Playing by the rules

Corey Maggette has not played for Duke in over two years, yet actions from before he even matriculated still continue to haunt the men's basketball program. Maggette, now a professional basketball player with the Los Angeles Clippers, long ago forfeited his amateur status by accepting payments from Amateur Athletic Union coach Myron Piggie. University athletic officials insist that they knew nothing of Maggette's past actions but until this summer faced imminent charges from an NCAA rules committee that was seemingly forced by rigid rules to take back 45 percent of Duke's 1999 tournament revenue and revoke the team's second-place finish.

Curiously, the outlook is less grim now.

Until late April, the NCAA Championships and Competition Cabinet was to have ruled on the Duke case using regulations that dictated an ineligible player's contribution "shall be deleted" and that the team's standings "shall be adjusted accordingly." Now, under regulations that took effect during the summer, the Committee on Infractions will oversee such investigations with the increased latitude to interpret the rules because every "shall" in the regulations has been replaced with a "may."

The timing of the decision should certainly raise some eyebrows. Three weeks after an NCAA poster child wins the national championship, the committee conveniently passes legislation that has the potential to let Duke off easily. The University of California at Los Angeles, which also unknowingly played an ineligible player, was not so fortunate. JaRon Rush took payments and even a car from Piggie before he donned the UCLA jersey, and the NCAA forced the school to return funds.

Although Duke is the fortuitous beneficiary, the change is long overdue. Universities can only look into a player's record so much prior to matriculation, and sometimes players such as Maggette and Rush will slip through the cracks. Punishing schools which have genuinely attempted to investigate a player's background, on the same par as those schools that have not, discourages good intentions.

As long as the NCAA operates under its current system of amateurism, it should not allow players who have received payments and gifts at any time to retain their eligibility. At the same time, the NCAA must provide a set of standards of how much inquiry schools should make so as to protect themselves from these later discoveries. Those schools that make the concerted effort should be rewarded for their ethics while those that turn a blind eye should face penalties.

While some can fault the environment that many athletes come from, these individuals are the ones who ultimately choose to forfeit their amateur status. Rush may be able to claim ignorance about the money, but receipt of a car stretches credibility to a snapping point.

The NCAA has good reason to declare these players ineligible as it emphasizes amateur competition. Penalizing well-meaning schools for athletes' pre-college behavior, however, creates an unfair playing environment that is unhealthy for basketball and collegiate athletics overall.