Adidas/NCAA bribery scandal

Football is also more of a gamble. Basketball, if you get an elite recruit, they almost always come in and make a difference from day 1. Football, they sometimes live up to the hype, sometimes not, but even when they do it usually takes a couple years before you can really be sure.

I also think there are more insane college footbaw fans/boosters who do the dirty work for the coaches compared to basketball. Like if you're a top recruit at Alabama/OSU/Georgia/etc. you've almost certainly got some weirdo who owns 6 Arby's franchises or whatever slipping you cash from the time you arrive on campus. I don't think that culture exists to the same extent at top basketball schools.
 
ronnie mund said:
I wonder what's worse between basketball and football. Football is obviously the bigger moneymaker, but there are 100 guys on a team instead of 15 in basketball, so I assume the payments are higher. And because one player in basketball is way more important than one player in football.
Click to expand...

Hoops, by far.

Do we hear much about these type of things in football? Back in the day, yeah, with SMU and such but I think that boosters realize their money goes further in basketball as you just need 1-2 players to change the direction of the program.

If you can bring in a difference maker like that a couple of times and the program is successful then it becomes a landing ground for great players to go there on the level so yeah, I believe that this will continue but they will be much more careful.

Had to laugh that Roy Williams was staying he was dumbfounded that these sort of things happened when he had an academic scandal with basically fake classes and degrees iand then he also brought along that educator to his next stop!
 
None that I know of.

I don't think the punishments will be severe considering they have strength in numbers. U of L will probably get the worst of it considering they are already on probation for the strippers
 
This issue could be solved very easily. Take the equipment provider away from the coach. Put someone in the athletic department, or better yet the business office in charge of uniforms and gear. Make it illegal for coaches and athletic departments to get free gear from Nike/ Under Armour, Addidas, etc. They pay for their gear just like everyone else. Lord knows they have the money.
This will take out the back room deals and free crap that kids get and sell.
 
Or we could just stop pretending like college athletics isn't a business and that these athletes aren't "amateurs" who aren't there to get a degree.
 
14Red said:
This issue could be solved very easily. Take the equipment provider away from the coach. Put someone in the athletic department, or better yet the business office in charge of uniforms and gear. Make it illegal for coaches and athletic departments to get free gear from Nike/ Under Armour, Addidas, etc. They pay for their gear just like everyone else. Lord knows they have the money.
This will take out the back room deals and free crap that kids get and sell.
Click to expand...
What a terrible idea
 
ronnie mund said:
Or we could just stop pretending like college athletics isn't a business and that these athletes aren't "amateurs" who aren't there to get a degree.
Click to expand...

and remove it from the colleges and put it where it belongs, in the private sector?

Push comes to shove, it's still the college name selling the game. No one goes to minor league football. Nike isn't looking to minor league ball players to sell their logo. Nebraska is pitiful and still packing them in. Would the Lincoln Logs do the same?

I agree it's an economic mess but the players are still still getting add it up, more than just room, board and tuition which in itself can come to several hundred thousand. It's their choice to find an alternate route to their degree or bigger paycheck. But college is there for academics and whatever sports can contribute to the academic environment. Kick it off campus before professionalizing it, my preference.
 
ronnie mund said:
Or we could just stop pretending like college athletics isn't a business and that these athletes aren't "amateurs" who aren't there to get a degree.
Click to expand...

ronnie that's usually one of the first points that are brought up. But look a little closer. How many D1 college football and basketball players are caught up in this? Very, very few. Still, even today...over 90% of these D1 college football and basketball players will NOT play professionally. Most know it. And unlike your accusation, most are still in college to get a degree.

College sports IS big business, but not for all schools. Yes, Ohio State, Kansas, Kentucky, Alabama, etc. But not Harvard, Bowling Green, South Dakota State....in fact, the list of the "have nots" far outweigh the "haves". I'll use Ohio State as an example because they are right here, and I'm not a fan. But Ohio State, through tradition, great recruiting and coaching, has built a "mega-corporation" like an Apple or Nike. Why should the guy that was hired last week get in on millions of the company profits?? That player, not only getting an athletic scholarship at a top flight school that produces several NFL caliber talent year in an year out....IS MOST CERTAINLY part of the deal.
Sure that kid can go to Bowling Green or Ohio U, but will they get noticed there?
Just because there is 8-10% of college programs that make mega millions, let's not change the rules for the other 200+ schools.
 
