Hoop Thoughts Exclusive: Kansas will ask NCAA to reinstate Silvio De Sousa
Seth Davis / The ATHLETIC
Last October, Kansas announced that it was withholding 6-foot-9 sophomore forward Silvio De Sousa from competition pending an eligibility review. The decision came in the wake of a federal trial in New York City that resulted in three convictions, during which T.J. Gassnola, a consultant for Adidas and a cooperating witness for the prosecution, testified he had paid $2,500 to De Sousa’s guardian. Given the explosive nature of the allegation, the broad scope of the FBI investigation into college basketball and Kansas’ various ties to the case, many people assumed that De Sousa would never play for the Jayhawks again, and certainly not this season.
That assumption is about to be challenged. Multiple sources have confirmed to The Athletic that Kansas is preparing to formally acknowledge to the NCAA that a violation took place, declare De Sousa ineligible and ask for his immediate reinstatement. The request is expected to be submitted to the NCAA’s Academic and Membership Affairs Group as early as this week. Over the last three months, Kansas has been working directly with members of the NCAA’s enforcement division to investigate the matter and agree upon a set of facts. There is no guarantee the NCAA will accede to Kansas’ wishes, and there is no standard for how long the NCAA must take to render a decision. However, the anticipated step raises the possibility that De Sousa could play for the Jayhawks this season.
According to the NCAA’s matrix regarding infractions, an improper payment of $2,500 most likely would yield a penalty that the player is suspended for 30 percent of the team’s season. Kansas has played 16 games, which means De Sousa has already exceeded that timeline. The school’s request for his immediate reinstatement will be based on the fact that De Sousa has already served the required suspension and then some.
It is hard to predict how the NCAA will rule on such matters, but the school’s confidence in its ability to gain De Sousa’s eligibility is reflected in its decision to allow him to remain enrolled and a member of the team. De Sousa has been attending classes and practicing all season. He sits on the bench in street clothes at all of Kansas’ games, both home and away. That stands in contrast to the way the school handled the case of Billy Preston, a 6-10 freshman on last year’s team. Preston was withheld from competition before the season opener because of questions surrounding an automobile he had been driving. When KU looked into the matter, it became apparent that Preston was going to have a hard time becoming eligible. He left school in January 2018 to play professionally in Europe.
The request for reinstatement will be Kansas’ first official acknowledgment that a violation with respect to De Sousa took place. If the school had determined that nothing wrong happened, then it could play De Sousa without needing permission. That has been the tack taken by several schools whose players have been linked to the FBI investigation, either through court proceedings or media reports.
During the trial in New York, Gassnola testified he gave the money to De Sousa’s guardian, Fenny Falmagne, in order to help pay for online classes that would enable De Sousa to enroll at Kansas for the second semester. Falmagne has publicly denied accepting any money. Gassnola said during the trial he originally had offered $20,000, which supposedly would help Falmagne reimburse a Maryland booster who allegedly had given Falmagne $60,000. I’ve been told that Maryland and the NCAA have looked into that allegation and found no evidence that such a payment took place.
Last August, the NCAA passed legislation allowing it to use information obtained by outside sources, such as a court proceeding, in its own investigations. After the October trial, the NCAA received permission from prosecutors in the Southern District of New York to follow up on some of the courtroom revelations, but in order to penalize a school or a player, the NCAA needs corroborating evidence that the testimony given at the trial was true.
Even if De Sousa is reinstated, that does not mean the NCAA is through with Kansas in regard to his case. Since the alleged payment was made before De Sousa enrolled at Kansas, the NCAA’s Committee of Infractions could determine that he was ineligible before serving his suspension this season. Often times, that leads to a finding that a school must forfeit the games in which the player competed. In this case, that would mean Kansas could be forced to vacate its appearance at the 2018 Final Four. If Kansas and the NCAA agree this violation occurred, that sanction could be levied without any further investigation.
Though Gassnola allegedly paid the money to De Sousa’s guardian without the player’s knowledge, he would still face a penalty because of the so-called “Cam Newton rule,” which was passed in 2012 and identifies a member of a player’s family as a de facto agent. Another complicating factor is the question of how the NCAA will categorize Gassnola and Adidas in general. If they are defined as agents and/or representatives of the school’s interests (e.g. boosters), that could warrant stiffer penalties.
If De Sousa does return for Kansas, it would come at a propitious time. The Jayhawks just lost their starting center, 7-foot junior Udoka Azubuike, to a season-ending wrist injury. Their win at Baylor on Saturday improved their Big 12 record to 2-1, leaving them a game behind Texas Tech in the league standings. Kansas has won or shared 14 consecutive Big 12 regular-season titles, and though it would presumably take some time for De Sousa to sharpen his skills and get into game condition, he would significantly fortify the Jayhawks’ frontcourt depth and bolster their chances to extend that streak.
