Kelvin Sampson Appealing Punishment

After the dust settled in the NCAA's investigations of Kelvin Sampson, the former coach of Indiana and Oklahoma was virtually banned for five years from coaching college basketball.

It's not a hard-and-fast ban, but the process schools would have to go through to hire Sampson make it likely not worth the effort -- especially considering the baggage he already carries.

Today, the Indianapolis Star reported that Sampson is appealing his punishment. As you can expect, the grounds for appeal are quite lame, and don't appear to have much chance to stick.

His first claim is that testimony from Sampson's fall-guy, Rob Senderoff, was misinterpreted. You might remember Senderoff as the member of Sampson's staff who was summarily dismissed when charges resurfaced toward the beginning of last season. Simply put, we're still expected to believe Sampson had no idea Senderoff was placing these phone calls. Furthermore, when he patched in Sampson on a three-way call, we're supposed to believe that Sampson had no idea it was against the rules. Thus, in his mind, Sampson's not guilty of unethicial conduct, which the NCAA concluded he was.

The second charge is a beauty as well.

The second is that the NCAA enforcement staff, essentially the prosecutor in the case, was biased and showed a prejudgment of guilt by requesting a hearing before all of the interviews were complete.

Isn't that rich? The committee was biased against a guy who blatantly neglected to follow their orders after already being placed on probation, threw a member of his staff under the bus, and accepted a buyout the second the investigation got close to taking him down. He was working for the San Antonio Spurs just weeks later.

If he really didn't do anything wrong, why was he so hasty in accepting a buyout? Why flee to the NBA so quickly? Where's the fight? It sounds to me like a guilty man was salvaging what he could of his career, and the evidence found by the NCAA reaffirmed my opinion -- shared by nearly all Indiana fans.

Even if Senderoff shows up to take all the blame for Sampson, which would be one of the most amazing turns of events in history, Sampson was still his boss. The university was held responsible for a "failure to monitor," so Sampson should have been watching his staff closely as well.

Also, are we to believe the embarrassing grade point average, alleged drug use, and mass exodus of his players -- after the season -- was all a huge coincidence? Tom Crean came in and raised expectations for off-court behavior, and every single one of Sampson's scholarship recruits fled Bloomington like it was a crime scene, leaving a trail of failing grades and flying plants in their wake.

Is the appeal a form of fighting for what is just? I don't know, nor do I care. I don't believe his intentions are for the greater good. No matter what Sampson does anymore, I can't rationalize his actions as anything other than selfish and -- likely -- unethical. If I'm wrong, so be it. He's made this bed for himself by nearly ruining two programs.

Of course, I'm sure that wasn't his fault. Nothing ever is.