I would love to see it happen today, but I don't think the higher administration will show us that kind of aptitude. I think Scott Drew and Tony Bennett (Washington State) would have to be two young coaches that deserve a legitimate look for new head coach at IU. Going to be an even tougher home stretch now against 3 top conference teams with all this negative press that will be whirling around for the next several days. Thanks again to Coach Sanctions and our good 'ole Uncle Ricky! BOOO!

the thing with Drew is I doubt big money would motivate him to move. I don't know as much about Bennett, other than his Dad was a badass.

The game tonight is going to be really, really tough after the release comes out today.

When at the game tonight, I will definitely be listening to see the reaction when Sampson is announced at the start of the game. I might even through in the traditional boo myself. As much as I would love to see the ax right now, there is no way it happens. I would like to see the timetable for hiring. does it have to happen before the sanctions come or does it come after the June date? It'll be impossible to hire a good coach (say, Jay Wright from 'Nova) with the possible sanctions. But an up and comer might want to take a risk. A gamble on both sides (IU and incoming coach) is needed for a successful transition in the long term. Can anyone think of a previous situation like this happening and the outcome of it? I'm drawing a blank right now.

I really wouldn't be trying to draw conclusions before even knowing what the allegations are against Indiana.
While I agree that currently it does not look promising, you do not know what the NCAA is actually alleging, so until Indiana has a chance to respond, this must run its course for due process reasons. The main issue is whether the NCAA will come down with the "lack of institutional control" moniker that could lead to severe penalties.
I am pretty sure that not one of you has actually seen the violation report issued to Oklahoma University with regard to what "sanctions" Sampson was under when he came to Indiana. So with that in mind, here are the sanctions that Indiana adopted from that report as they apply to phone calls:
The number of permissible calls to prospects on or after June 15 of the prospects' sophomore year in high school through July 31 of the prospects' junior year in high school shall be reduced from one call per month to one call every other month for a period of two years commencing August 1, 2005, and concluding July 31, 2007; and the institution shall reduce the number of permissible calls to prospects on or after August 1 of their senior year in high school from two calls per week to one call per week for a period of two years commencing August 1, 2005, and concluding July 31, 2007. Exceptions are legislated to these bans.
Further, since Sampson could not make these phone calls anyway, this is the lone sentence that applies to telephone calls while Sampson is at Indiana from that report: Indiana must show cause as to why it should not prohibit coach from May 25, 2006 to May 24, 2007 from "1) making any phone calls that relate in any way to recruiting or being present when members of his staff make such calls; and 2) engaging in any off-campus recruiting activities."
For those of you who believe that violations do not take place on every college campus, you are living in a fairy tale. Even Kelper's beloved Scott Drew has been implicated in two violations of which I know. I am not being an appologist for what seems like either complete incompetence on Sampson's part or complete disregard (both of which are not very good qualities). I simply think you need all the facts and allegations before you can go castrating anyone (remember the Duke lacrosse case).

Scott Drew is "beloved" to me? I was just throwing names out there, and if I had my pick of the entire scene, I would rather have Bennett. And this is far from the Duke lacrosse case. First off, IU self-reported a good portion of these violations. Duke didn't self-report anything in that case, as it was a CRIMINAL investigation. With Sampson and IU, we're talking about NCAA rules violations, not criminal offenses. I realize that secondary violations take place all over the country and never get heard about, despite the fact that institutions self-report themselves to the NCAA all the time. This isn't Sampson's first time doing this, and I refuse to believe that the majority of it was done "unknowingly" by him given his track record. I am more than free to draw my own conclusions and I would not be disturbed at all if Dakich had to step in and coach in place of a fired Kelvin Sampson tonight.

Jeez, I wish some website/news outlet had stepped in a long time ago and let me know that there was trouble coming...

At least give me a hint or something...

Maybe "beloved" was too extreme of a word; however, I was trying to prove a point that even coaches who you may think are pristine have some baggage as well.
As for the Duke lacrosse analogy; it was made to show that people should not be too quick to rush to judgment. It has nothing to do with criminal law versus NCAA violations cases. It is the overriding issue that you need all the facts and allegations before you can make a final judgment.
As for Dakich, good coach, I used to go to his basketball camps growing up, but he couldn't win with any consistency at Bowling Green; and walked away from a coaching job before one week was finished. Do you really want him coaching Indiana just because he is an "Indiana guy"?

I'm not sure I'm making any outrageous 'assumptions' other than the possibility of Sampson being fired tonight, which was a personal preference and not an assumption. The loss of recruits....very well could happen when Sampson is let go.....the loss of players he's recruited at IU leaving when he's let go....All of these things have happened many times before.

Based on his track record and based on what we've heard, IU is not going to put up with ANY violations, minor or major, that Sampson accrues. ANY. He was on thin ice before and I'm not sure what's left after today....I'll post the NCAA letter and allegations statement in a moment.

