IARP update



  • 12 more months to wrap up an investigation into things that happened going on four years ago now? At this point, even if they do find wrongdoing, what are the appropriate penalties?

    Preston is gone from KU. The coach that primarily recruited him is also gone.

    The big names from other schools like Duke and Arizona are playing out the last years of their rookie contract by next spring, or working on extensions. What’s the point in pursuing those schools. Zona has a new coach, also. The investigations are taking so long that, if they decide to penalize anyone, they are penalizing kids that were freshmen and sophomores in high school when the events that led to any penalties actually happened.

    This is beyond ridiculous. At this point its just silly.



  • Sounds like the NCAA to me.



  • It is absurd. They apparently do not have a damn thing, so “hey, let’s just drag it out guys! What do you say?” Which makes it to where even if we received nothing we have still received something, it screwing us on the recruiting trail for going on years now. Just think how bad things would be if we didn’t have master recruiter Self.



  • @justanotherfan said in IARP update:

    12 more months to wrap up an investigation into things that happened going on four years ago now? At this point, even if they do find wrongdoing, what are the appropriate penalties?

    Preston is gone from KU. The coach that primarily recruited him is also gone.

    NCAA is going to send someone to Lawrence real soon to measure those skid marks from when Preston crashed his car in 2017



  • Does anyone realize the IARP is not a direct part of the NCAA? I am not sure the NCAA has any control of the timeline. The fact that they issued a statement at all seems very odd to me. What contacts are they relying on within this “independent” body, or were they just stating a conjecture about a general expectation? That would explain the year as an outside guess.



  • A lot of unknowns with this still.



  • @mayjay said in IARP update:

    Does anyone realize the IARP is not a direct part of the NCAA? I am not sure the NCAA has any control of the timeline. The fact that they issued a statement at all seems very odd to me. What contacts are they relying on within this “independent” body, or were they just stating a conjecture about a general expectation? That would explain the year as an outside guess.

    @mayjay So they say, an Independent review panel. I don’t buy it.



  • @Marco

    I could be wrong but from the way I understand it, it is a board of prosecuting lawyers that have impunity for their actions. They can make any claim they want and lay down a ruling. KU has no opportunity to appeal.

    This is so anti-American. I do believe KU had to agree to this path. I can’t understand why a school would open themselves up to such a potential for complete 100% corruption.

    What I feel comfortable saying is that we don’t know the whole story… and I’m sure that goes for the incidents that brought this attack to how the process has lead to this.

    I wonder if Kansas has been threatened by the NCAA… forcing them to go towards IARP. IARP is such a distortion away from a justice path that it surely could be challenged in a federal court and knocked down. But was Kansas forced into this path?

    It is my opinion that Kansas is preparing to go to federal court when the time is ripe. I think extending on Self’s contract was a glimpse into where the institution of Kansas has their support. And I know Self is a fighter and he won’t tolerate getting the shaft.

    One last thought… in the federal investigation… which is THE legal standard (not a kangaroo legal path like IARP), Kansas was found to be a VICTIM in this case. I’m imagining this ruling is worth a great deal in seeking a just remedy in a federal court after IARP delivers their ruling and consequences.



  • @drgnslayr Do your homework on what the IARP is and how they operate and who recommended this case go that route first (hint, not the NCAA) instead of spouting off a bunch of uninformed opinions and misinformation.

    The IAPR is not paid for by the NCAA and the NCAA cannot force a program into having their fate decided by the IARP. If the NCAA did attempt to force a school into having their case heard by the IARP and a school refused, that’s called coercion and the NCAA isn’t stupid enough to do that knowing they would be sued for that for hundreds of millions of dollars in damages.

    If the NCAA did financially back the IARP, why the hell would any school agree to have their case go that route knowing the decision can’t be appealed?

