Turn Off Ads?
Page 45 of 67 FirstFirst ... 3541424344454647484955 ... LastLast
Results 661 to 675 of 997

Thread: University of Kentucky Men's Basketball - 6th edition

  1. #661
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Bedford, KY
    Posts
    8,992

    Re: University of Kentucky Men's Basketball - 6th edition

    So all universities who bring in players from basketball factories are breaking the rules?

    Why, then, has the NCAA simply not allowed those players in Division I hoops?

    I agree that the NCAA has ruled on Kanter based on professionalism and that the rulebook at least partly explains the answer. But, when compared to the real world, your claims that it's "plain" and "black and white" ring hollow.

    What you say makes no sense in the current world of college hoops and hasn't since European kids started coming across.
    "You can learn little from victory. You can learn everything from defeat."
    -- Christy Matthewson
    "Show me a good loser and I'll show you an idiot."
    -- Leo Durocher

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #662
    Member Topcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,934

    Re: University of Kentucky Men's Basketball - 6th edition

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrap Irony View Post
    So all universities who bring in players from basketball factories are breaking the rules?

    Why, then, has the NCAA simply not allowed those players in Division I hoops?

    I agree that the NCAA has ruled on Kanter based on professionalism and that the rulebook at least partly explains the answer. But, when compared to the real world, your claims that it's "plain" and "black and white" ring hollow.

    What you say makes no sense in the current world of college hoops and hasn't since European kids started coming across.


    His whole family lived off his housing allowance . Following link actually uses facts. But most likely UK fans do not want facts because it doesn't fit there agenda to win a NCAA basketball title. http://thesportsjury.com/20110109879...kyand-shouldnt
    2006 Redzone mock Draftee's- 1(st) Daniel Bard(redsox), 1(st sup)( Jordan Walden (Angels), 2(nd) rd.- Zach Britton(Orioles), 3(rd) Blair Erickson(Cardinals), 3(rd) Tim Norton( Yankees),(cuz its a Tim Hortons thing

    Pain heals. Chicks dig scars. Glory... lasts forever.

  4. #663
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,567

    Re: University of Kentucky Men's Basketball - 6th edition

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrap Irony View Post
    So all universities who bring in players from basketball factories are breaking the rules?

    Why, then, has the NCAA simply not allowed those players in Division I hoops?

    I agree that the NCAA has ruled on Kanter based on professionalism and that the rulebook at least partly explains the answer. But, when compared to the real world, your claims that it's "plain" and "black and white" ring hollow.

    What you say makes no sense in the current world of college hoops and hasn't since European kids started coming across.
    I think it's simply a matter of manpower. The NCAA eligibility clearinghouse simply can't bust but a fraction of kids that were paid by professional clubs overseas. A lot of them probably have been paid expenses that went above and beyond the allowable "necessary" expenses. But conducting a thorough investigation to find that out isn't feasible, so short of any specific evidence existing to the contrary, the NCAA typically clears those players.

    Do all universities break the rules in bringing in those kids? Not all, but I imagine many (though it's not fair to assume all of them know their kids are likely 'professionals'). But as with the Kanter situation, I don't hold it against the schools as much the letter of the law dictates those players should be labeled professionals and the schools shouldn't gripe if they're in fact ruled ineligible.

    I don't think Kanter or Kentucky did anything wrong. But the rule is in place to keep from kids that have been playing professional basketball, coming in and having a competitive advantage. Dictating kids that have been, by law, paid as professionals, is the best way to do that. And by those laws, Kanter was found to have fit that bill. For me, that's the most important point.

    My specific points about this:

    1. I see a difference between being given extra benefits on campus, and being compensated by a professional club

    2. I see a difference between not having a competitive advantage while being compensated benefits in school and being compensated to play against professionals

    3. I see a difference between pursuing an education awarded by athletic scholarship by an institution of learning and reimbursed education expenses by a professional club.

    It's those subtle points that differentiate the players suspended for games at a time and being ruled a professional. And it's not an indictment against Kanter, just simply a letter-of-the-law observation between the differences.

