An article written by ESPN Senior Writer Mark Schlabach sent shock waves through the world of college basketball on Friday.
Shockwaves. That’s what it felt like. Shockwaves ravaged their way through the Arizona Basketball program and Wildcats fan nation and continued to gain steam over the weekend. The story dominated the conversation by sports fans and media alike.
Basketball analysts from every network covering NCAA games gave their take on the allegations, ranging from wait and see, to an immediate demand that Arizona Head Coach Sean Miller’s employment be terminated in addition to strongly worded opinions that Deandre Ayton (the player named in the article) be suspended for the remainder of the year. But the word “allegation” was missing from a lot of reports and discussions.
Arizona Wildcats Basketball
If you haven’t read the article yet, the gist of the story is that Coach Miller was allegedly overheard on a telephone conversation that was captured via FBI Wiretap discussing setting up a payment of $100,000 to secure the commitment of Deandre Ayton.
Ayton, who was the top-ranked recruit, according to the ESPN’s player rankings at the time, signed with Arizona during the Fall signing period in 2016. The supposed conversation, held between Miller and Christian Dawkins (a former agent who is now the subject of an ongoing FBI investigation) was one of among roughly 3000 hours of conversations that the FBI listened to as part of an investigation into corruption between agents, players and the schools that are recruiting them. How many minutes were reported on by Schlabach? Five?
According to ESPN’s original article, sources close to the investigation shared information with Mark Schlabach, detailing a number of conversations held between Miller and Dawkins. These wiretap conversations include the alleged discussion regarding a payment to secure Ayton’s services. The timeline of the conversation is cloudy, as the originally published date has since been changed from Spring of 2017 to Spring of 2016, to just 2016. ESPN issued a correction, but it is buried in their correction page.
Brad Allis points out it isn’t just the writer, but all the powers that be who employ the writer, he’s right!
The alleged activity constitutes a possible major NCAA infraction, let me explain. Players in college basketball are required to retain their amateur status, and acceptance of any form of payment would result in them forfeiting that standing, making them ineligible to compete. Likewise, the payment of any player by a coach would constitute cheating, by gaining an unfair advantage over other schools in the recruitment process.
Taken at face value, the allegations lay out a strong case for those actions mentioned above. The immediate removal of Sean Miller as head coach and suspension of Deandre Ayton would be reasonable and expected results if the actions detailed in Schlabach’s article are valid. However, the use of an unnamed and unverifiable source calls into question the validity of the assertions made in the report. And the FBI has not handed out any indictments to either Ayton or Miller.
As Schlabach has admitted, the leaked information did not come from the FBI, but rather from a “source close to the investigation”. There is no clear knowledge at this point if the writer has heard a recording of the call, or seen the transcripts of the recorded conversation. He says,“I’m told from people who have heard these wiretaps,” in this interview:
The article was written in a direct and forceful manner, seeming to indicate that the conversations and details shared are deemed factual by the author and by ESPN. But without corroborating evidence, there are, and there will continue to be questions that come up.
One important point to remember is that an ongoing federal investigation requires that all data captured remain sealed, without exception, to anyone other than those involved in the investigation, prosecution, or defense of those who are being investigated.
The fact that Coach Sean Miller is not currently under FBI Investigation, would seem to indicate that the source who leaked the information may not have Miller’s, or the school’s best interest at heart and that they have separate, personal (though not necessarily nefarious) reasons for wanting the information out in the public eye.