Mosquera-Perea, Jurkin lose appeal

The NCAA ruled against Hanner Mosquera-Perea and Peter Jurkin and the two Indiana freshmen big men have lost their appeal to have their nine game suspensions reduced. The organization’s explanation from its website is linked here and quoted below.

Indiana University freshmen student-athletes Peter Jurkin and Hanner Perea must miss nine games, according to an appeal decision announced today by the NCAA Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement. Jurkin and Perea have already sat out five games and must miss four more games before being eligible to compete again.

According to the facts of the case, which were agreed upon by the university, Jurkin and Perea accepted approximately $6,000 and $8,000, respectively, in impermissible benefits from an Indiana University booster. The recruiting inducements were provided on multiple occasions during the student-athletes’ recruitment, and included plane tickets, meals, housing, a laptop, cell phone and clothing.

While a $185 donation to the university may have triggered the booster’s status, recent interactions reinforce his unique access and continuous involvement with the men’s basketball program.

Specifically, he signed financial aid documents required for two former Indiana University basketball student-athletes in 2008 and 2010. Further, Jurkin and Perea lived with the booster in Bloomington, Ind., during multiple summers. Indiana University also provided the booster, who is a nonscholastic coach, with complimentary men’s basketball tickets. The booster had enough access to the program that the university has suspended the relationship until July 1, 2013 as a corrective response.

On a number of occasions during the regular review of its rules, NCAA members have continually stressed that the unfair recruiting advantages that come from booster involvement should not be acceptable in college athletics. Further, the 2011 NCAA Presidential Retreat participants emphasized the need for increased accountability and integrity in several aspects of college sports, including the involvement of boosters with prospective student-athletes.

Reinstatement decisions are made based on withholding guidelines developed by the reinstatement committee of NCAA members, as well as any mitigating factors presented by the university. The staff and committee consider a number of factors, including the total amount of benefits received, the nature and type of violations, and whether a booster provided the benefits, among others. The staff provided a significant reduction in the amount of repayment due to the mitigation presented. Perea and Jurkin will be required to pay $250 and approximately $1,590, respectively, to charities of their choice. Indiana did not appeal the repayment requirement.

The reinstatement committee is the final appeal opportunity. The independent committee is composed of representatives from NCAA member colleges, universities and athletic conferences. It can reduce or remove the conditions, but cannot increase the conditions imposed by the staff.

Share the Scoop!


  • Ron says:


  • Big E says:

    Silly. 1/3 of the season- pffft. The NCAA loses their little credibility with idiocy like this.

  • Laffy says:

    The NCAA sucks dog doo doo.

  • Chet says:

    There’s no there there.

  • DD says:

    All of this malarkey still hinges around the fact that Adams was deemed a “booster” over $185 worth of bumper stickers purchased by his ex-wife 20 years ago.

    Meanwhile, Shabazz Muhammad is now playing for UCLA. What the ever-loving heck?

  • Debbie says:

    From the NCAA release: Specifically, he signed financial aid documents required for two former Indiana University basketball student-athletes in 2008 and 2010. Further, Jurkin and Perea lived with the booster in Bloomington, Ind., during multiple summers. Indiana University also provided the booster, who is a nonscholastic coach, with complimentary men’s basketball tickets.

    2008 & 2010. This no longer is a situation where we worry about $185 from 20+ yrs ago. His constant involvement, including free tickets, happened under Crean’s watch after he took over for a cheater. Crean is no better than any other cheater in college sports. What’s Crean’s penalty in all this? He gets to keep coaching while the innocent kids pay the price for his desire to get IU to the top of the college basketball world. Either he or Glass need to serve some type of punishment for this. It is unacceptable when we were trying to show the NCAA and sports world we are cleaning up the program. Better get the bible out as I’m sure there are a few verses there that justify Crean’s actions.

  • Cutter In Chicago says:

    Worldwide Wes = good
    Mark Adams = bad
    That’s my takeaway.

  • Podunker says:

    Debbie, did you read Fred Glass’s comment? He wrote, “While we are disappointed with the denial, we are even more disappointed in the case summary as communicated by the NCAA public relations staff. This case continues to be about $185 in Varsity Club contributions over 20 years ago, notwithstanding the NCAA National Office’s troubling references to activities that are permissible or would have been permissible but for the minor donations.”

    Fred Glass is an experienced attorney. He’s saying that the NCAA is full of it in how they have characterized the “violation.” I believe Fed Glass before I believe anyone at the self-serving NCAA. If you know anything about the NCAA, you know they are a profoundly corrupt and organization. They’re bullies with no accountability, feckless is preventing or punishing real cheating, so they grandstand on this minor crap. Common sense suggests that if Glass believed that anyone associated with IU was guilty of a violation, he would not have appealed this ridiculous penalty.

    Debbie, I’ll bet you are one of those “blame America first” people, too. Some Hoosier fan you are. Open your eyes!