    KU is the party that initiated the request that this case go to the IARP, not the other way around. Covid based locked downs and restrictions are what have slowed this process down. The IARP also has much more capabilities to get access to information the NCAA doesn’t have the ability to do because of the backgrounds of committee members such as former FBI agents, former SEC (not the conference) employees, former NSA agents, and similar backgrounds so these people have a much greater ability to dig into a case and get facts the NCAA never could.



  • @Texas-Hawk-10 said in IARP update:

    @drgnslayr Do your homework on what the IARP is and how they operate and who recommended this case go that route first (hint, not the NCAA) instead of spouting off a bunch of uninformed opinions and misinformation.

    The IAPR is not paid for by the NCAA and the NCAA cannot force a program into having their fate decided by the IARP. If the NCAA did attempt to force a school into having their case heard by the IARP and a school refused, that’s called coercion and the NCAA isn’t stupid enough to do that knowing they would be sued for that for hundreds of millions of dollars in damages.

    If the NCAA did financially back the IARP, why the hell would any school agree to have their case go that route knowing the decision can’t be appealed?

    KU is the party that initiated the request that this case go to the IARP, not the other way around. Covid based locked downs and restrictions are what have slowed this process down. The IARP also has much more capabilities to get access to information the NCAA doesn’t have the ability to do because of the backgrounds of committee members such as former FBI agents, former SEC (not the conference) employees, former NSA agents, and similar backgrounds so these people have a much greater ability to dig into a case and get facts the NCAA never could.

    You seem to know alot about the IAPR, so I have a question. Who funds them?



  • @Marco I would recommend you go to the IARP’s website and read about how this process works. Both sides will have significant financial investments into the process.

    If you want to know who’s actually conducting the investigation, look up Berryman Prime LLC, AlixPartners, and Kroll. One of those three forms is who’s conducting the investigation so if you think the NCAA can financially influence any of those three companies, good luck with thinking the NCAA has those kind of resources.



  • @Texas-Hawk-10 Oh, the NCAA has plenty of resources, as well as finance. Just ask all of the athletes who participate even with what they do get all but free-of- charge in the NBA and NFL farm systems. Ofcourse the NCAA has power, influence and resources.



  • @Texas-Hawk-10

    I didn’t mention the financial aspect.

    As someone who has extensively used our judicial system including working sometimes in the judicial system I can guarantee to you that just because some of these members have the background they have, they do not have more access to information over the NCAA. Garnering information legally is the only way their efforts can hold water in a legal setting and also not break laws.

    Not sure why you are telling me KU agreed to this route… I mentioned it in my original post. " I do believe KU had to agree to this path."

    Maybe Kansas feels positive of what happened in the federal investigation and thinking go this route will support those findings. That doesn’t mean the judgment goes our way. This group can find exactly the same info found in the federal case and come up with a completely different verdict.

    I’m trying to imagine how KU’s legal team thought it was the route to go where there is no opportunity to appeal the results. Maybe you have an idea why KU would desire to go for this. Sounds like suicide to me unless they know something we don’t know. I’m betting they feel they still have a great case for federal court. The very basis of our legal system is to offer appeals. It’s anti-American to NOT have an appeal process.



  • @drgnslayr said in IARP update:

    @Texas-Hawk-10

    I didn’t mention the financial aspect.

    As someone who has extensively used our judicial system including working sometimes in the judicial system I can guarantee to you that just because some of these members have the background they have, they do not have more access to information over the NCAA. Garnering information legally is the only way their efforts can hold water in a legal setting and also not break laws.

    Maybe Kansas feels positive of what happened in the federal investigation and thinking go this route will support those findings. That doesn’t mean the judgment goes our way. This group can find exactly the same info found in the federal case and come up with a completely different verdict.

    I’m trying to imagine how KU’s legal team thought it was the route to go where there is no opportunity to appeal the results. Maybe you have an idea why KU would desire to go for this. Sounds like suicide to me unless they know something we don’t know. I’m betting they feel they still have a great case for federal court. The very basis of our legal system is to offer appeals. It’s anti-American to NOT have an appeal process.