14Red said:
ronnie that's usually one of the first points that are brought up. But look a little closer. How many D1 college football and basketball players are caught up in this? Very, very few. Still, even today...over 90% of these D1 college football and basketball players will NOT play professionally. Most know it. And unlike your accusation, most are still in college to get a degree.

College sports IS big business, but not for all schools. Yes, Ohio State, Kansas, Kentucky, Alabama, etc. But not Harvard, Bowling Green, South Dakota State....in fact, the list of the "have nots" far outweigh the "haves". I'll use Ohio State as an example because they are right here, and I'm not a fan. But Ohio State, through tradition, great recruiting and coaching, has built a "mega-corporation" like an Apple or Nike. Why should the guy that was hired last week get in on millions of the company profits?? That player, not only getting an athletic scholarship at a top flight school that produces several NFL caliber talent year in an year out....IS MOST CERTAINLY part of the deal.
Sure that kid can go to Bowling Green or Ohio U, but will they get noticed there?
Just because there is 8-10% of college programs that make mega millions, let's not change the rules for the other 200+ schools.
Click to expand...

The amateurism of individual athletes aside this is good point when devising solutions to a perceived problems. More then likely any new rules will disproportionately hurt the the majority of schools as the Ohio State's, Texas's, USC's, etc. have the capital and political power to handle more regulations. If anything it just ensures they stay at the top and hurts other schools ability to compete.

It's like most regulations, the unintended consequence is that the short term pain helps the big company, who can absorb the loss, and in the long run just hurts the smaller companies who can't take on the cost.

From a sports perspective you can see it in European soccer. UEFA instituted a bunch of Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules to make sure clubs weren't just throwing money around and to slow the influence of foreign money. Instead of a more level playing field all it has done is made all of the countries leagues less competitive, with a few clubs Juventas (Italy), Bayern (Germany), Real Madrid and Barcelona (Spain) being even more dominate, and the foreign owned teams (Chelsea, Manchester City, Paris St. Germain) even stronger because no one else can afford to disrupt the status quo.
 
Tardis said:
The amateurism of individual athletes aside this is good point when devising solutions to a perceived problems. More then likely any new rules will disproportionately hurt the the majority of schools as the Ohio State's, Texas's, USC's, etc. have the capital and political power to handle more regulations. If anything it just ensures they stay at the top and hurts other schools ability to compete.

It's like most regulations, the unintended consequence is that the short term pain helps the big company, who can absorb the loss, and in the long run just hurts the smaller companies who can't take on the cost.

From a sports perspective you can see it in European soccer. UEFA instituted a bunch of Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules to make sure clubs weren't just throwing money around and to slow the influence of foreign money. Instead of a more level playing field all it has done is made all of the countries leagues less competitive, with a few clubs Juventas (Italy), Bayern (Germany), Real Madrid and Barcelona (Spain) being even more dominate, and the foreign owned teams (Chelsea, Manchester City, Paris St. Germain) even stronger because no one else can afford to disrupt the status quo.
Click to expand...

And this is where the really interesting dynamic comes in. Who reports it. The national sports media NEEDS to have excitement and eyeballs on their products to stay relevant and make money. They will in no way shape or form knock the current system as it keeps the money coming in and keeps the college playoff and March Madness rolling.
But is it truly the best system for all? Of course not.
 
Tardis said:
The amateurism of individual athletes aside this is good point when devising solutions to a perceived problems. More then likely any new rules will disproportionately hurt the the majority of schools as the Ohio State's, Texas's, USC's, etc. have the capital and political power to handle more regulations. If anything it just ensures they stay at the top and hurts other schools ability to compete.

It's like most regulations, the unintended consequence is that the short term pain helps the big company, who can absorb the loss, and in the long run just hurts the smaller companies who can't take on the cost.

