2010 Kentucky Wildcats Men's Basketball - 5th edition

[reds44]

Depends who you believe.

I wouldn't trust anything Cal tells anybody.

[WMR]

Wow! Samardo Samuels to keep his name in the draft and hire an agent? Being reported multiple places...

[WMR]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2010/news/story?id=5163350

I bet Pat Forde was bawling his eyes out while he wrote that. :D

[joshnky]

Wow! Samardo Samuels to keep his name in the draft and hire an agent? Being reported multiple places...

Stupid. He reminds me of Randolph Morris. Plenty of offensive talent but a poor work ethic and desire to "get rich quick" has led to a bad decision. His family could use the money but he could probably play himself into the first round next year if he returned.

Oh well, at least this helps to alleviate the logjam of mediocre front court players. Terrence Jennings probably has more athletic ability and potential if he can ever get out of Pitino's doghouse.

[dabvu2498]

Stupid. He reminds me of Randolph Morris. Plenty of offensive talent but a poor work ethic and desire to "get rich quick" has led to a bad decision. His family could use the money but he could probably play himself into the first round next year if he returned.

Oh well, at least this helps to alleviate the logjam of mediocre front court players. Terrence Jennings probably has more athletic ability and potential if he can ever get out of Pitino's doghouse.

He's a strange case to me. I know some coaches from a small school here in Ohio who were recruiting him from Jamaica before he was "discovered" by the basketball legions and ended up at that private school in NY.

They portrayed him as a level-headed, hard-working kid who was just going to be happy to get an education in the States.

Sad how things have changed.

[dabvu2498]

I was thinking that Matt Pilgrim might have looked good in a UK uni next year, until I saw this:

http://www.ocolly.com/news/protective-order-filed-against-pilgrim-1.1472348

[joshnky]

He's a strange case to me. I know some coaches from a small school here in Ohio who were recruiting him from Jamaica before he was "discovered" by the basketball legions and ended up at that private school in NY.

They portrayed him as a level-headed, hard-working kid who was just going to be happy to get an education in the States.

Sad how things have changed.

Pitino said this at the press conference:


“It’s not about right or wrong decisions in this case,” Pitino said. “It’s about a family making a decision. We certainly support a family making a decision and we move forward.”

It appears that Samardo's family pushed him to do this regardless of advice to the contrary.

[Blimpie]

Pitino said this at the press conference:


“It’s not about right or wrong decisions in this case,” Pitino said. “It’s about a family making a decision. We certainly support a family making a decision and we move forward.”



Pitino espousing the virtues of family...

Nice.

[WVRed]

In other news, Rod Strickland has been reassigned to an administrative assistant position (similar to what he held in Memphis) and so there is an assistants job open.

My guess is Kenny Payne.

[dabvu2498]

Wait a minute!!! I didn't think there was going to be an assistant opening at UK! Oh well. Nevermind. I musy consider my source better next time. :)

[WMR]

Eloy Vargas is planning to visit UK per Jerry Mayer and others...

sounds like he needs to do quite a bit of work to get qualified without going juco... would be a very nice pick-up if he can get qualified.

[WMR]

Eloy Vargas has committed to UK per Meyer and others ...

should be a good depth guy for the front court (which we need desperately).

[WMR]

From Meyer's Mailbag...

Is Vargas headed to Kentucky?

If UK lands Eloy Vargas, does that give them the No. 1 class?

- Mike from Lexington

Landing Vargas would push Kentucky past Memphis into the top spot in the national team recruiting rankings for 2010.

As a 2008 prospect, Vargas was the No. 26 ranked prospect in the Rivals150. He wasn't healthy, and consequently struggled during his freshman year at Florida. He transferred to Miami Dade Community College, where he hit his stride. Vargas and averaged 25 points and 15 rebounds per game.

[texasdave]

Don't know if this is in this thread but a nice story nonetheless.

http://highschool.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1084044


NASHVILLE, Tenn. - With the confidence of a coach and the passion of a preacher, Zach Lipson has spent much of his teenage years telling anyone he meets about his plans to join one of the nation's elite college basketball programs.

It didn't matter to him that he'd never played a minute of organized hoops. Or that he stood little chance of ever being more than 4 feet tall. He still gave the same speech to just about everyone he met, whether he was chatting at a dinner table full of strangers or sitting across from a skeptical guidance counselor.

[WVRed]

From Meyer's Mailbag...

Is Vargas headed to Kentucky?

If UK lands Eloy Vargas, does that give them the No. 1 class?

- Mike from Lexington

Landing Vargas would push Kentucky past Memphis into the top spot in the national team recruiting rankings for 2010.

As a 2008 prospect, Vargas was the No. 26 ranked prospect in the Rivals150. He wasn't healthy, and consequently struggled during his freshman year at Florida. He transferred to Miami Dade Community College, where he hit his stride. Vargas and averaged 25 points and 15 rebounds per game.

I think Vargas will provide some good depth at a position we will likely need, but I don't see him being a major contributor. Still holding out hope on Terrence Jones.

I've never been a big fan of the JuCo route. You generally invest in players who have maybe 2 years of eligibility left who while they are older generally are less advanced than somebody out of high school.

Remember when Darnell Dodson was the second coming of Rudy Gay?

[Joseph]

From the rumors that won't die department there is another rumor today floating around about a package deal of LeBron and Cal going to Chicago.

[WVRed]

Looks like John Wall will be playing for the Wizards next season. He should be a welcome face in DC as long as he doesn't brandish a gun.

Chad Ford has Cousins going 5th to Sacramento. Would be a nice 1-2 punch with Tyreke Evans, but I could see Boogie working his way into the third pick with New Jersey. IMO he has improved himself to be picked over Derrick Favors.

