Count on Mike DeCourcy of the Sporting News to know about all of this.

The Panthers played 27 regular-season games–nine non-conference, 18 in the Big East season. They competed in the Big East tournament, which counted as one game because any team could be eliminated the first day. They played four early games in the Hispanic College Fund Basketball Challenge, which counted as two under NCAA rules for multi-team events. The Panthers’ NCAA Tournament appearances does not factor in; postseason doesn’t count because there’s no expectation a team will make it. So as permitted by the organization’s rules, Pitt’s schedule officially consisted of 30 games last season.

If you count Cook as having played 11 games, he is not eligible for the waiver. Indeed, he took the court 11 times. There’s no disputing that. He played a full complement of minutes in every one of those games.

However, it seems curious for the rules to be different for a team and a player in terms of how the games are calculated. If those four games in the Hispanic College Fund tournament counted only as two on Cook’s record–as they did for Pitt to meet NCAA scheduling rules–he officially would have played nine games last season. He’d be at exactly 30 percent and eligible for the waiver.

That case was made to the reinstatement committee nearly two months ago. Its members apparently thought hard about this, because they did not issue an answer for quite a while. But they still said no.

“They say, ‘There may be merit to your case, but we can’t do anything about it,’ ” Dixon said.

The university was told it could attempt to change the rule through the NCAA’s legislative process.

Of course, by the time a new rule could be adopted, Mike Cook’s grandkids would be D-I prospects.

If the committee had wanted to be just, it could have essentially rewritten the rule by issuing a precedent-setting decision. Instead, the committee chose expedience.

Got that?

Two different calculations, one screw over.

Cook had never taken a redshirt — medical or otherwise. He sat out one year under NCAA rules for transfers — he was not eligible to play. While getting a 6th year is rare, it would only have been a 5th year of actual eligibility. That’s one of the key differentials between the Ben Mauk case at Cinci and Mike Cook’s.

Crap. Crap. Crap. Crap.

University of Pittsburgh head men’s basketball coach Jamie Dixon announced Wednesday that senior forward Mike Cook has been denied an additional year of competition from the National Collegiate Athletic Association.

In order to be considered for a sixth year extension, Cook would have needed to obtain a medical hardship waiver for his participation during the 2007-08 year. NCAA rules state that to be eligible for a medical hardship, a student-athlete must participate in no more than 30 percent of the team’s regular season games in order to guarantee an extra year of athletic eligibility. Even though Pitt played 37 total games including six postseason games, NCAA rules only allow postseason contests to be counted as one game when determining total number of games played. Since Cook played in 34 percent of Pitt’s games, Pitt filed an appeal with the NCAA to grant him an additional season of competition, as well as a sixth year after the hardship waiver was denied by the conference. The appeal was denied by the NCAA Division I Student-Athlete Reinstatement Committee, comprised of faculty members and conference and athletic administrators.

One game. If it had been the 10th game when he got hurt — he’s getting another year. If it had been in game 12, not at all in dispute and there isn’t even an appeal. But right in the middle. Realistically Pitt played 37 games. For counting purposes a conference tournament and the NCAA Tournament get lumped as one single game. The numbers were uncomfortable.

In the end they fell back on, “a rule, is a rule, is a rule.” Why? Damned if I know. I do know whatever the letter of the rule, the spirit just got dumped on like John Edwards in a cancer survivors chatroom.

“Situations like this are hard to take when you know how dedicated Mike’s life has been to playing basketball,” Pitt Basketball Coach Jamie Dixon said. “Over the last three years, Mike has contributed significantly to our success both on and off the floor and has been an important member of our basketball family. When I asked Mike why he wanted to come to Pitt, he simply said he ‘wanted to win’. And he has won, going 40-8 as a starter. He has grown into a leader and has become an outstanding example for the younger players in our program. Mike has earned his degree and will have the opportunity to continue his career professionally when he returns to the floor.”

He did indeed. He left East Carolina where he was the man, but the rest of the team sucked. He had to do everything. He could have padded his stats and likely looked a lot better to NBA scouts. He came to Pitt and became part of a team. A family. He gave up a lot more chances to score. Embraced defense and — I hate this, it’s like a frickin’ eulogy.

I’m just really pissed about this.

Look, by all accounts Cook’s rehab is going a bit slower than expected. This was a brutal injury for a wing player. In all probability it will take him another 6 months — at least — before he can approximate where he was before the injury. He would have been a great presence and leader for the team, but his contributions would not have been as big. This wasn’t about how much better Pitt could have been with him. I think that was overstated.

It’s about the NCAA, once more, talking about how it is about the student-athlete. That it’s about the kids, and then falling back to hidebound rules when convenient and screw the kids.

One thing in the Pitt press release, though, did make me feel good.

