Indiana's Fishy Player Dismissals Reveal Lack of Accountability In NCAA

When Indiana basketball coach Tom Crean announced that Hanner Mosquera-Perea and Devin Davis had been dismissed from the team Thursday night, his public statement was pure coachspeak.

"Indiana Men's Basketball announces that sophomore Devin Davis and senior Hanner Mosquera-Perea have been dismissed from the program effective immediately for not living up to their responsibilities to the program," the statement read.

"Living up to the responsibilities of the program" is perhaps the most vague description a school could muster for such a strong punishment, and it could encompass any variety of things—academic troubles, drug use, even violence. In this case, however, we have a pretty good idea of what actually happened. Davis was cited—not arrested—for marijuana possession. Mosquera-Perea wasn't even cited. He was simply in the room, or in the vicinity of the demon weed drug.

Crean's fuzziness is by design, because in college sports, programs want to control the narrative—they don't want all the details behind their decision-making in the public eye, left open to interpretation and dissent.

The details in this case—or at least, those that have been made public—don't seem to warrant dismissals. Yes, schools tend to take draconian, middle-aged white man-pleasing approaches to marijuana and alcohol use, despite both being a longtime part of college culture, as well as the culture within college athletics. And yes, Mosquera-Perea and Davis both have prior incidents on their records: Mosquera-Perea had a prior OWI, while Davis's previous run-in with the law essentially involved getting hit by a car (as a pedestrian) driven by one of his teammates after both had been drinking.

That said, two Indiana players—Troy Williams and Stanford Robinson—failed multiple drug tests last fall, yet only received four-game suspensions that were more like two-game suspensions, given that two of the games were exhibition contests.

Why the Roger Goodell-like disciplinary inconsistency? It's hard not to wonder if Mosquera-Perea and Davis are less incorrigible embarrassments to Crean's team than a pair of inconvenient bench bodies, victims of scholarship oversigning. After all, Williams was a star for the Hoosiers and integral to their future success. Mosquera-Perea and Davis are not. Meanwhile, Crean needs an open scholarship as he looks to sign star high school big man Thon Maker—and surprise, two spots just become available.

The timing is favorable for Crean, and one has to wonder if his decision to dismiss Mosquera-Perea and Davis would have been different in different circumstances.

Of course, that's speculation—though speculation that, as the author of the Wells Report might write, is "more probable than not" to have occurred. Indeed, the process in the Deflategate report—as absurd as the actual controversy may be—shows just how unfair the collegiate disciplinary system is.

In the NFL, all of the findings are released, and no entity can give a one-paragraph explanation that explains nothing. Unlike in virtually every judicial or quasi-judicial system in the free world, there is no accountability for Indiana, no requirement to explain the inconsistencies in punishments of its players—inconsistencies that, in a more fair and adversarial system, player lawyers could and would have a chance to assail.

This kind of power is what drives college athletics and keeps potential mistreatment of athletes under the radar. There is no requirement for additional explanation, there is no real appeal with legal representation and there is no accountability for such blatant inconsistencies in team policy.

Instead, Davis loses his scholarship over a marijuana citation and Mosquera-Perea loses his over, well, pretty much nothing. Davis loses structured medical care for his injuries, while Mosquera-Perea loses a familiar atmosphere after coming to the United States from Colombia to play basketball.

Indiana gets two open scholarships. And the Hoosiers will never have to give a full explanation for why it happened.