The Major Questions in the Jovon Robinson Transcripts Debacle

jovon robinson transcripts

from www.warblogle.com

Earlier today, Kyle Veazey of the Memphis Commercial Appeal broke the news that following an inquiry from the NCAA, a guidance counselor at the high school of Auburn freshman Jovon Robinson resigned after admitting to doctoring Robinson’s transcripts. While it sounds like the story is mostly over for the guidance counselor, it is just starting for the athlete, who expected to get his college career underway later this month.

Robinson’s eligibility and Auburn’s fate rests on three questions. First, how much help did the falsified transcripts give Robinson? Two, what did Robinson know about the counselor’s actions? And three, how involved was Auburn?

How Much Help Were the Transcripts?

Job one for the NCAA, specifically the NCAA Eligibility Center, is to figure out what Robinson’s real grades were and whether he would still have been a qualifier. The assumption is that if there was a fraudulent transcript, it was because he was going to be a nonqualifier. But it could be that Robinson was going to be close and the new transcript made him appear to be a qualifier by a safer margin. Or it could have been falsified to meet admissions standards at Auburn or another school.

Even if Robinson’s true grades leave him a nonqualifier, how short he is would be critical for his chances at an initial eligibility waiver. And depending on the answer to the next question, he may have quite a bit of mitigation.

What Did the Athlete Know?

It might be hard to stomach another Auburn eligibility issue resting on what an athlete knew, but it applies here. The NCAA could end up in one of three places:

• Evidence that Robinson knew or was active in falsifying his transcripts.
• Evidence that Robinson did not know.
• No evidence or inconclusive evidence either way.

The first makes sense. As for the second, it is very difficult, if not impossible, to prove you did not know something. But you can show some evidence. For instance, if Robinson asked his counselor what extra work he should do or suspected he was not going to be eligible and wanted to know what he needed to do to fix the situation. Or if the counselor had told Robinson for a long time that he would be fine.

What Did Auburn Know?

What Auburn knew should not have too much impact on Robinson’s eligibility, unless Auburn was how Robinson knew his transcripts were being falsified. Rather, what Auburn knew or did will mostly impact Auburn.
Pressuring a high school guidance counselor would be a serious charge for the university. It would be almost guaranteed to result in individuals being fired and charged with ethical conduct violations, and would likely be a major violation for Auburn as well. Simply knowing it will happen and allowing it would be almost as bad. But those violations take time to process and are secondary to determining Robinson’s eligibility as soon as possible.

So What Should the NCAA Do?

Robinson’s eligibility is a complex question because there are two issues right now: whether he would have been a qualifier and whether he knew about the guidance counselor’s actions. If Robinson had knowledge of or participated in the academic fraud, that would be an ethical conduct violation with a normal penalty of a one-year suspension and losing a season of competition. If Robinson was also going to be a nonqualifier, that would mean he would need to go the junior college route, be starting with three seasons of eligibility, and maybe need to sit out for a year when he returns to Division I.

If the NCAA does not have evidence that Robinson knew what was going on and he was going to be a qualifier anyway, nothing should happen with his eligibility. If there is no clear evidence either way and Robinson was going to be a nonqualifier, he should just be declared a nonqualifier and would have to leave Auburn unless he can get a waiver.

However if Robinson can show clear evidence he did not know what was going on and was going to be a nonqualifier, that would be strong mitigation and he likely deserves a waiver. Even if he would have been very short, he should get a partial waiver to keep his scholarship and continue practicing with the team, just not be cleared to play this year.

Finally, if Auburn was involved and Robinson was not, he should have the opportunity to leave Auburn. He should not be declared ineligible and forced to leave. Rather, he should be permitted to void his National Letter of Intent, transfer without restriction, and be immediately eligible if he decided to leave Auburn.

Please share your thoughts in the comments section or find us on Twitter, Google+ or Facebook.

College Recruiting process , what actually happens during the college recruiting timeline?

How does a college coach evaluate the athletic  potential of a prospective student-athlete?

International athletes. NCAA Eligibility requirements. Athletic and academic standards.

What steps can I take to improve my chances of getting recruited?

 Home-schooled student-athletes, NCAA eligibility.