  • P.Harris says:

    Although I don’t believe any wrong doing was done I hope Crean stays away from Adams “kids” in the future!

  • Old Sports Dude says:

    Okay folks the Dude could make lots of comments all valid on what a crappy organization the NCAA is and how they ignore Kentucky in BB and Alabama in FB what they do. But rather than usually conventional warfare which could take years as Otter said in Animal House let’s go nuclear. Here is the NCAA address and phone number. Do with it what you want but calls and letters would be good.

    NCAA Headquarters
    Address: 700 West Washington Street, Indianapolis, IN 46204
    Phone: (317) 916-4255

    I HATE them! IU self reports and they do this crap. UCLA did not report their player and he gets 2 games. Just like when they suspended Alford for posing for a charity calendar right before we played UK.

  • Rico Chet says:

    Continue to think for yourself, Debbie. Podunker comes from straight Animal Farm, along with Chet and their dog, Laffy. Ignore them, they’re being paid for their propaganda.

  • TsaoTsuG says:

    Old Sports Dude (and I do enjoy your contributions…especially your take on life). To be frank, I don’t give a r.a. about Kentucky and UCLA (I agree and throw in USC and Miami for good measure). If anything, their cheating shows some thought, ours shows incompetent cheaters who make it up as they go along.

    DD- Why are we ‘hedging’ between ‘discovered’ and ‘Adam’s self reporting’? Same thing, in fact now I would want to know if Adams was already in negotiations to go to Iowa. (Logical question at this point). Did we already know this when we hired Adams? I’d feel better if we ‘uncovered’ it.

  • I think you’re messing up the timeline here. Drew Adams is Mark’s son, and he’s not at Iowa, he’s at New Mexico. His presence on the staff doesn’t have anything tangible to do with the case, though his presence within the program may have made the NCAA more leery. Whether Drew was or was not coaching at Indiana, the penalty and the violations would be the same. My point being is, it’s not like Adams was trying to hide the fact that he was a booster. He was attempting to lay it all out there, show the NCAA everything about how his foundation worked. He revealed all of the pertinent information and went out of his way to make sure the NCAA and Indiana were aware of everything he was doing and trying to find out if it would all be considered permissible. One staffer failed to communicate a critical part of the information. Which is a violation and an admitted one that was self-reported as soon as the staffer later volunteered the information.
    What I’m saying is that this does not appear to be a collaborative orchestrated effort to cover up critical information to the case. It appears that one cog in the machine failed to do its job and when it was found that said cog failed, efforts to report its failing began immediately.

  • TsaoTsuG says:

    Sorry, you’re right…I meant New Mexico. As to the rest. it’s more than a cog…it’s dominoes falling. The assistant a.d. for compliance failed to report it beyond the Sr. assistant a.d. for (compliance,etc) and it remained buried until Adams revealed it himself to the NCAA when they were reviewing status…… Sounds like a Chicago political story. ‘don’t send us nobody, nobody sent’.

    We can’t possibly stand on ‘we didn’t do nuthin’.

    Thanks for the links.

  • Chet says:

    Talk about looking for something that isn’t there.

    Thanks for the info Dustin. All of this conspiracy theory stuff is laughable. Are you sure the resident 12-year-old isn’t using some other folks screen names?

  • Really, if we’re using dominoes as the metaphor, it’s that one domino refused to fall and therefore screwed up the chain reaction.
    Adams was in a series of meetings with the NCAA and Indiana compliance to discuss the works of his foundation and the benefits he was giving players, which were, mostly, essentials in their travel to the United States. He in formed this particular Indiana compliance official about his donations, but Adams himself wasn’t aware of how critical that information was and was not aware it made him a booste so he did not make a point to tell others. The compliance official in question sat on that information for three years, and then, at random, volunteered it to his superiors, who then reported his failure to disclose that information previously as a secondary violation.
    It wasn’t so much buried as one guy swallowed it and then randomly burped it up one day.

  • TsaoTsuG says:

    Dustin, Chet…what you say here is likely. A violation of some significance none the less and not about $185 worth of Varsity Club contributions but of nearly $15,000 based on that ‘burp’. It really saddens me and it infuriates me. Glad the IU officials thought, wherever it falls we have to report. But (and I stand behind every word I wrote Chet trying to dig this to the relevant facts) we brought this on ourselves. UCLA, USC, Tennessee,U.of Miami get caught for cheating, we get caught for being rubes. Bothers me for the two players. I’ll reserve judgment on Adams, and beg we have someone who knows what the h___ we are doing. There’s too much likelihood of these things repeating as long as the Office of Intercollegiate Athletics remain aloof and opaque.

    If you still have doubts, Dustin can give you (and only you) my personal email address.

