL can appeal. If UL submits them then they can’t appeal and the NCAA can check for accuracy and add more penalties if they try to lie.



  14. WizardWCN
    6:38 pm June 15, 2017 Permalink

    what are the chances UL can tell the truth?