Cook graduated from Pitt this spring with a communications degree and has spent the summer rehabbing his injury and preparing to action. The university will provide Cook an opportunity to remain in Pittsburgh as he takes additional classes and continues his rehabilitation.

That’s how you treat the student athletes.

Cook will at least have the time to really rehab. To really get better. All the while getting more education and prepared for the future. Even if in the short term, it’s just about basketball.

In an interview last month, Cook sounded ready to move on.

“As long as I can play basketball, that’s the most important thing to me,” he said. “If it’s not here, then I have to work for it to be somewhere else.”

One of the things I never quite grasped was the mocking Coach Wannstedt came in for at the end of his first year back at Pitt. The debacle that was the Backyard Brawl that year had a sideline interview at the half asking what Pitt needed to do to get back in the game. “Get faster,” was Wannstedt’s response.

For some reason, many on the outside saw this as an indication of Wannstedt’s overall cluelessness about the game. I think most Pitt fans recognized that Wannstedt was not talking about the game in particular at that point. The game, that was already out of hand — and with H.B. Blades injured — not going to get better. What he was talking about was the program and team — but specifically the defense — needed a lot more speed.

Whether it was to contend with the proliferating spread offense. Or just the way college football was becoming. Oddly, within a year of that statement there began the whole meme about the speed in the SEC and the plodding, slow athletes in the Big 11. Conflicting styles and speed was winning nearly every argument.

Whether it was Wannstedt recognizing the trend or just because his defensive philosophy has always been about generating speed on defense it probably doesn’t matter. Pitt’s defense was anything but in the first couple years.

Last year Pitt began showing it, but the lack of depth and execution was glaring. Especially the mindset and execution. The Navy game was the worst demonstration of the problems with the execution and a defensive braintrust that just could not seem to understand where to adjust against Navy’s triple option.

The theory that Wannstedt effectively took control of the defense from DC Paul Rhoads after the Navy game is still just that. It’s an attractive one. Don’t get me wrong. As a long-time member of the anti-Rhoads base, I find it very appealing and believable. It’s unlikely, however, that we’ll ever know. And really, all that matters is that Rhoads is gone.

Keep in mind, however, that 10 days later, Pitt still gave up over 350 yards in offense. 3 Cinci turnovers in the 4th quarter were the reason Pitt was able to take the lead and hold on to the win. The point being, the defense remained inconsistent and prone to giving up big plays and yardage even if it was statistically strong.

I was thinking about the speed on defense for the past week after this article on “tweeners” and moving kids one spot back on defense.

And those “tweeners” — like safety Elijah Fields, who is 6 feet 2, 225 pounds and runs the 40-yard dash in less than 4.5 seconds, or defensive end Jabaal Sheard, who is 6 feet 4, 250 pounds and runs the 40 in about 4.7 seconds, are the type of players every defensive coach covets.

“Offenses have gotten smart, and they are putting more skill-position players out there and making you cover them all,” Bennett said. “It has completely changed the way we have to recruit.

“Now, we’ve got to find those what I call hybrid players to play linebacker — kids who are smart and who are fast and maybe played other positions in high school.”

Bennett said the spread offense is the “passing version of the wishbone” because the concepts are pretty much the same: The offense spreads the defense out and reacts to where the numbers favor the offense. If there are five defensive players in the box, the offense will likely run the ball. If the defense decides to put a sixth or seventh player into the box, the offense will react with a pass.

The concept of putting “hybrid” players on the defensive side of the ball is not new, especially not to Pitt coach Dave Wannstedt, who has been building defenses this way for nearly his entire career.

It’s all about creating exploitable mismatches whether on the offensive or defensive side of the ball.

As for Elijah Fields, specifically, he has an incredible opportunity before him. The NFL has been evolving in its own way. Fields is in a system, paired with his own ability that will get him to the pros. Especially as a safety in today’s game.

The safety position is evolving to match increasingly complex playbooks, personnel packages and presnap adjustments. Versatility—not size—is the key. Today’s top safeties (think Ed Reed and Bob Sanders) have to match up with freakishly athletic tight ends and barracuda-quick slot receivers while still providing run support and zapping receivers on crossing routes.

Coaches can mask some of the deficiencies of a pass-challenged safety with Cover 2 schemes, but that pulls an enforcer off the line of scrimmage. The Cover 3 is an alternative, but not every DB is comfortable in zone, where spacing and discipline require constant vigilance. Plus, spread sets, motion, no-huddle and playaction still can create (or mimic) scenarios that force a safety to match up one-on-one with a slot receiver or downfield burner. And with refs throwing illegal-contact flags more than ever, there’s no margin for error.

He seems to be catching on the big picture of his future. I hope he gets how close it actually is.