Welcome to The Holy Land of Hoops

Beware Cleveland State!!!

What a joke. Louisville "gets off" with running a whorehouse in the dorms, servicing 17 recruits and players, and 2 AAU coaches. No penalty for Louisville. Pitino might get a few games' suspension. Otherwise another NCAA joke.

So remember, Big East fans, no problem if you want to organize a brothel service on campus, the NCAA doesn't mind. Meanwhile, UNC is running out the clock on their 25 years of fake classes... Tarheels kneeling on the ball, clock ticking down, their "opponents" have no more timeouts.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... ll-program

"Hall of Fame coach Rick Pitino has been charged with failing to monitor a staff member in his basketball program, but Louisville otherwise escaped potentially serious penalties stemming from an NCAA investigation into allegations made by a former escort.

The NCAA's notice of allegations, released Thursday, includes four Level I charges, with one to Pitino, two directed at former director of basketball operations Andre McGee and the fourth aimed at former assistant Brandon Williams. The university was not charged with any violations, such as a lack of institutional control or failure to monitor, the two most egregious NCAA infractions."

well if they are like their coach the infractions only lasted 15 seconds

The bizarre part is the investigation confirmed there was paid sex at least 15 times but still isn't enough to call it a "lack of institutional control"

The NCAA didn't "let North Carolina go." I know it looks that way to people, but that's not exactly what happened. The reason they didn't sanction UNC is the same reason I didn't sanction UNC. I don't have the authority to dictate or critique what UNC's academic curriculum should or should not be. Academic freedom dictates that they can make it as easy or as challenging as they like. And, since the classes were open to all students, there's no basis for an extra benefit. The practicalities of the case were disgusting, but the technicalities simply weren't there. The NCAA is not an accrediting agency. SACSCOC is, and that's who should be hammering them. The NCAA really wanted to nail them, but as they got further and further into it they pretty much realized that they couldn't. Had athletes been given special treatment, or had they not done their own work, or had the classes not actually been part of the university catalog, then they could have hammered them. But, since that's not what it was, they really couldn't. I wasn't posting here when this first broke so people may not believe me when I say this, but I said back then that there was nothing the NCAA could do to them no matter how badly they wanted to. SACSCOC can publicly reprimand them, or fine them, or put restrictions on what kind of federal funding they can receive. The NCAA can do none of those things, and the NCAAs own rules prevent them from violating academic freedom by dictating how easy or hard a class needs to be. I don't think that they're in bed with North Carolina and wanted to do them a favor. Quite the opposite. I think they rushed in like the cavalry and wanted to put on a show about how they were going to lay the smack down!! And then, embarrassingly and hilariously, it dawned on them that they couldn't, so they just quietly went away.

The Louisville situation is pretty standard as well. In order to be slapped with "lack of institutional control" it TYPICALLY (although not always) needs to be more than one entity that is out of control. Since what came out was that this was on single rogue assistant coach (which I personally find hard to believe, but that's what was presented), then they are going after the individuals and not the school itself. That's GENERALLY how it works pretty much anywhere no matter how large or small the school is. Samford, for instance, (not Stanford) was not hit with lack of institutional control when they were improperly certifying players. The individual was punished and not the school. I realize those are two very different types of violations, but the reason I point it out is just to demonstrate that if it is just one person or entity, they're much less likely to penalize the whole institution or department.

