[Stardust]

I know the NCAA didn't have anything to do with the appeals committee. But when the appeals committee upheld the original ruling they said it was because the facts have never changed. They said in the original ruling, Kanter accepted benefits and that was what made him ineligible. Not that he took 33 thousand but just that he took something. So thats my argument.

Barnhardt has been furious with the decision and has voiced it openly. As has Lee Todd and Calipari who keeps questioning the justice in the ruling.

Dead-on, and I agree that the benefits comparison to what other athletes who have not been penalized was the opportunity. The Appeals committee was correct in finding that the $33K was in the original findings from the NCAA, but the committee had the right to say that this was in line with the recent rulings with Cam and Selby, thus they could have overturned the NCAA's "Reasoning". That was in their right to do. I'd expect that Barnhart will be a very disgruntled member of that committee going forward.