So, NCAA basketball news just got more interesting...

• Laley23

  

  vball10set;1873757 wrote:good lord--they'll KILL him in Louisville!

  He would be good there, temporarily, given the situation.
  
  His time had came at Indiana. But let's not forget he won 63 games his last 6 years (throwing out the first 3 yrs he was there), with 2 outright B1G titles. His style sucked, his personality grew old, and he flopped in his 1 major chance in the tournament (though outperformed 2 other years)...but he is very tolerable for any program short-term.
• GOONx19

  

  FatHobbit;1873705 wrote:I know everyone has been saying Petino and Louisville, but I've been reading Calipari and Kentucky. I'm really curious to see how far this goes and how this might blow up the NCAA.
  
  Also, several ex OSU basketball players have been on twitter talking about how Matta ran a clean program. You would think they would know, but I'm definitely holding my breath waiting for this to work itself out. I'm sure everyone hopes their program is clean.

  Do you have a link for anything reputable about UK? I'm genuinely curious. I assume they would be involved in any investigation but haven't seen anything but comment and forum trolls.
• Spock

  

  Terry_Tate;1873634 wrote:Also, the statement from the U of L President gave a good laugh as well. Any violations will not be tolerated, but yet Pitino is still there after the whole scandal that already happened.
  
  

  Hey Greg.......you should be worried about the FBI, not the NCAA.
• FatHobbit

  

  GOONx19;1873778 wrote:Do you have a link for anything reputable about UK? I'm genuinely curious. I assume they would be involved in any investigation but haven't seen anything but comment and forum trolls.

  Ha, maybe i wasn't clear. Everyone has been saying Petino all along but i wasn't paying attention and assumed it was Calipari. I've not seen anything about UK.
• FatHobbit

  

  
• Dr Winston O'Boogie

  

  This investigation seems like it was inevitable. College athletics (big time football and bball) is not a sustainable model. So long as there is this much money around it, I think it is impossible to keep it clean or amateur or whatever. And I don't think there is any way to go back in time and erase this era of big time tv, apparel, coaching salaries, etc. The only solution I can think of would be to allow schools to "sponsor" football and basketball teams. The teams would be independent entities from the schools. But they would wear the school's name and play in the stadium and arena on the campus. Players on the team would get compensated. If they chose to have some or all of the compensation in the form of tuition to the sponsoring school, they would be treated by the school like a normal student - subject to the standard admissions process. But the default for the players on the sponsored teams would be as employees. The term student-athlete would no longer be applicable.
  
  So, for example, there would still be and Ohio State Buckeyes football team. However it would be an entity independent of the University. The entity would pay the school to use its facilities. The revenue from tv and tickets would be used by the entity to pay its coaches, players and staff. Some of that revenue would be used to pay the school for use of its facilities.
  
  This may sound crazy, but I don't think its a huge change from where we are today. All it would do is take the illusion of amateurism away and call the sports what they are - for profit development leagues.
• hilliardfan

  I posted this on another forum. Also, I suspect basketball isn't the only sport affected. "No fan of any big sports university should become too smug over this. I suspect this is just scratching the surface. The Adidas, Nikes, Under Armors, etc, pay billions of dollars a year to these universities and have a lot more control than most of us can imagine and will do what they can to get an edge over their competitors. I think this may get real ugly real quick. It's one thing talking about suspensions, an entirely different thing to talk about prison."
• vball10set

  Laley23;1873773 wrote:He would be good there, temporarily, given the situation.
  
  His time had came at Indiana. But let's not forget he won 63 games his last 6 years (throwing out the first 3 yrs he was there), with 2 outright B1G titles. His style sucked, his personality grew old, and he flopped in his 1 major chance in the tournament (though outperformed 2 other years)...but he is very tolerable for any program short-term.

  I don't think a program like Louisville will tolerate anything that is viewed as tolerable-lol. Tom Crean is a whiner who oversold himself to the powers-that-be at IU, and once his true colors shown through, he was bounced out of there the way any blue blood program would.
• Laley23

  

  vball10set;1873835 wrote:I don't think a program like Louisville will tolerate anything that is viewed as tolerable-lol. Tom Crean is a whiner who oversold himself to the powers-that-be at IU, and once his true colors shown through, he was bounced out of there the way any blue blood program would.

  Lol, yes they would. If not, I'll come back and own it. But they are about to be hammered, they could and probably will do MUCH worse than Crean.
• superman

  Laley23;1873845 wrote:Lol, yes they would. If not, I'll come back and own it. But they are about to be hammered, they could and probably will do MUCH worse than Crean.

  Yeah I'm guessing there is not a long line of candidates wanting to clean up that mess.
• superman

  hilliardfan;1873834 wrote:I posted this on another forum. Also, I suspect basketball isn't the only sport affected. "No fan of any big sports university should become too smug over this. I suspect this is just scratching the surface. The Adidas, Nikes, Under Armors, etc, pay billions of dollars a year to these universities and have a lot more control than most of us can imagine and will do what they can to get an edge over their competitors. I think this may get real ugly real quick. It's one thing talking about suspensions, an entirely different thing to talk about prison."

