The Duke mythology that has continued to shield Tommy Amaker’s reputation and coaching career was dented further by allegations of questionable recruiting practices at his latest stop in Cambridge.
Like his mentor whose success formula is unduly dependent on McDonald’s All-American level recruitment, Amaker’s hunger for top drawer players may have him on the receiving end of the NCAA’s scrutiny, if not penalty. While it remains to be seen whether Amaker’s trouble evolves into a Sampsonesque fall from grace, it goes a long way towards finally obliterating the false notion of him as an exemplar of class, propriety, and student-athleticism.
Of course, when one considers the NCAA’s reporting on academic performance, none of this should come as a particular surprise. Coach K’s 67% graduation rate and Amaker’s 57% rate at Michigan do not jibe with the PR of them as leaders of programs where academics are prioritized beyond a minimal lip service.
Myths Debunked
What the latest allegations do confirm is that Amaker, like the coach who developed him, depends on a recruiting strategy where getting elite talent is more important than upholding the academic standards of the host institution. And as the latest scenario at Harvard suggests, that it may be worth breaking NCAA rules to gain a recruiting advantage.
While lowering admissions’ standards for athletes is hardly breaking news for the system at large, that Amaker and Coach K have for so long luxuriated in the perception of being peerless models of books and ball, the level of hypocrisy is striking. It goes without saying that Duke and now apparently Harvard are complicit, institutions willing to harbor basketball programs that are dramatically incongruous to the general student body from an academic standpoint.
Poor Comparisons
Those who continue to make comparisons between Duke, Stanford and schools like Vanderbilt and Northwestern overlook the obvious differences. While the former two have decided that winning is worth supporting a severe double-standard for admissions, the other schools have not been so willing. Like Duke, Stanford’s 67% basketball graduation rate is indicative of the depressing underbelly to the program’s success.
Vanderbilt’s 83% and Northwestern’s 89% rates suggest a different approach, one that Vanderbilt is proving can also achieve pretty good winning percentages. The climb is much steeper and the twenty win seasons less frequent, but success at such schools, when it does occur, has much greater meaning.
Recruiter First, Coach Last
Perhaps even more unfortunate is that Harvard hired and has apparently decided to enable a coach who, even with top recruiting classes, has shown little evidence he can coach them to full potential. Even with the short-cuts there is little in his resume to suggest Amaker has the coaching chops to outdo his Ivy League counterparts like Steve Donahue at Cornell or Craig Robinson at Brown.
Yet another wormy apple on the Krzyzewski coaching tree that includes ethically-challenged Quin Snyder and pink-slipped David Henderson, Amaker and his fellow Blue Demon Kenny Blakeney may too be well on their way to rot and descent.
What is becoming readily apparent is that among the most central lessons imparted by Coach K to his acolytes, whether directly or by example, is that blue-chip recruitment should be pursued even when it creates troubling incongruities with the institution.
While Coach K’s epic haul of McDonald’s All-Americans over his tenure has been achieved with Duke’s complicity and Amaker seems to have forged a similar “look the other way” pact with Harvard, the idea that they are sterling examples of winning the right way needs to be categorized for what it is - pure myth.
