Missouri Tigers step eyes wide into sanctions

COLUMBIA, MISSOURI - JANUARY 08: Head coach Cuonzo Martin reacts as he cheers for his team against the Tennessee Volunteers of the Missouri Tigers in the first half at Mizzou Arena on January 08, 2019 in Columbia, Missouri. (Photo by Ed Zurga/Getty Images)
COLUMBIA, MISSOURI - JANUARY 08: Head coach Cuonzo Martin reacts as he cheers for his team against the Tennessee Volunteers of the Missouri Tigers in the first half at Mizzou Arena on January 08, 2019 in Columbia, Missouri. (Photo by Ed Zurga/Getty Images) /
facebooktwitterreddit
Prev
3 of 4
Next
Missouri Tigers players celebrate with fans following a 38-17 victory over the Florida Gators at Ben Hill Griffin Stadium on November 3, 2018 in Gainesville, Florida.
GAINESVILLE, FL – NOVEMBER 03: Missouri Tigers players celebrate with fans following a 38-17 victory over the Florida Gators at Ben Hill Griffin Stadium on November 3, 2018 in Gainesville, Florida. (Photo by Sam Greenwood/Getty Images) /

Rogue tutor

Locals called the whistle blowing math tutor that brought the NCAA down on the Missouri Tigers “attention-craving”, and “rogue.”

Maybe, but there is every indication the tutor conducted herself not as a rogue employee of the University of Missouri, but exactly as her supervisors wanted.

Not so winding road

The story begins in 2015 when a math tutor faced financial difficulties and, after a request for advanced pay, was instead granted a salary increase. She was shortly assigned a student athlete to tutor and informed by an academic coordinator that the student would be off campus, but needed to complete work to graduate. This was the first of Missouri’s mistakes.

Un-typically, this academic coordinator interacted directly with a tutor on behalf of an athlete. By doing so, the academic coordinator gives the appearance of exploiting this math tutor’s particular financial difficulties to get inappropriate help for the athlete.

The math tutor, already under financial strain, added two and two and came up with the obvious answer – she received a raise and was then expected to deliver a passing grade. She did that by doing the athlete’s work for him. She then did the same for other student athletes.