  • Tsao.
    Agreed that IU is clearly and admittedly at fault. As Glass said “We screwed up.” My suggestion is simply that this was not an orchestrated cover-up. Obviously, the NCAA doesn’t consider this a “major” violation, but it is a significant secondary violation, which sounds about right.
    One thing I’ve found interesting here. I’d say based on precedent, the suspensions should probably be shorter, but the Hoosiers should have actually had to vacate every game they played with Tijan Jobe on the roster. Of course, there aren’t a lot of wins in that period, which probably has a lot to do with the reason the NCAA hasn’t bothered to move to do that.

  • TsaoTsuG says:

    We agree on that Dustin. Not once the current administration of athletics seems to have figured it out and figured out we would be in some deep doo-doo if we tried to have the facts as they were remain under the rug.

    I do hope IU Athletics learns from this, runs a more transparent shop, remains open to journalists and stop trying to play the ‘no comment’ game because it always come back to haunt. And, I hope at some point you find the time (good luck!) to sit with Fred Glass (who does eem responsible and accountable) and discuss a different tack in their ‘public information’ function which seems closer to the Defense Department’s ‘classified’ section than a public University. Nobody should have to pull it out of them one word per day.

    Thanks fir reviewing it all.

  • Geoff says:

    Tsao – why are YOU fixated on the $15000? How many times does the report need to state that the benefits were otherwise permissible? The only thing that matters is the $185… It’s what make Adams a “booster” and the benefits impermissible.

    The easiest way to prove this is to see the similar benefits that other A-Hope kids received, without penalty, because Adams was not a “booster” of the schools they accepted scholarships from.

    This is black and white and printed all over. Glass says it, the NCAA says it, everyone says it…

  • hiensohn says:

    Typical,we report,get punished SEVERELY.Conclusion,don’t contact them ,stonewall,deny,make that pitiful body investigate.Give them nothing.If they can’t stop kentucky from wholesale cheating right under their noses,why assume they can find anything on their own?I wouldn’t answer the phone if they called.Attack them in the press and stop cooperating.There is simply no benefit to trying to be an honest citizen.They are playing games,why shouldn’t we?

  • TsaoTsuG says:

    No Geoff. The $185 is the donation that was given over a number of years and made Adams a ‘booster/representative of the athletic interests of Indiana University. The actual amount contributed to Mosquera-Perea and Jurkin was 8000+ and $6000 plus which became ‘illegal contribution’ the minute the NCAA started seeing Adams as an IU booster. Somehow, they determined a lesser amount to be paid back based on something (I’m not privy to the formula), but I believe it’s based on a subset of the $1400 (total for the two) and not the $185.

    Look, I know you like to think of yourself as rational, analytical and a fountain of information. But you react to inputs out of likes and dislikes, anger with circumstances like bad calls, ‘the ref stole the game’, and often selective choice of data/numbers where it does appear to me you think up your conclusion and choose the set which supports your argument to your conclusion afterwards. Fine, do it Geoff…, I have a hard time with it.

    I’m a huge IU fan, get distressed when stuff like this happens but, I try to admit to myself facts and events and work them into my thoughts about Indiana. As an alumni it’s important we keep IU above any reproach.

    So, in essence, it is exactly your take on issues such as this and the manipulation of some facts to fit the argument that has eroded whatever I may have thought may have been of value about your attempts to be serious in your approach. Look, I’m sorry it turn out like that…but it does. Enjoy the season.

  • Chet says:

    Your guys discussion sounds like a story of 2 guys driving a borrowed car. They got pulled over for going 11 mph over the speed limit. Upon searching the car it turns out it’s owner stashed a pound of pot under the seats that they didn’t know about.

    Now, you guys are trying to decide if they should be held responsible for the speeding or the pound of pot.

    As we are the parking lot (whose attendant alerted the police to the pot), what the hell does it matter?

  • Geoff says:

    Tsao – would either player have been suspended or have to repay any money had they gone to Purdue?

    The answer is no.

    Therefore the issue isn’t the benefits.

    The issue is the $185.

    That is flawless logic. It took 4 simple sentences. I’m not churning facts to make a whipped up theory for you here. I haven’t seen a single published write-up on this that disagrees with me….

  • Geoff says:

    Well, Chet… The pound of pot would bring much bigger consequences…

    More of what this comes down to for me is – there is, by the letter of a stupid law, an issue in this recruitment. If the NCAA wants to hold IU and Adams responsible, with appropriately measured sanctions, and then change the rules so there is a donation-floor and/or a statute of limitations on donations that would have been an acceptable response in my eyes. But to give minor slaps on the wrist to IU and Adams, while giving the harshest penalties to the 2 kids is unforgivable to me. These kids are innocent, but get they are the ones who must pay… Brutal.

    The wide open hypocrisy of the UCLA case, and the failure to do the right thing upon appeal, only exacerbates my frustration… Or I would have dropped this a week ago.

    Sorry to put everyone through this with me. I’ll stop now.

Comments are closed.


Hoosier Sports Report is live!

Scoop Poll:

How many games will IU football win in 2016?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Find Notre Dame football coverage on © Hoosier Times Inc., all rights reserved.