KANSAS CITY – If quarterback Terrelle Pryor wouldn’t have played, Ohio State’s victory over Arkansas in the Sugar Bowl would’ve been a mammoth television ratings bust.

But if Baylor basketball star Perry Jones is relegated to the bench, people are still going to watch the NCAA tournament.

Perhaps that explains why the NCAA allowed Pryor and five teammates to compete in the postseason even though they blatantly – and knowingly – violated NCAA eligibility rules by selling Buckeyes memorabilia to the owner of a Columbus tattoo parlor.

More From Jason KingKnight exits with class Mar 10, 2011 Gillispie tries to get back in the game Mar 8, 2011 AdChoices

Perry Jones was ruled ineligible by the NCAA just a few hours before Baylor played in the Big 12 tournament.

(Tim Umphrey/Getty Images)
And maybe it explains why the NCAA deemed Jones ineligible Wednesday after an investigation revealed that his mother accepted – and then repaid – a loan from his AAU coach to help pay rent. Jones had no knowledge of the loans, which totaled around $1,000 and were made when he was in high school.

Good gosh, NCAA.

Jones and his family don’t look bad in all of this.

You do.

“You’d like to think that all student athletes would be treated equally,” Baylor athletic director Ian McCaw said. “That’s all we’re asking.”

Baylor has appealed the ruling in hopes that Jones will be able to play in the NIT. That’s where the Bears are headed following Wednesday’s loss to Oklahoma in the Big 12 tournament.

Scott Drew’s squad entered the contest as a “bubble team” that probably needed to win two games to earn an NCAA tournament bid. Although defeating Texas in the quarterfinals would’ve been unlikely, the Bears could’ve done it with Jones, a surefire top five pick in this summer’s NBA draft.

Instead, by suspending Jones for this petty infraction, the NCAA erased any chance the Bears may have had of experiencing the “unique opportunity” to take part in March Madness. The term “unique opportunity” is important, because that’s the exact phrase the NCAA used to defend its decision to let Pryor and his rule-breaking teammates to play in the Sugar Bowl.

“The NCAA recognizes the unique opportunity these (bowls) provide at the end of a season, and they are evaluated differently from withholding policy,” Kevin Lennon, the NCAA’s vice president of academic membership affairs, said at the time.

The Sugar Bowl is a unique opportunity? Fine.

Then what do you call the NCAA tournament, which gives participants a “unique opportunity” to win a national championship? Pryor had no shot at accomplishing that feat by playing in the Sugar Bowl, but – even though it was highly, highly unlikely – Jones and his teammates would’ve at least had the chance to do it by playing in the NCAA tournament.

But they won’t get it partly because an AAU coach loaned Jones’ mother a small amount of cash when Jones was 16.

“She paid it back,” the coach, Lawrence Johns, told the New York Times Wednesday. “What was the difference? This was two years ago. It’s got nothing to do with it. You know how people ask you to borrow something and they pay you back? What’s the big deal? I don’t get that.”

As if knowing all the rules and doing the right thing 100 percent of the time isn’t already tough enough for a 16-year-old, Jones was apparently responsible for his mothers’ actions, too.

Unbelievable.

The father of Auburn quarterback Cam Newton solicited money from school’s for his son’s services, but Newton wasn’t held out Auburn’s BCS title game against Oregon because the NCAA deemed that he “didn’t know” that his father had made those demands during his recruitment.

Well, Jones “didn’t know” about the loan provided to his mother. But suddenly that doesn’t matter.

Did the NCAA seriously think that people wouldn’t notice the double-standard here? As the only major sporting event on television Jan. 2, the Sugar Bowl is huge money-maker that simply couldn’t afford to lose its luster by keeping Pryor some of his star teammates off the field. So the NCAA swallowed its pride and allowed the players to compete.

It probably helped that Sugar Bowl CEO Paul Hoolahan caught the NCAA’s ear before the decision was made.

“I made the point that anything that could be done to preserve the integrity of this year’s game, we would greatly appreciate it,” Hoolahan told the Columbus Dispatch. “That appeal did not fall on deaf ears.”

And it didn’t hurt when Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany made an influential phone call to the NCAA.

“Let me publicly thank Jim Delany for assisting in this process,” Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith said at a press conference leading up to the game. “He gave us some good advice. He did work at the NCAA years ago. He’s got a lot of experience and gave great advice.

“He also made a phone call on our behalf to the reinstatement team. So we appreciate what he did.”

Sounds as if Baylor needed Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe to make a call on its behalf Wednesday. The problem was that, after a three-month investigation, the NCAA decided to conveniently inform Baylor of its decision six hours before it tipped off against Oklahoma in the Big 12 Tournament Wednesday. Classy.

At the time, Beebe – a member of the NCAA tournament selection committee – was sequestered in a hotel conference room in Indianapolis, unable to use his cell phone or provide assistance.

The only thing Baylor can hope for now is for the NCAA to reverse its decision and let Jones play for Baylor in the NIT. It would go a long way toward repairing the group’s reputation.

And it wouldn’t cost a dime.

SportsAndLady;706818 wrote:It's funny because the NCAA makes a LOT of money off the college basketball tournament, you would think they would want their best basketball players eligible just as they do football.

Fly4Fun;706823 wrote:But it's Baylor... not a Big name program at the top of the rankings.

The NCAA has a serious integrity problem right now... which only encourages cheating and trying to get away with it.

bo shemmy3337;706858 wrote:I just don't get why the NCAA seems to come down so hard on the Basketball side and not the football. Could it be because of the money?

Writerbuckeye;709862 wrote:This ruling is truly a joke. A ridiculous joke.

The NCAA spends way too much time on crap like this, instead of finding REAL efforts to gain competitive advantages on the football field: like selling a son's services for $100,000 or so, or letting teams cull through players like the NFL does, cutting those who just don't have it, when a better scholarship player happens along.

Fidmeister;714643 wrote:Scholarships are yearly agreements at most schools. Kids can break them to transfer when ever they want. Why can't a school tell a recruit he isn't cutting it anymore?

That said, in order for the NCAA to have a double standard, it would need standards. We all know that's not the case.

elbuckeye28;715422 wrote:While an athlete can transfer whenever they want, there are rules and regulations that limit the choices of places they can transfer to and still receive a scholarship. In addition, there are instances, most recently with Jo Pa and Schiano, where a player wants to transfer and the coach will not grant a release. Therefore, players are at the mercy of the coach and school and they better hope that they are granted a release or they may not be able to get a scholarship to play at other schools any time soon.

Fidmeister;715745 wrote:Year to year agreements. Schools have the right to break them just as players do. For every coach who won't let guys transfer, there are athletes who go to three different colleges over five years. Where's the outrage over that?

elbuckeye28;715770 wrote:How many players do you know that have played at 3 different colleges, especially through transfers rather than getting kicked out or what not? Since in order to play at another Division 1A(Bowl Subdivision), the player has to sit out a year, transferring twice would not make much sense. The schools have the power in these situations. That's part of the reason why over-signing is such a big issue.