David G wrote:The NCAA didn't "let North Carolina go." I know it looks that way to people, but that's not exactly what happened. The reason they didn't sanction UNC is the same reason I didn't sanction UNC. I don't have the authority to dictate or critique what UNC's academic curriculum should or should not be. Academic freedom dictates that they can make it as easy or as challenging as they like. And, since the classes were open to all students, there's no basis for an extra benefit. The practicalities of the case were disgusting, but the technicalities simply weren't there. The NCAA is not an accrediting agency. SACSCOC is, and that's who should be hammering them. The NCAA really wanted to nail them, but as they got further and further into it they pretty much realized that they couldn't. Had athletes been given special treatment, or had they not done their own work, or had the classes not actually been part of the university catalog, then they could have hammered them. But, since that's not what it was, they really couldn't. I wasn't posting here when this first broke so people may not believe me when I say this, but I said back then that there was nothing the NCAA could do to them no matter how badly they wanted to. SACSCOC can publicly reprimand them, or fine them, or put restrictions on what kind of federal funding they can receive. The NCAA can do none of those things, and the NCAAs own rules prevent them from violating academic freedom by dictating how easy or hard a class needs to be. I don't think that they're in bed with North Carolina and wanted to do them a favor. Quite the opposite. I think they rushed in like the cavalry and wanted to put on a show about how they were going to lay the smack down!! And then, embarrassingly and hilariously, it dawned on them that they couldn't, so they just quietly went away.

The Louisville situation is pretty standard as well. In order to be slapped with "lack of institutional control" it TYPICALLY (although not always) needs to be more than one entity that is out of control. Since what came out was that this was on single rogue assistant coach (which I personally find hard to believe, but that's what was presented), then they are going after the individuals and not the school itself. That's GENERALLY how it works pretty much anywhere no matter how large or small the school is. Samford, for instance, (not Stanford) was not hit with lack of institutional control when they were improperly certifying players. The individual was punished and not the school. I realize those are two very different types of violations, but the reason I point it out is just to demonstrate that if it is just one person or entity, they're much less likely to penalize the whole institution or department.

Right. Just remember guys, it's the letter of the law, not the spirit that counts.

If you're going to cheat, just make sure you clear it with your lawyers first.

Doge McDermott wrote:

David G wrote:The NCAA didn't "let North Carolina go." I know it looks that way to people, but that's not exactly what happened. The reason they didn't sanction UNC is the same reason I didn't sanction UNC. I don't have the authority to dictate or critique what UNC's academic curriculum should or should not be. Academic freedom dictates that they can make it as easy or as challenging as they like. And, since the classes were open to all students, there's no basis for an extra benefit. The practicalities of the case were disgusting, but the technicalities simply weren't there. The NCAA is not an accrediting agency. SACSCOC is, and that's who should be hammering them. The NCAA really wanted to nail them, but as they got further and further into it they pretty much realized that they couldn't. Had athletes been given special treatment, or had they not done their own work, or had the classes not actually been part of the university catalog, then they could have hammered them. But, since that's not what it was, they really couldn't. I wasn't posting here when this first broke so people may not believe me when I say this, but I said back then that there was nothing the NCAA could do to them no matter how badly they wanted to. SACSCOC can publicly reprimand them, or fine them, or put restrictions on what kind of federal funding they can receive. The NCAA can do none of those things, and the NCAAs own rules prevent them from violating academic freedom by dictating how easy or hard a class needs to be. I don't think that they're in bed with North Carolina and wanted to do them a favor. Quite the opposite. I think they rushed in like the cavalry and wanted to put on a show about how they were going to lay the smack down!! And then, embarrassingly and hilariously, it dawned on them that they couldn't, so they just quietly went away.

The Louisville situation is pretty standard as well. In order to be slapped with "lack of institutional control" it TYPICALLY (although not always) needs to be more than one entity that is out of control. Since what came out was that this was on single rogue assistant coach (which I personally find hard to believe, but that's what was presented), then they are going after the individuals and not the school itself. That's GENERALLY how it works pretty much anywhere no matter how large or small the school is. Samford, for instance, (not Stanford) was not hit with lack of institutional control when they were improperly certifying players. The individual was punished and not the school. I realize those are two very different types of violations, but the reason I point it out is just to demonstrate that if it is just one person or entity, they're much less likely to penalize the whole institution or department.

Right. Just remember guys, it's the letter of the law, not the spirit that counts.

If you're going to cheat, just make sure you clear it with your lawyers first.

Yeah, pretty much. That's the world they've created. When they want to enforce the spirit of the rule, they can't if the letter of the rule wasn't actually broken.