From a sports perspective you can see it in European soccer. UEFA instituted a bunch of Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules to make sure clubs weren't just throwing money around and to slow the influence of foreign money. Instead of a more level playing field all it has done is made all of the countries leagues less competitive, with a few clubs Juventas (Italy), Bayern (Germany), Real Madrid and Barcelona (Spain) being even more dominate, and the foreign owned teams (Chelsea, Manchester City, Paris St. Germain) even stronger because no one else can afford to disrupt the status quo.
Click to expand...

That was exactly what anyone who pays attention to the game expected to happen.

The sports has been headed towards a European super league model for some time now and this was just another step in that direction.
 
With Zion now being mentioned in the case the rest of the schools should be breathing a sigh of relief. The NCAA certainly wont be coming down hard on anyone now
 
Just like Jerry Tarkanian said, “The NCAA is so mad at Kentucky, it’s going to give Cleveland State two more years of probation,” Look for some mid-major to get the wrath of the NCAA in this case.
 
I agree but they have already shown they will take down UK. They will turn a blind eye. They already have with UNC for shaky reasons. Strength in numbers

U of L will get hammered though bc they were already on probation foe the strippers.

I want to know how Creighton was dishing out 200k
 
Well the NCAA ended up rescinding the part where Casey gave him the money. Yes he got paid but not by Casey, probably a booster or other coach. The subsequent investigation revealed way more violations and they were already on probation for interfering with an NCAA investigation, which is why they got hit so hard. UK has always been dirty.

U of L won't get the TV ban like UK did. I would argue U of L was in much murkier waters ethically ie giving recruits hookers. They didn't even take Penn St off Tv. Different times and different punishments.

How did they spin UNCs fake classes? They were available for all students so there was no cheating taking place. Just so happens mostly athletes took them bc they were steered there by advisors and those they whistle blew were blacklisted and ran out of town. The NCAA can spin what they like.....


The NCAA hasn't even started investigating this yet. We will see what they choose to look at. I think most schools will get off light bc they will say the coaches went rogue and acted on their own will while violating their contracts. The universities in question will be far enough away from it so they won't get hit too hard. Unless further evidence comes out showing the schools higher ups knew about it, I don't see too bad of penalties coming for any school.
 
Arrogate said:
Well the NCAA ended up rescinding the part where Casey gave him the money. Yes he got paid but not by Casey, probably a booster or other coach. The subsequent investigation revealed way more violations and they were already on probation for interfering with an NCAA investigation, which is why they got hit so hard. UK has always been dirty.

U of L won't get the TV ban like UK did. I would argue U of L was in much murkier waters ethically ie giving recruits hookers. They didn't even take Penn St off Tv. Different times and different punishments.

How did they spin UNCs fake classes? They were available for all students so there was no cheating taking place. Just so happens mostly athletes took them bc they were steered there by advisors and those they whistle blew were blacklisted and ran out of town. The NCAA can spin what they like.....


The NCAA hasn't even started investigating this yet. We will see what they choose to look at. I think most schools will get off light bc they will say the coaches went rogue and acted on their own will while violating their contracts. The universities in question will be far enough away from it so they won't get hit too hard. Unless further evidence comes out showing the schools higher ups knew about it, I don't see too bad of penalties coming for any school.
Click to expand...


Agree with all of this. After the UNC debacle they have zero credibility left.
Like coach K says before Williamson name came up. " This corruption is just a blip. " Whoops.
 
http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/...ton-greg-mcdermott-brian-bowen-ii-recruitment

From the article:

The records show that each of the calls Dawkins made to or received from the number associated with Miller lasted at least five minutes

.....

According to court records, the FBI monitored Dawkins' cellphone from at least June 19, 2017, until Sept. 25, 2017. An FBI agent testified that calls involving a second cellphone Dawkins had, which prosecutors referred to as his "bat phone," were not intercepted via wiretaps. Prosecutors also couldn't retrieve text messages from the second phone because it was password-protected. The government has released some but not all of his phone records and wiretap recordings.

......


Sounds like no real evidence of wrongdoing. Neither side has backed down from the "wiretapped convo" scandal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top