As for Drew....he's 'beloved' by me.

Just the fact that we are even discussing rule violations about Sampson calls for him to be dismissed. I can take one instance with the NCAA but two (and the possible fact that he may of lied about the degree of them) and that is it. I don't care what kind of possible sanctions are coming and I don't care to wait and see. Granted that these situations happen all over the nation but he was on the NCAA radar for the previous violations and then goes on and does them again. That's plain stupidity that you don't want at the front of your program.

I only mentioned Dakich, because he is a member of the current staff that would be most likely to be the interim leader, with an expected coaching search and hiring at season's end. Did I say in there anything about Dakich being the coach of the future? I thought I made it pretty obvious that I would like to have Tony Bennett as a long-term replacement for Sampson. I have read the allegation sheet. Sampson lied about the 3-way calling--he knew all along what he was doing, as I inferred before. And he allowed an assistant to provide gifts to a current recruit. Enough is enough, he needs to be gone TODAY.

After looking through the statement of allegations it does not seem that there are any new allegations then those that were self-reported back in the fall. At that time, the institution believed that these were all of a secondary nature. It seems as though the NCAA has said that individually they may be "secondary" but collectively this may be a "major" violation issue.
What has happened since then seems to be that the NCAA believes that Sampson and Senderoff were lying to them, which then seems to have pushed the NCAA into a vendetta-type of mood versus Sampson, and it then categorizes these as "major" infractions.
As for allegation 5 with Elston. The first allegation about recruiting him while he was at a camp is bogus. NCAA legislation with regard to unofficial visits is also holding for the June 30th date; therefore, that can be easily dispelled as not a violation of legislation at all. The other allegation of the inducement worries me a bit more; however, that is a secondary violation as well under the normal application of NCAA legislation.
You must remember though that this is all through the NCAA's own information; Indiana may have differing information to add. This is why the initial letter from NCAA Enforcement stated that these are "potential" major violations. They are looking for more information as well.
While it does not look good, this is a long way from over. Each of these allegations has much room to be disputed.

Much appreciation for the input and helpful interpretation......

Still, I think with the way IU basketball has been in the past the alumni, boosters and fans are not going to want to deal with these 'shenanigans' any longer. I already had a major booster offer me their tix to the game tonight because they were "disgusted". I think it's safe to assume that's the feeling for the majority of "Hoosier Nation" right now. I doubt it will matter to the alumni/boosters, who help fund the new athletics complexes, whether IU's lawyers are better than the NCAA's.

The IU Administration needs to step up now that these collectively may be a 'major' violation. Where there is smoke, there is fire. There are ways to run a clean program, they've done it before, they can do it again.

I think that these are all violations that they were already willing to put-up with or he would have been fired back in October. Most of, if not all of, this is from the self-reported violations, that is why he will not be fired until after the violations hearing and disposition are final.

As much as people think or what to beleive, a university is not run by alumni and/or boosters. While they are a constituency base that may be outspoken and have money, they will not be making the final decisions on these matters.
If one of your colleagues at work, who gives money to IU, wants to not go to any more games because Sampson is coaching, that is his perogative. However, I still think you are going to see quite a bit of crimson and cream in the stands for a long time to come, and a lot of people still donating money to the university for a long time as well.
And the only part of "Hoosier Nation" that people ever hear from are the Coach Knight loyalists who will never be satisfied with anything that happens within the IU basketball program until he returns or one of "his" guys coaches.

Yeah, you'd think some web-site was brave enough to be criticized--not a mainstream site, but maybe a little blog or something, you know? Just a couple of guys, 3 or 4 of them, willing to put their reputations on the line even though they might look silly. Why didn't that ever happen? (wink-wink) haha Good point, BP.

I respect your opinions and they are great and all but...when that money stops rolling in, people notice. IU is trying to fund a very expensive athletic complex construction and a lot of that money is 'old money' coming from the Coach Knight loyalists. It's not about the people sitting in the bleachers. It's about the people with the fat wallets that are in the ear of the administration.

On the firing...that's my personal preference. I'm tired of all this, get rid of the guy today. Will it happen? Probably not. Will he be here next season? Probably not.

I prefer a coach that comes from outside the IU birthday card mailing list.

Mack- you are right in saying alumni/boosters don't run the show. But major alumni/boosters are much like any major stakeholders in that they sure can have influence. I'm still amazed that Sampson was that much of an idiot to think he would be fine through all of this. I think we're safe from having Knight or a Knight guy coach this program anytime soon.

Sampson gets caught at Oklahoma for phone violations, comes to IU and says he learned from it and was 'moving on' and then gets in trouble for phone violations again? I mean, I can understand the logic in your thinking but at some point common sense has to kick in and say....that dude is toast.

plus, they caught him lying about the three-way calls which shows he knew what he was doing was wrong.....