DudeAnon wrote:The bizarre part is the investigation confirmed there was paid sex at least 15 times but still isn't enough to call it a "lack of institutional control"

Yes. 15 times, yet he knew nothing about something as insane as that kind of activity. In a world with 24x7 news, ubiquitous smart phones with cameras, massive social media, et al, all these little "sessions" took place in absolute quiet. Sure, okay.

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/columnists/paul-daugherty/2016/10/20/doc-time-uc-find-better-big-brother/92483636/

And poor UC can only dream of carrying on such shenanigans in Clifton...

David G wrote:The NCAA didn't "let North Carolina go." I know it looks that way to people, but that's not exactly what happened. The reason they didn't sanction UNC is the same reason I didn't sanction UNC. I don't have the authority to dictate or critique what UNC's academic curriculum should or should not be. Academic freedom dictates that they can make it as easy or as challenging as they like. And, since the classes were open to all students, there's no basis for an extra benefit. The practicalities of the case were disgusting, but the technicalities simply weren't there. The NCAA is not an accrediting agency. SACSCOC is, and that's who should be hammering them. The NCAA really wanted to nail them, but as they got further and further into it they pretty much realized that they couldn't. Had athletes been given special treatment, or had they not done their own work, or had the classes not actually been part of the university catalog, then they could have hammered them. But, since that's not what it was, they really couldn't. I wasn't posting here when this first broke so people may not believe me when I say this, but I said back then that there was nothing the NCAA could do to them no matter how badly they wanted to. SACSCOC can publicly reprimand them, or fine them, or put restrictions on what kind of federal funding they can receive. The NCAA can do none of those things, and the NCAAs own rules prevent them from violating academic freedom by dictating how easy or hard a class needs to be. I don't think that they're in bed with North Carolina and wanted to do them a favor. Quite the opposite. I think they rushed in like the cavalry and wanted to put on a show about how they were going to lay the smack down!! And then, embarrassingly and hilariously, it dawned on them that they couldn't, so they just quietly went away.

The Louisville situation is pretty standard as well. In order to be slapped with "lack of institutional control" it TYPICALLY (although not always) needs to be more than one entity that is out of control. Since what came out was that this was on single rogue assistant coach (which I personally find hard to believe, but that's what was presented), then they are going after the individuals and not the school itself. That's GENERALLY how it works pretty much anywhere no matter how large or small the school is. Samford, for instance, (not Stanford) was not hit with lack of institutional control when they were improperly certifying players. The individual was punished and not the school. I realize those are two very different types of violations, but the reason I point it out is just to demonstrate that if it is just one person or entity, they're much less likely to penalize the whole institution or department.

Thanks for your post, i really do appreciate it and like when you contribute to the board.

- you're talking in softened tones about the UNC scandal and trying to sugarcoat it. Same with Louisville. Lol, "more than one entity"?

- the NCAA absolutely never wanted to penalize UNC in any way.

- the goal of the NCAA and UNC from the beginning was to come up with a group of reasons to let UNC off the hook, while claiming they gave a crap. They test marketed several, and the most effective is the one that they're going with. So their key reason for doing nothing is basically that "some non-athletes were in these fake classes"... that's it.

- Anyone can tell you that's a ridiculous excuse, and enough lawyers can find fine print to interpret shit any way they want... again, the NCAA and UNC and ESPN and the ACC had the goal of providing just enough excuses to let UNC off... a big moneymaking blueblood is never getting slammed.

- I'm not wasting my time reading the fine print or getting into semantics war with anyone who matters, and unfortunately few sportswriters will either, or they don't care, so it's an easier defense i guess.

- Louisville had a member of their coaching staff... yes a member of their coaching staff... set up a fuckin whorehouse on campus... in the dorms...