    This is not a court room and does not follow federal law. The IARP is judging this case based on NCAA bylaws. KU wanted to go this route because the IARP is not the NCAA is not specifically out for blood against KU like the NCAA is. KU at minimum will probably end up vacating the 2018 Final Four and every game Silvio DeSousa played that season because money changed hands in his recruitment making DeSousa ineligible. That much is indisputable. I also wouldn’t be surprised if KU vacates the games Cheick Diallo played in as well since he’s one of the other players in the report. The hope on KU’s part is to avoid a postseason ban and a show cause against Kurtis Townsend, both of which would almost certainly be part of the NCAA’s punishments against KU.

    You claim to be very familiar with the US legal system and that not being able to appeal a ruling is not American, but yet you fail to realize what legal processes the IARP are analogous to and that’s a combination of an arbitration hearing and the Supreme Court. Both KU and the NCAA had to agree to recommend this case to the IARP similar to how cases end up in arbitration. Like the Supreme Court, the IARP gets to decide if they hear any case that gets recommended to them.

    Neither one of those types of rulings in the US are appealable so does that mean going to arbitration is not American? Does that mean that the Supreme Court deciding to take a case and ruling on it is not American since Supreme Court rulings are not appealable either?



  • @Texas-Hawk-10 The decisions are not directly appealable, but organizations are required to follow their own rules. Many federal courts have accepted jurisdiction to review a process ab initio where egregious violations of fundamental concepts of fairness have occurred. I have already extensively analyzed how I think the NCAA’s charged stemmed from violations of their own evidentiary and investigative rules. Kansas has not waived its right to sue in federal court, only the right to have the IARP decision reviewed on the merits.



  • @mayjay said in IARP update:

    @Texas-Hawk-10 The decisions are not directly appealable, but organizations are required to follow their own rules. Many federal courts have accepted jurisdiction to review a process ab initio where egregious violations of fundamental concepts of fairness have occurred. I have already extensively analyzed how I think the NCAA’s charged stemmed from violations of their own evidentiary and investigative rules. Kansas has not waived its right to sue in federal court, only the right to have the IARP decision reviewed on the merits.

    There’s only one part of this case KU has any legal ground to file a lawsuit for and that’s corporate sponsors being classified as boosters. Even that’s not a slam dunk case because of how NCAA bylaws are currently written. That’s also something that would come down to letter vs. intent of the rule and probably result in the NCAA having to create a new section of their bylaws specifically regarding corporate sponsors like Adidas, Nike, and Under Armour that provides money to a school. By current letter of the bylaws, Adidas is a booster and there’s not any kind of real argument that can be made to dispute that other than that’s not the intent of those bylaws.





  • @Texas-Hawk-10 Okay, you have decided it so no need for further discussion from me.



  • @Texas-Hawk-10

    First off… I appreciate your responses because I am not up to snuff on IARP and our connection to it.

    In our court appellate system, it is typical to have an appeal process for arbitration… but both sides can agree to limit or forbid appeals. In this case, both sides agree to forbid appeals.

    The US Supreme Court is the last stop for our appellate process but for typical appeals, the process ends sooner unless there is an area of their case that at least 4 SC justices see as important enough to consider hearing the case to give clarity to an area of the law by granting a writ of certiorari (beginning process to reach the court). The SC has never been about specifically addressing the case of a particular side and ruling an outcome. It is about making sure laws are applied correctly, not (for example) if the evidence weighs heavy enough to sway a decision. That process is conducted through a lower court.

    There are two ways a case can reach the US SC… appeals advanced through the circuit courts or possibly appeals from state SCs and by process of original jurisdiction.

    In rare situations, the US SC can hear original jurisdiction cases that have not gone through the appeals court process. In most cases, circuit court marks the end of appeals, unless the appeals court decides there is question to whether the lower courts had applied the law correctly in their decisions.

    I would like to better understand why Kansas thinks this is the best route to take. And it’s not just Kansas, but Louisville and the other programs, too. Maybe it’s an admission of partial guilt and they thought this is the most expedient path because we are being punished through the entire delay process. Maybe they feel like we will receive a more impartial verdict from outsiders.