I also wish the firing would be executed today and be done with. I also agree that the next coach should be a new blood without specific ties to IU historically. I've gone on record earlier this morning as being open to Tony Bennett from Washington State and I think that Sean Miller from Xavier would be worth a look as well. Miller especially already has recruiting roots in the region and would be a nice asset as a young, up-and-coming leader. Neither of these options came directly from myself, as I'm an avid message board reader, but I would be willing to jump on the bandwagon of either should they get consideration from IU.

Props to Jack Cobra and the Brigade for being out in front with this.

My feeling right now is that they're going to ax Sampson and keep Greenspan. The fact that Greenspan was quoted in the press release today would indicate that he might escape unscathed.

Which would be a shame.

Maybe all the D-Bags that were complaining about this when you posted on it originally will issue their apologies since they demanded you issue a retraction of that story....I'm sure you'll be waiting for that apology for a while.

Bennett isn't going to leave Pac-10 money for a mess at IU...

Mack, Scott Drew is one of the best recruiters in the country and has been for the last decade. Of course he is going to have accusations and allegations thrown at him for being a constant recruiting stud. It's called jealousy.

Heehee. Hehe. Heehee.

My comments to the story of Buck Rampage were in regard to the aspects about player suspensions and speculation for why they were suspended. I haven't been opposed to the thoughts of firing Sampson and I think that has been justified since October regardless of off-the-court player behavior. If that was true, which we probably won't ever "officially" know, that is just the icing on the cake in what has been a very shady tenure for Sampson at IU. I hope this is the end of that tenure, as I'm ready for this program to move on with a legitimate leader.

Jack, I am not condoning anything about Sampson right now. I am simply saying that if the IU administration and all your "fat-cat" donors/alumns are so up in arms now, why weren't they when IU released all of this information in October? Why wasn't he fired then? Is it because now it is being categorized as "major" opposed to "secondary"? That may be a valid consideration, and I'll give you that, but these are still allegations.
GM, I have personal knowledge Drew has been involved with a violation of NCAA legislation; those are not accusations or allegations, they are instances that have been deemed violations by the NCAA or his institution.

I would be interested to see/read of said violation. Personal knowledge doesn't really cut if for me these days...no offense

Four words for why they didn't demand it then. Eric Gordon. National Championship

If 'Mack' is who I think he is I'd say his knowledge/facts are pretty good and can be believed.

Pardon my French, but Sampson is kinda a piece of shit. All college bball coaches are dirty, but only the worst ones get caught. The Big 10 doesn't need someone like this tarnishing their imagine.

The Eric Gordon/National Championship is not completely out of reach just yet. Granted, IU is not playing too stellarly of late, but they do have the talent to play with anyone.
GM, my position does not allow me to divulge most of that information, but I can tell you what the two instances that I have personal knowledge of involve: 1) academic misconduct and 2) offers and inducements to prospects (i.e., impermissible benefits). I can confirm that I am the person Jack believes, so take that as some validation.

Some of our '"fat-cat" donors/alumns' were up in arms. I know of two who were fairly aggravated about it and i think other writers for this site knew of some others who felt the same way. The probable reason for these people being shouted down was outlined by Jack and could also be factors similar to those that motivated people to comment the way they did in the December piece on CB

I was listening to Mac, Jurko, and Harry on ESPN 1000 in Chicago and they had a fun idea; while IT IS PURELY SPECULATION, I thought it was fun to imagine. What if the Indiana/Kalvin Sampson fallout had Bob Knight ties??? They were speaking of the idea that in his 40 years of coaching, Coach Knight surely made many "insider: friends. Is there a possiblity that these insider friends alerted Bobby to the upcoming trouble the IU basketball program was in store for. Could it be possible that The General's surprising resignation was a cover to make him available to guide the IU basketball program back to the pinnacle of NCAA basketball. With all the problems that the Hoosiers have facing them, Knight would bring the ideal no-nonsense personality to restore the shine to the program.

While I am almost positive that this is pure and total BS, it was fun to think for a moment of times when the pride of the Hoosier state was run by a man with class and character.

*Remember that most of Knight's enemy's (i.e. Brand, and Athletic Director are gone...)

* Sorry its Kelvin not Kalvin

No need to yell

Yeah, I heard this one today, too and while Knight had more character than class....it's highly unlikely. Although he'll always be remembered in Bloomington, I'm not sure he has any ties to the administration any longer. It certainly would make for quite a story but I think if they brought him back he would be too powerful to control

I would rather see Knight come back in the role of Athletic Director to replace a fired Rick Greenspan. RMK could clean house like Merry Maids and re-build the IU athletic administration from the ground up. As equally unlikely as him coming back here to coach, but just as much fun to think about.