- UConn for relatively nothing can get penalized because why?... because they have few of their people skunking around the NCAA halls, and probably because they had the nerve to beat Duke, Kentucky, etc, on their way to 4 national championships.

billyjack wrote:

David G wrote:The NCAA didn't "let North Carolina go." I know it looks that way to people, but that's not exactly what happened. The reason they didn't sanction UNC is the same reason I didn't sanction UNC. I don't have the authority to dictate or critique what UNC's academic curriculum should or should not be. Academic freedom dictates that they can make it as easy or as challenging as they like. And, since the classes were open to all students, there's no basis for an extra benefit. The practicalities of the case were disgusting, but the technicalities simply weren't there. The NCAA is not an accrediting agency. SACSCOC is, and that's who should be hammering them. The NCAA really wanted to nail them, but as they got further and further into it they pretty much realized that they couldn't. Had athletes been given special treatment, or had they not done their own work, or had the classes not actually been part of the university catalog, then they could have hammered them. But, since that's not what it was, they really couldn't. I wasn't posting here when this first broke so people may not believe me when I say this, but I said back then that there was nothing the NCAA could do to them no matter how badly they wanted to. SACSCOC can publicly reprimand them, or fine them, or put restrictions on what kind of federal funding they can receive. The NCAA can do none of those things, and the NCAAs own rules prevent them from violating academic freedom by dictating how easy or hard a class needs to be. I don't think that they're in bed with North Carolina and wanted to do them a favor. Quite the opposite. I think they rushed in like the cavalry and wanted to put on a show about how they were going to lay the smack down!! And then, embarrassingly and hilariously, it dawned on them that they couldn't, so they just quietly went away.

The Louisville situation is pretty standard as well. In order to be slapped with "lack of institutional control" it TYPICALLY (although not always) needs to be more than one entity that is out of control. Since what came out was that this was on single rogue assistant coach (which I personally find hard to believe, but that's what was presented), then they are going after the individuals and not the school itself. That's GENERALLY how it works pretty much anywhere no matter how large or small the school is. Samford, for instance, (not Stanford) was not hit with lack of institutional control when they were improperly certifying players. The individual was punished and not the school. I realize those are two very different types of violations, but the reason I point it out is just to demonstrate that if it is just one person or entity, they're much less likely to penalize the whole institution or department.

Thanks for your post, i really do appreciate it and like when you contribute to the board.

- you're talking in softened tones about the UNC scandal and trying to sugarcoat it. Same with Louisville. Lol, "more than one entity"?

- the NCAA absolutely never wanted to penalize UNC in any way.

- the goal of the NCAA and UNC from the beginning was to come up with a group of reasons to let UNC off the hook, while claiming they gave a crap. They test marketed several, and the most effective is the one that they're going with. So their key reason for doing nothing is basically that "some non-athletes were in these fake classes"... that's it.

- Anyone can tell you that's a ridiculous excuse, and enough lawyers can find fine print to interpret shit any way they want... again, the NCAA and UNC and ESPN and the ACC had the goal of providing just enough excuses to let UNC off... a big moneymaking blueblood is never getting slammed.

- I'm not wasting my time reading the fine print or getting into semantics war with anyone who matters, and unfortunately few sportswriters will either, or they don't care, so it's an easier defense i guess.

- Louisville had a member of their coaching staff... yes a member of their coaching staff... set up a fuckin whorehouse on campus... in the dorms...

- UConn for relatively nothing can get penalized because why?... because they have few of their people skunking around the NCAA halls, and probably because they had the nerve to beat Duke, Kentucky, etc, on their way to 4 national championships.

Yup...nothing was ever going to happen at UNC. But if the NCAA had a backbone and any measure of integrity, they most certainly could have found violations. While I understood the comment about the classes being open to all students, I assume that the NCAA does not allow "bullsh--" credits for classes not taken for student athletes. And these were bullsh-- credits. So if the NCAA wanted to come down on UNC, they would have found many student athletes that were ineligible to participate because they did not have the credit hours and appropriate progress toward a degree to be academically eligible. But, that's not what the NCAA wanted and they certainly did not want to strip NCAA titles from St. Roy.