  The only thing that makes me think football might not be impacted in the same way is the lack of AAU influence in football.
• Spock

  

  Dr Winston O'Boogie;1873827 wrote:This investigation seems like it was inevitable. College athletics (big time football and bball) is not a sustainable model. So long as there is this much money around it, I think it is impossible to keep it clean or amateur or whatever. And I don't think there is any way to go back in time and erase this era of big time tv, apparel, coaching salaries, etc. The only solution I can think of would be to allow schools to "sponsor" football and basketball teams. The teams would be independent entities from the schools. But they would wear the school's name and play in the stadium and arena on the campus. Players on the team would get compensated. If they chose to have some or all of the compensation in the form of tuition to the sponsoring school, they would be treated by the school like a normal student - subject to the standard admissions process. But the default for the players on the sponsored teams would be as employees. The term student-athlete would no longer be applicable.
  
  So, for example, there would still be and Ohio State Buckeyes football team. However it would be an entity independent of the University. The entity would pay the school to use its facilities. The revenue from tv and tickets would be used by the entity to pay its coaches, players and staff. Some of that revenue would be used to pay the school for use of its facilities.
  
  This may sound crazy, but I don't think its a huge change from where we are today. All it would do is take the illusion of amateurism away and call the sports what they are - for profit development leagues.

  here is the fix......the universities and the NCAA holy grail in this is that they think the almighty "scholarship" these kids get is compensation and what makes them follow rules. All the while, these entities make millions off the $100,000 scholarship. THey should just offer the kids a spot on the team, have them pay their scholoarship and then let them do whatever they want to earn money from their fame.
• Dr Winston O'Boogie

  

  Spock;1873857 wrote:here is the fix......the universities and the NCAA holy grail in this is that they think the almighty "scholarship" these kids get is compensation and what makes them follow rules. All the while, these entities make millions off the $100,000 scholarship. THey should just offer the kids a spot on the team, have them pay their scholoarship and then let them do whatever they want to earn money from their fame.

  A scholarship has never been a good answer, agreed. Scholarships are arbitrary rewards. While they are a windfall for some, they are way below the market value of top athletes. If a kid wants to try for the NFL or NBA, he may not have any interest in a scholarship since he won't likely be in school long enough to get a degree. You may as well pay that kid in women's pantyhose.
• vball10set

  Laley23;1873845 wrote:Lol, yes they would. If not, I'll come back and own it. But they are about to be hammered, they could and probably will do MUCH worse than Crean.

  
  we'll see
• queencitybuckeye

  Dr Winston O'Boogie;1873865 wrote:A scholarship has never been a good answer, agreed. Scholarships are arbitrary rewards. While they are a windfall for some, they are way below the market value of top athletes. If a kid wants to try for the NFL or NBA, he may not have any interest in a scholarship since he won't likely be in school long enough to get a degree. You may as well pay that kid in women's pantyhose.

  I'd take it a step beyond this. Why do big-time college sports exist? To entertain the alumni base, which is part of the schools' fund-raising arm. Hire them for whatever the marketplace decides their talents are worth. I don't even see the requirement that they have to be students, just employees. If they want a portion of their compensation to be in reduced (or free) tuition, fine. If they want to go straight wages, fine. Why the need to pretend that they're "students just like us"? Many are, many aren't.
• kizer permanente

  I don't think schools need to pay players. I think scholarships are fine, but don't limit it to that. If I want to sign with Nike in college.. let me. If I want to sell autographed memorabilia, let me. Let me earn what I can off myself.
• ernest_t_bass

  

  kizer permanente;1874002 wrote:I don't think schools need to pay players. I think scholarships are fine, but don't limit it to that. If I want to sign with Nike in college.. let me. If I want to sell autographed memorabilia, let me. Let me earn what I can off myself.

  I agree with this. But I think the big time schools make WAY too much money off of the athlete's likeness. F*ck Chris Webber, but the Mitch Albom bit where he's walking with CW and they see a Michigan #4 jersey in the window... that's not right. These companies (and universities) are making MILLIONS off their athletes, and the athletes get a few thousand in return (scholarships). Put the athlete's last name on the jersey and give them a cut of it... but that is with EVERYTHING that is tied to them.
• kizer permanente

  ernest_t_bass;1874003 wrote:I agree with this. But I think the big time schools make WAY too much money off of the athlete's likeness. F*ck Chris Webber, but the Mitch Albom bit where he's walking with CW and they see a Michigan #4 jersey in the window... that's not right. These companies (and universities) are making MILLIONS off their athletes, and the athletes get a few thousand in return (scholarships). Put the athlete's last name on the jersey and give them a cut of it... but that is with EVERYTHING that is tied to them.

  absolutely.
• Laley23

  

  In a move I just simply don't understand, Louisville hires from within. Scott Padgett. I mean, does anyone believe he didn't know what was going on? What happens when he is indicted in the coming weeks/months?
• GOONx19

  

  Laley23;1874078 wrote:In a move I just simply don't understand, Louisville hires from within. Scott Padgett. I mean, does anyone believe he didn't know what was going on? What happens when he is indicted in the coming weeks/months?

  David, not Scott.
• Laley23

  

  GOONx19;1874080 wrote:David, not Scott.

  Whatever lol. Still a ridiculous hire imo, given the situation.
• GOONx19

  

  Laley23;1874085 wrote:Whatever lol. Still a ridiculous hire imo, given the situation.

  Haha I agree, but I like Scott so I wanted to make it clear.
• Heretic

  

  Laley23;1874078 wrote:In a move I just simply don't understand, Louisville hires from within. Scott Padgett. I mean, does anyone believe he didn't know what was going on? What happens when he is indicted in the coming weeks/months?

  Well, I mean, Rick never knew anything was going on with ANY of the scandals that hit Louisville while he was there, so I can't imagine that Padgett would have any knowledge either!
  
  /sarcasm