    The lingering question I had: if the money was for educational expenses, but they anticipated playing NCAA ball, why were the expenses necessary? That part never added up for me (but it's not central to my point).

    Anyhow, should he be a pro because he was allegedly paid for expenses meant for education? I don't know. As I said, it's a good debate. But I think the premise of the rule is that it opens up a can of worms and potential for abuse if it's allowed.
    "No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda

  5. #664
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Bedford, KY
    Posts
    8,992

    Re: University of Kentucky Men's Basketball - 6th edition

    Quote Originally Posted by Brutus the Pimp View Post
    I think it's simply a matter of manpower. The NCAA eligibility clearinghouse simply can't bust but a fraction of kids that were paid by professional clubs overseas. A lot of them probably have been paid expenses that went above and beyond the allowable "necessary" expenses. But conducting a thorough investigation to find that out isn't feasible, so short of any specific evidence existing to the contrary, the NCAA typically clears those players.
    Respectfully, that makes no logical sense, Brutus. The NCAA could simply create a rule where all kids who played with professional teams ineligible. That they don't indicates they accept how it works currently.

    But the Kanter situation is one where they can subjectively brandish their collective amateur sword and insist on education before professionalism.

    It's subjective as Hades, runs counter to recent NCAA decisions, and does a disservice to the young man.

    That, IMO, is plain, black, and white.
    "You can learn little from victory. You can learn everything from defeat."
    -- Christy Matthewson
    "Show me a good loser and I'll show you an idiot."
    -- Leo Durocher

  6. #665
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Bedford, KY
    Posts
    8,992

    Re: University of Kentucky Men's Basketball - 6th edition

    Quote Originally Posted by Topcat View Post
    His whole family lived off his housing allowance . Following link actually uses facts. But most likely UK fans do not want facts because it doesn't fit there agenda to win a NCAA basketball title. http://thesportsjury.com/20110109879...kyand-shouldnt
    Did you read the article you linked to?

    Were one of my sophomore students to turn that in, they'd have to re-write it. Painful.

    Trolling doesn't belong on an intelligent board.
    "You can learn little from victory. You can learn everything from defeat."
    -- Christy Matthewson
    "Show me a good loser and I'll show you an idiot."
    -- Leo Durocher

  7. #666
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Bedford, KY
    Posts
    8,992

    Re: University of Kentucky Men's Basketball - 6th edition

    Quote Originally Posted by Brutus the Pimp View Post
    My specific points about this:

    1. I see a difference between being given extra benefits on campus, and being compensated by a professional club

    2. I see a difference between not having a competitive advantage while being compensated benefits in school and being compensated to play against professionals

    3. I see a difference between pursuing an education awarded by athletic scholarship by an institution of learning and reimbursed education expenses by a professional club.

    It's those subtle points that differentiate the players suspended for games at a time and being ruled a professional. And it's not an indictment against Kanter, just simply a letter-of-the-law observation between the differences.
    And mine:
    1. A ruling like the one against Kanter is ethnocentrist, ignorant of other cultures, and ignores the reality of the way basketball is played around the rest of the world.

    2. Compensation is compensation and it matters not whether a kid received it from a professional team, a booster, a street agent, or a university. Any money given to an athlete because of his skill makes said athlete professional.

    3. Recent NCAA rulings and the new focus of the new NCAA president run counter to the decision made on Kanter, especially as his intent was not to defraud nor take advantage, but to become a college player.
    "You can learn little from victory. You can learn everything from defeat."
    -- Christy Matthewson
    "Show me a good loser and I'll show you an idiot."
    -- Leo Durocher

  8. #667
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,567

    Re: University of Kentucky Men's Basketball - 6th edition

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrap Irony View Post
    Respectfully, that makes no logical sense, Brutus. The NCAA could simply create a rule where all kids who played with professional teams ineligible. That they don't indicates they accept how it works currently.

    But the Kanter situation is one where they can subjectively brandish their collective amateur sword and insist on education before professionalism.