    I know you follow this closely and I respect your opinion… why exactly do you think Kansas decided to go this route?



  • I am not near - nor will I ever be - as informed or versed as others when it comes to the ins and outs or workings of our judicial system and or esoecially the NCAA, but to me what it comes down to is that the case is weak, and I believe that was the reason for KU deciding to go the IARP route. I hope they were right in their decision. Regardless of what happens (look at our recruiting), we have already been punished for going on three years now.



  • @drgnslayr KU has acknowledged money changed hands during the recruitment of players mentioned in the report so they aren’t fighting very hard on those allegations, probably just that KU wasn’t aware of the payments. The biggest thing KU is fighting and why they wanted this case to go to the IARP is because of Adidas being ruled a booster. KU is hoping the IARP rules that because the NCAA has never accused a school of this before (along with Louisville and NC State) despite shoe companies being corporate sponsors of programs for decades now, that the NCAA can’t begin to selectively apply that rule and overturn those infractions which would have the most serious consequences.

    At the end of the day, KU is going to receive some punishment because of Silvio, Preston, and Diallo. Forfeiture of games those guys played in, scholarship reductions, and probation all seem very likely. KU is trying to avoid a postseason ban which is much more likely to happen with the IARP ruling on the case than the NCAA.

    The NC State case is the one to watch because that case went to the IARP before ours so will likely be ruled upon before ours. The reason to pay attention to that case is because NC State has a lot of similar accusations against them including Adidas being considered a booster. However the IARP rules on that charge against NCSU is also likely how they’ll rule it for KU as well.



  • At the end of the day KU shouldn’t have recruited this trio. They knew it could backfire.



  • @Texas-Hawk-10

    Is my memory failing me… but didn’t Kansas acknowledge Adidas as a booster to help bring Silvio back? That was another move I didn’t really understand the logic.



  • @Texas-Hawk-10 said in IARP update:

    @drgnslayr KU has acknowledged money changed hands during the recruitment of players mentioned in the report so they aren’t fighting very hard on those allegations, probably just that KU wasn’t aware of the payments. The biggest thing KU is fighting and why they wanted this case to go to the IARP is because of Adidas being ruled a booster. KU is hoping the IARP rules that because the NCAA has never accused a school of this before (along with Louisville and NC State) despite shoe companies being corporate sponsors of programs for decades now, that the NCAA can’t begin to selectively apply that rule and overturn those infractions which would have the most serious consequences.

    At the end of the day, KU is going to receive some punishment because of Silvio, Preston, and Diallo. Forfeiture of games those guys played in, scholarship reductions, and probation all seem very likely. KU is trying to avoid a postseason ban which is much more likely to happen with the IARP ruling on the case than the NCAA.

    The NC State case is the one to watch because that case went to the IARP before ours so will likely be ruled upon before ours. The reason to pay attention to that case is because NC State has a lot of similar accusations against them including Adidas being considered a booster. However the IARP rules on that charge against NCSU is also likely how they’ll rule it for KU as well.

    Yahtzee! And if Adidas is a booster then what about Nike and Under Armor? And was it KU that gave the money? What about Zion, what about Ayton? I don’t think the NCAA really wants to open this can…



  • This post is deleted!


  • Sometimes my motives come out slowly… especially if I am not well versed on the subject.

    *Has anyone implicated the NCAA as a co-conspirator in these trials? Especially concerning Zion? With the level of corruption today being so rampant… why wouldn’t we vision the possibility the NCAA is corrupt beyond just being inept? Why would money and perhaps gifts come in the direction of the NCAA?

    Who buys the theory that the NCAA is basically a bunch of “stupid saints?”

    https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10002000-zion-williamsons-family-was-paid-by-adidas-in-2016-17-court-documents-show

    At what point can we state that ineptness or some closet animosity towards certain programs just doesn’t hold water as to explaining actions?


Log in to reply