And the Louisville situation is embarrassing. The NCAA has completely neutered itself of any real authority , particularly when it comes to P5 football conference schools.

billyjack wrote:

David G wrote:The NCAA didn't "let North Carolina go." I know it looks that way to people, but that's not exactly what happened. The reason they didn't sanction UNC is the same reason I didn't sanction UNC. I don't have the authority to dictate or critique what UNC's academic curriculum should or should not be. Academic freedom dictates that they can make it as easy or as challenging as they like. And, since the classes were open to all students, there's no basis for an extra benefit. The practicalities of the case were disgusting, but the technicalities simply weren't there. The NCAA is not an accrediting agency. SACSCOC is, and that's who should be hammering them. The NCAA really wanted to nail them, but as they got further and further into it they pretty much realized that they couldn't. Had athletes been given special treatment, or had they not done their own work, or had the classes not actually been part of the university catalog, then they could have hammered them. But, since that's not what it was, they really couldn't. I wasn't posting here when this first broke so people may not believe me when I say this, but I said back then that there was nothing the NCAA could do to them no matter how badly they wanted to. SACSCOC can publicly reprimand them, or fine them, or put restrictions on what kind of federal funding they can receive. The NCAA can do none of those things, and the NCAAs own rules prevent them from violating academic freedom by dictating how easy or hard a class needs to be. I don't think that they're in bed with North Carolina and wanted to do them a favor. Quite the opposite. I think they rushed in like the cavalry and wanted to put on a show about how they were going to lay the smack down!! And then, embarrassingly and hilariously, it dawned on them that they couldn't, so they just quietly went away.

The Louisville situation is pretty standard as well. In order to be slapped with "lack of institutional control" it TYPICALLY (although not always) needs to be more than one entity that is out of control. Since what came out was that this was on single rogue assistant coach (which I personally find hard to believe, but that's what was presented), then they are going after the individuals and not the school itself. That's GENERALLY how it works pretty much anywhere no matter how large or small the school is. Samford, for instance, (not Stanford) was not hit with lack of institutional control when they were improperly certifying players. The individual was punished and not the school. I realize those are two very different types of violations, but the reason I point it out is just to demonstrate that if it is just one person or entity, they're much less likely to penalize the whole institution or department.

Thanks for your post, i really do appreciate it and like when you contribute to the board.

- you're talking in softened tones about the UNC scandal and trying to sugarcoat it. Same with Louisville. Lol, "more than one entity"?

- the NCAA absolutely never wanted to penalize UNC in any way.

- the goal of the NCAA and UNC from the beginning was to come up with a group of reasons to let UNC off the hook, while claiming they gave a crap. They test marketed several, and the most effective is the one that they're going with. So their key reason for doing nothing is basically that "some non-athletes were in these fake classes"... that's it.

- Anyone can tell you that's a ridiculous excuse, and enough lawyers can find fine print to interpret shit any way they want... again, the NCAA and UNC and ESPN and the ACC had the goal of providing just enough excuses to let UNC off... a big moneymaking blueblood is never getting slammed.

- I'm not wasting my time reading the fine print or getting into semantics war with anyone who matters, and unfortunately few sportswriters will either, or they don't care, so it's an easier defense i guess.

- Louisville had a member of their coaching staff... yes a member of their coaching staff... set up a fuckin whorehouse on campus... in the dorms...

- UConn for relatively nothing can get penalized because why?... because they have few of their people skunking around the NCAA halls, and probably because they had the nerve to beat Duke, Kentucky, etc, on their way to 4 national championships.

I guess you're not familiar with this. It involved over 100 div1 institutions that had used what were essentially fake online classes. They were having athletes take fake ten day classes at Western Oklahoma State to help get them eligible. The NCAA did nothing because they couldn't. They can't dictate what types of transfer credits universities are allowed to accept. It's not like this has never happened before. It's also not like this has happened before, but other schools got in trouble while UNC was given a pass this time. It's happened over a hundred times before, and the NCAA didn't come down hard on anyone, and the reason they didn't is because they couldn't.

http://www.chronicle.com/article/Need-3 ... ay/135690/