Busting Brackets
Fansided

Kansas Basketball: Impact of Silvio De Sousa’s major suspension

OMAHA, NE - MARCH 25: Silvio De Sousa #22 of the Kansas Jayhawks celebrates cutting down the net after defeating the Duke Blue Devils with a score of 81 to 85 in the 2018 NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament Midwest Regional at CenturyLink Center on March 25, 2018 in Omaha, Nebraska. (Photo by Jamie Squire/Getty Images)
OMAHA, NE - MARCH 25: Silvio De Sousa #22 of the Kansas Jayhawks celebrates cutting down the net after defeating the Duke Blue Devils with a score of 81 to 85 in the 2018 NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament Midwest Regional at CenturyLink Center on March 25, 2018 in Omaha, Nebraska. (Photo by Jamie Squire/Getty Images) /
facebooktwitterreddit
Prev
2 of 3
Next
SAN ANTONIO, TX – MARCH 31: Silvio De Sousa #22 of the Kansas Jayhawks reacts after being defeated by the Villanova Wildcats during the 2018 NCAA Men’s Final Four Semifinal at the Alamodome on March 31, 2018 in San Antonio, Texas. Villanova defeated Kansas 95-79. (Photo by Tom Pennington/Getty Images)
SAN ANTONIO, TX – MARCH 31: Silvio De Sousa #22 of the Kansas Jayhawks reacts after being defeated by the Villanova Wildcats during the 2018 NCAA Men’s Final Four Semifinal at the Alamodome on March 31, 2018 in San Antonio, Texas. Villanova defeated Kansas 95-79. (Photo by Tom Pennington/Getty Images) /

Breaking down the Decision

As the governing body of college athletics, the NCAA can rule how they see fit in rules of eligibility and ineligibility. The problem everyone has with that, is the NCAA does not seem to have any rhyme or reason as to how they determine the proper punishment for a player or a university. This case was more of the same. De Sousa had no knowledge of the payment that his guardian received and because of that he was told he would have to sit out two full years of competition.

The story for the Angolan big man has played out the same way many times before; a talented player comes from foreign country. Shows he can play basketball, a handler who is looking for some quick cash and recognition takes the player under his wing and advises them as to where to go to school. These types of things never usually end well and it is all at the expense of the exploited player.

It is understandable why the NCAA reacted the way they chose to. Even though De Sousa didn’t know his guardian accepted money on his behalf. If the competition committee of the NCAA did not set a precedent that this would not be tolerated, every kid would claim they did not know about the payments. That would create a bigger problem for the NCAA and for college basketball. So, while the decision to bar De Sousa from competition for two years may be unfair. It is understandable why the NCAA decided to bar him.

What is not understandable is how the NCAA came up with the decision to punish the player for two years. This is the longest punishment for this violation, and it came out of nowhere. The consistency of the NCAA and their decisions leave a lot to be desired and most times the punishments do not fit the crime or make any sense. While the NCAA was busy punishing a player who did nothing wrong, the coaches and interested parties remain untouched and able to coach their respective teams. Both parties should be punished equally. Until the NCAA starts doing that, everyone is going to look to take advantage of every loophole they can find. Coaches and players included.