    It's subjective as Hades, runs counter to recent NCAA decisions, and does a disservice to the young man.

    That, IMO, is plain, black, and white.
    Why doesn't it make sense? We have laws in this country that aren't enforceable but in rare instances, but that doesn't mean we do away with them or make them more strict just because we can't catch everyone doing them.

    By your logic, we should just stop allowing European players because many of them have probably played professional basketball in some fashion.

    Like I said... the NCAA is inconsistent, but they're pretty darn consistent when it comes to getting compensated by professional clubs. That's going to not end well for schools & players almost every time.
    "No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda

  9. #668
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,567

    Re: University of Kentucky Men's Basketball - 6th edition

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrap Irony View Post
    And mine:
    1. A ruling like the one against Kanter is ethnocentrist, ignorant of other cultures, and ignores the reality of the way basketball is played around the rest of the world.

    2. Compensation is compensation and it matters not whether a kid received it from a professional team, a booster, a street agent, or a university. Any money given to an athlete because of his skill makes said athlete professional.

    3. Recent NCAA rulings and the new focus of the new NCAA president run counter to the decision made on Kanter, especially as his intent was not to defraud nor take advantage, but to become a college player.
    1. OK but this isn't the rest of the world. This is America. We shouldn't have to change our culture or our tradition to suit the rest of the world. Call that ethnocentrist if you like, but this is our country and our system. If kids want to play American ball, they should have to go by our rules. If you go into a person's house, do you expect them to change their house rules for you? No.. you obey their laws & their rules.

    2. Not true. There's a huge difference getting paid by a professional organization and getting paid by random individuals. Getting benefits from boosters doesn't make you a pro. You're not providing any service for them as a basketball player. Getting paid by a basketball club to play basketball in exchange for playing ball is, by very definition, a professional.

    3. If they were so hung up on being an amateur, they never should have played for a professional club to begin with. Club teams do exist. But that's neither here nor there. Intent matters, but only to a point. He is still, by law, a pro.
    "No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda

  10. #669
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Bedford, KY
    Posts
    8,992

    Re: University of Kentucky Men's Basketball - 6th edition

    Quote Originally Posted by Brutus the Pimp View Post
    Why doesn't it make sense? We have laws in this country that aren't enforceable but in rare instances, but that doesn't mean we do away with them or make them more strict just because we can't catch everyone doing them...
    If the NCAA doesn't want professionalism or professional teams paying for things like education, then it'd be awfully easy to get rid of those players. Any player that ever played for a team like Febernahce or Olympiakos would automatically be ineligible.

    It's that simple and wouldn't take any manpower at all.

    They don't.

    That should tell you two things:

    1) The NCAA recognizes that someone is paying for a kid's education. Since most kids arond the world are remarkably poor, it stands to reason that they couldn't afford the tutors or teachers they'd need to get a secondary degree so that they'd be eligible for universities in America.
    2) Because only a few students have been declared ineligible out of a few hundred (again, over the course of 30 years), the NCAA is okay with that.

    It has nothing to do with professionalism... unless the NCAA wants it to.

    By your logic, we should just stop allowing European players because many of them have probably played professional basketball in some fashion.
    No, I'm simply reporting what's already happening. (And yeah, most European players probably have played some sort of professional ball. As have most American kids. Almost all get paid in some fashion or another.)

    Like I said... the NCAA is inconsistent, but they're pretty darn consistent when it comes to getting compensated by professional clubs. That's going to not end well for schools & players almost every time.
    Except when it does. And no one knows when the NCAA is going to declare an athlete ineligible or over what.
    "You can learn little from victory. You can learn everything from defeat."
    -- Christy Matthewson
    "Show me a good loser and I'll show you an idiot."
    -- Leo Durocher

  11. #670
    Member Topcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,934

    Re: University of Kentucky Men's Basketball - 6th edition

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrap Irony View Post
    Did you read the article you linked to?

    Were one of my sophomore students to turn that in, they'd have to re-write it. Painful.

    Trolling doesn't belong on an intelligent board.

