The NCAA is thorough in its investigations?

That is the belief of Rivals Radio Chris Childers.

Let me set this up...

I am driving into work yesterday. I usually tune into Bill King on Sirius/XM. Bill's show is pushed back this week with his being at the Big-12 and then Big-10 media days. So Childers and King flip flop their on air time.

I am not in the car more than five minutes and Childers, who is talking about tOSU and the NCAA, says that the NCAA is thorough in their investigations. That if the NCAA investigates a possible infraction they always get the information they need.

I laughed...

I don't follow Childers on Twitter but I looked him up as I am sitting in traffic and sent this message:

Now, I haven't listened to Childers much...he is on usually while I am in surgery so I normally miss his show.

Childers seems like a decent guy. He seems pretty informed, but he is way off base here.

Childers responded back as to "why" I had the opinion that I do. So, I responded...

Childers has faith in an organization that has constantly changed its own rules to make their position fit their agenda.

Childers clearly hasn't read up on this subject. And certainly not about Ohio State's mess.

My friend Brdcstr nails it once again...

George Dohrman sent out the following tweet that the NCAA claimed they couldn't grant the SI source confidentiality, so he walked.

@georgedohrmann George Dohrmann
NCAA met with SI source on OSU story, said it couldn't grant him confidentiality. So, players walk. Happens. SI story still 100% accurate

https://twitter.com/#!/georged...511873378095104

The NCAA had no problem providing confidentiality to their source in the case against Rick Neuheisel, though.

Plaintiff Richard G. Neuheisel, JI., respectfully requests that the Court compel defendant National Collegiate Athletic Association ('NCAA") to respond to discovery requests concerning the individual who informed the NCAA about Mr. Neuheisel's involvement in a 'March Madness" auction. Mr. Neuheisel has issued discovery requests that call for the identity of and other pertinent information concerning the informant. The NCAA has refused to provide the requested discovery, claiming its source is "confidential."

http://www.aspenadvocacybooks.com/pd...0Discovery.pdf

Ohio State's own auditors found fault with their oversight of uniforms and equipment in April, but apparently the NCAA felt the auditors were wrong - or hold a lower threshold for acceptability than do the auditors - when they claimed the institution took monitoring efforts designed to identify the sale or distribution of equipment or awards.

Here's a snippet from the auditors findings:

The OSU auditors wrote in November that the department needed to pay more attention to athletes' cars, particularly those driven by football players, and needed more control over the inventory of uniforms and equipment.

Internal auditors wrote in April that increased scrutiny of equipment and the department's plans for a beefed-up car-registration database, more frequent cross-checks of other campus car-registration databases and increased NCAA-rules education for football and men's basketball players would meet their standards.

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content...its-guard.html (Read the auditors findings contained in the article. Somehow, the NCAA never took the time to discover the problems their own auditors found)

Here's what the NCAA said on Friday about Ohio State monitoring efforts regarding the sale or distribution of equipment.

"The institution took monitoring efforts designed to identify the sale or distribution of institutionally issued athletics awards, apparel and equipment,"

Apparently, because Ohio State "took monitoring efforts designed to identify the sale or distribution of institutionally issued athletic awards, apparel and equipment" - that's enough for the NCAA in this case... Even if those monitoring efforts were inadequate, or below standards of acceptability to their own auditors.

As you can see, the NCAA really wasn't interested in utilizing every resource available to them in their search to discover the truth. They appear to be more interested in minimizing damage to their reputation, caused by allowing the tat5 to play in the BCS bowl game, after a rushed 'investigation' concluded the incidents were isolated.

Findings seven months later that run contrary to the December findings depict their own investigators and investigations in an incompetent light.

Can't have that if you're going to talk loudly and carry no stick, can they?

So, I would ask Mr. Childers if he still thinks the NCAA is thorough.

Obviously, I am not breaking any new ground with our readership here.

Childers also seems to miss that it took the NCAA four-plus years to investigate USC.

They found the following:

• A bunch of phone calls made by a tennis player

• Recruiting dinners at Papadakis Tavern

• An extra coach

• OJ Mayo taking money (after the NCAA AND the Pac-10 cleared Mayo of any issues)

• And the Reggie Bush mess that was put together with spit and toilet paper.
  

What did I miss?

Four years and that's all they got?

Shortof Mayo and Bush the rest would be considered minor infractions.

Heck, they didn't even break the story Bush and Mayo, it was Yahoo! and ESPN that broke them and then the NCAA waited for Lake to roll over and then Ornstein's associate to do the same. They really waited for Bush to go through his deposition because they had nothing to corroborate it, but when that didn't come they stretched the truth and helped Lake fabricate his story about McNair.

You may ask why is this important?

Because the Media continues to get it wrong and say misinformed things. These sorts of comments only give the misinformed story credibility.

If Childers want to be seen as credible and not some also ran he might want to take the time to read ALL the documents that I have on the USC case linked in the sidebar. He should chew on them and ask himself it the NCAA really is thorough.

SI's story breaks Tressel's back with new allegations and the NCAA wraps it all up in eight weeks? They have an alleged witness and they won't grant him immunity to see if the story checks out?

That's thorough?

Like I also tweeted to Childers...six hours with Willie Lyles and NOT ONE question about Oregon?

Yeah, that is being thorough alright.

UNREAL!