 

Posted on by John Infante
This entry was posted in Bylaws, Transfer Rules. Bookmark the permalink.
Join the #1 RECRUITING NETWORK

17 Responses to The Major Questions in the Jovon Robinson Transcripts Debacle

  1. CajunTiger says:

    Very good summary of the options that may play out. Thanks

    • Zeke Pike biznich says:

      They aint gon do sheeeet homie. I gots a new rap song call auburn paid me dat skrilla, then i got kicked out

  2. Dojo says:

    Bammers are behind this BS

    • THT says:

      absolutely correct; if any college is behind this, it is unequivocally ua-t

      • Jason says:

        You idiots…a long time UT booster has been commenting on this for months…he knows Memphis…he is the same one who turned Alabama in. How about this…quit crying about Bama and stop cheating and the NCAA will leave you alone. Morons.

        • GoogleAndreSmith says:

          It must be nice to go for a school that’s allowed to cheat. This is just the latest of many times the NCAA has displayed its double standard concerning Alabama and Auburn. It is obvious that the situations are the same, Robinson didn’t know anymore than Chapman did. Maybe someday the NCAA will start enforcing the rules in Tuscaloosa and we’ll see how much y’all like it

  3. Jconyer says:

    What did the HS counselor do the player’s transcript, when did the counselor committ the fraud, why did the counselor do it, and who are the parties involved that assisted/paid the counselor? These are ALL questions that must be answered

  4. cecil newton says:

    The money was to much

  5. Phishininau says:

    “The money was TOO much” is what you meant to say you uneducated rube. If you are going to be snarky (and coincidentally wrong), then at least use proper spelling. Sidewalk bammer I’m sure.

    • Dwight James says:

      lol @ you DA barner! you used a “fragment” With This>” If you are going to be snarky (and coincidentally wrong), then at least use proper spelling.” Try it this way next time DA. > At least use proper spelling if you are going to be snarky (and coincidentally wrong.) Also what the hell is “snarky” Did you mean SNARLY?
      LOL @ YOU sidewalk barner I’m sure.

      • Patrick Chamberlain says:

        That sentence had a full subject and predicate, you just rearranged the clauses. Do you even know what a sentence fragment is? Here’s an example: [subject???] laughs out loud at you. And by the way, snarky is a word. I’m not too sure about snarly though.

  6. George Schellang, Pensacola FL says:

    Can anyone explain to me how these rules were applied in the Josh Chapman case where the DC at Alabama asked and was granted a grade change after the transcript had been sent to Alabama? He got the grade changed and Alabama submitted the second, falsified transcript to the NCAA. The NCAA ruled “not Chapman’s fault” and granted eligibility even though without the grade change he would have been ineligible. So the university was involved in the change and he would have been ineligible. Why was that not a violation?

    • Jason says:

      I can. Alabama compliance department found the error. They then declared Chapman ineligible and investigated Hoover. Once the investigation was over, they found it was an error on the schools part. All of the info was sent to the NCAA clearinghouse and they cleared him to play. Any other questions? Try to do a little research before trying to deflect everything. You know…when you reach manhood, you learn to accept blame where it is warranted instead of always saying “but he did this and they did that…” You AU morons sound like a bunch of babies crying about what “big brother” does.

      • JC50 says:

        So it should be of no consequence that Chapman was committed to AU, but was told he wouldn’t qualify. So he flips to bama, and magically, a rounding error was found in his grade. And magically, a former bama cheerleader was the one who found the error, not the actual teacher of the class in question. And magically, a bama asst coach called his grades into question. And, again, magically, a coach from Hoover High School lucked out and got a assistant coaching job on saban’s staff. All coincidental, I assume.

  7. WarCrow says:

    Auburn will come through this unscathed. Just look how well they covered up the Scam Newton payoff

    • RealityCheck says:

      Google Andre Smith hypocrite. And stop hating Cam for being good your an Alabama fan for Godsake even if Auburn had cheated you have no room to talk

  8. Smoke Ring says:

    If the purpose is a level playing field, then athlete knowledge should be irrelevant. That would remove the incentive for athletes to stay “willingly blind” as to shenanigans …

Leave a Comment