    I was talking about the points involved in it. But I guess you rather become the grammar police. The points made in the article are true. BTW I am not trolling. I have stated from day 1 there would be no way Kantner would be eligible. The fact Oak Hill Academy wouldn't touch this kid was a dead give away he was a pro.
    Last edited by Topcat; 01-09-2011 at 07:09 PM.
    2006 Redzone mock Draftee's- 1(st) Daniel Bard(redsox), 1(st sup)( Jordan Walden (Angels), 2(nd) rd.- Zach Britton(Orioles), 3(rd) Blair Erickson(Cardinals), 3(rd) Tim Norton( Yankees),(cuz its a Tim Hortons thing

    Pain heals. Chicks dig scars. Glory... lasts forever.

  12. #671
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    3,736

    Re: University of Kentucky Men's Basketball - 6th edition



    Some UK fans not too happy about the Enes decision.

    http://www.cardchronicle.com/2011/1/...news-in-stride

    note: comments are pretty offensive

  13. #672
    Member Topcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,934

    Re: University of Kentucky Men's Basketball - 6th edition

    Quote Originally Posted by TeamSelig View Post


    Some UK fans not too happy about the Enes decision.

    http://www.cardchronicle.com/2011/1/...news-in-stride

    note: comments are pretty offensive

    Sad part is that is quite typical of all to many UK fans. Who forced the $$$ on this kid ever? Also to state the obvious he was a 1 and done player from the get go.
    2006 Redzone mock Draftee's- 1(st) Daniel Bard(redsox), 1(st sup)( Jordan Walden (Angels), 2(nd) rd.- Zach Britton(Orioles), 3(rd) Blair Erickson(Cardinals), 3(rd) Tim Norton( Yankees),(cuz its a Tim Hortons thing

    Pain heals. Chicks dig scars. Glory... lasts forever.

  14. #673
    GR8NESS WMR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky
    Posts
    16,960

    Re: University of Kentucky Men's Basketball - 6th edition

    Quote Originally Posted by Topcat View Post
    Sad part is that is quite typical of all to many UK fans. Who forced the $$$ on this kid ever? Also to state the obvious he was a 1 and done player from the get go.
    Cardinal troll.

    Sad part is someone being ignorant enough to equate 10 idiots on twitter with a fanbase comprised of millions. Kentucky fans are passionate, but to attempt to relate those twitterers to somehow being representative of the entire fanbase is just dumb.

    (PS- 28-14 ... Where were you after that beatdown at the YUMMY! Center? I guess trolling isn't as much fun when your team just got whipped...)
    Last edited by WMR; 01-10-2011 at 05:17 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Scrap Irony View Post
    Calipari is not, nor has he ever been accused or "caught", cheating. He himself turned in one of his players (Camby) for dealing with an agent to get one Final Four overturned. The other is all on the NCAA and Rose. (IF Rose cheated.)
    "Cheering for Kentucky is like watching Star Wars and hoping Darth Vader chokes an ewok"


  15. #674
    GR8NESS WMR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky
    Posts
    16,960

    Re: University of Kentucky Men's Basketball - 6th edition

    Fun question I saw on another board: Who is your pick for greatest leaper to ever play at UK?

    King Rex? Dirk? James Lee? Azubuike? John Wall?
    Quote Originally Posted by Scrap Irony View Post
    Calipari is not, nor has he ever been accused or "caught", cheating. He himself turned in one of his players (Camby) for dealing with an agent to get one Final Four overturned. The other is all on the NCAA and Rose. (IF Rose cheated.)
    "Cheering for Kentucky is like watching Star Wars and hoping Darth Vader chokes an ewok"


  16. #675
    Yay!
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Middletown, Ohio
    Posts
    7,430

    Re: University of Kentucky Men's Basketball - 6th edition

    Quote Originally Posted by WMR View Post
    Fun question I saw on another board: Who is your pick for greatest leaper to ever play at UK?

    King Rex? Dirk? James Lee? Azubuike? John Wall?
    They didn't call him "Sky" Walker for no good reason.
    When all is said and done more is said than done.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25