Missouri seems to be hanging their appeal on the fact that no one can prove the tutor wasn’t acting alone.
“The NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions found that Kumar violated NCAA ethical conduct, academic misconduct and academic extra benefits rules when she completed academic work for 12 student-athletes. The NCAA did not find credible evidence that her colleagues directed her to complete the athletes’ work, the NCAA said in its report.”
Do we believe that a tutor would just volunteer to do the work for 12 different student athletes on a whim? That she wasn’t “directed” to do whatever it took to get them passing grades? I suspect that was beyond the belief of the Infractions Committee, and why they came down hard even without definitive proof.
But, we’ll see if Missouri winds up getting away with this after the appeal. Who thinks this will stand up?
Photo by skipgo shannon