[Joseph]

I saw the SI mock earlier.

They had Wall at 1. Cousins at 4 to Minnesota. Orton at 14 to Minnesota. Patterson at 15 to Chicago. And finally Bledsoe at 16 to Miami.

I might be off one slot on those last 3, but those were the teams and order.

As a part time Bulls fan, I'd be happy with Pat at 15.

[dabvu2498]

Orton ahead of Patterson. That surprises me.

[WVRed]

Terrence Jones to decide at 10:30. This time, it's for good.

[WVRed]

Ok, i've tried to get on both TBK and KSR, both of the servers have apparently crashed. Does this happen for other teams?

[WVRed]

Terrence Jones to Kentucky.

Looking at this years recruiting class:

PG-Brandon Knight
SG-Doron Lamb
PF-Terrence Jones
PF-Eloy Vargas
C-Enes Kanter

[WMR]

yee haw

[Javy Pornstache]

Terrence Jones to Kentucky.

Looking at this years recruiting class:

PG-Brandon Knight
SG-Doron Lamb
PF-Terrence Jones
PF-Eloy Vargas
C-Enes Kanter


Don't forget our boy Stacey Poole, Jr. And a certain assistant coach officially joining the fold soon as well.

[macro]

Orton ahead of Patterson. That surprises me.

I was listening to a talking head on radio or TV a few weeks ago (Mike McConnell show on WLW, perhaps?), and they made the point that the longer a player stays in school, the lower their draft position. It seems that NBA teams are more likely to draft players based on "potential" than on what they have actually accomplished.

In this case, Patterson has accomplished more than Orton "might have", but the NBA is more enamored with the potential than what has already happened.

It's almost like a bird in the bush is worth two in the hand.

[Razor Shines]

Terrence Jones to Kentucky.

Looking at this years recruiting class:

PG-Brandon Knight
SG-Doron Lamb
PF-Terrence Jones
PF-Eloy Vargas
C-Enes Kanter

Jones has one of the those great shot fakes that are really hard not to go for.

[WVRed]

Jones has one of the those great shot fakes that are really hard not to go for.

I'm thinking Lamar Odom. A crafty lefty who can run the floor and spread you out but can also bang inside.

Sucks to be a Washington fan right now. We've poached two recruits from them (Enes Kanter and now Terrence Jones). Not to mention the possibility of us playing them in Maui.

[cumberlandreds]

I'm thinking Lamar Odom. A crafty lefty who can run the floor and spread you out but can also bang inside.

Sucks to be a Washington fan right now. We've poached two recruits from them (Enes Kanter and now Terrence Jones). Not to mention the possibility of us playing them in Maui.

You have to believe ESPN will try to get a UK/UW matchup in Maui. It would be an interesting game to say the least.

[jmac]

Don't forget our boy Stacey Poole, Jr. And a certain assistant coach officially joining the fold soon as well.
Yeah...one ranking has UK with 5 of top 33 with Poole being # 33. Not too shabby ! :thumbup:

[WMR]

Rivals released their final ranking of the top 25 recruiting classes of 2010...

Very, very strong haul overall for the SEC as 5 teams made their way into the top 25.

[WMR]

The dichotomy between the East and the West next season is going to be as wide as the grand canyon.

[joshnky]

So, if Bledsoe is ruled ineligible will UK distribute "UK2K" shirts again next year when they pass 2000 wins for the second time? :)

[dabvu2498]

So, if Bledsoe is ruled ineligible will UK distribute "UK2K" shirts again next year when they pass 2000 wins for the second time? :)

Cal knew nothing about it and the NCAA cleared him, so it's OK. ;)

[dabvu2498]

In all seriousness, though, Bledsoe raising his GPA from a 1.9 to a 2.4 deson't seem like a big deal. It's not like he went from a 1.9 to a 3.9.

The landlord/rent stuff should be somewhat of a concern for UK fans. Even though it didn't have anything to do with UK or Cal, it would make him ineligible and all that goes with it. Not good.

The "unnamed college coach" stuff is a load of poop and I'm quite surprised the NY Times published it.

[Scrap Irony]

I looked at it differently, dab. I read the inteview and see a landlord mad enough to make problems for Bledsoe and his mother because they ran out on the rent. Maybe she's looking to small claims court and a way to get back her money. Maybe she's the type to talk all day long. Maybe she's looking for hush money.

I don't really trust anything she says.

[Hoosier Red]

In all seriousness, though, Bledsoe raising his GPA from a 1.9 to a 2.4 deson't seem like a big deal. It's not like he went from a 1.9 to a 3.9.

The landlord/rent stuff should be somewhat of a concern for UK fans. Even though it didn't have anything to do with UK or Cal, it would make him ineligible and all that goes with it. Not good.

The "unnamed college coach" stuff is a load of poop and I'm quite surprised the NY Times published it.

Several college coaches who recruited Bledsoe told ESPN.com they seriously questioned whether he would meet NCAA eligibility standards based on transcripts reviewed after his sophomore and junior years of high school. Following his junior year, Bledsoe maintained only a 1.92 grade-point average in core courses, well shy of the 2.5 he would eventually graduate with.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=5231161

I don't know Dab, to go from a 1.92 through 3 years to a 2.5 GPA for the four years would require him to get a 4.25 GPA his senior year.

Wait after re-reading the article it appears some of the classes he took replaced the lower scoring ones on his record. So it goes from impossible to implausible.

[Scrap Irony]

I teach in a high school and see GPA's go up like this every year. We've got a kid this year who's gone from a 1.75 to a 2.5 by re-taking two core courses (English I and Algebra II) and getting good marks in upper level courses.

Think of it this way: a student needs 25 "points" in his 10 core courses. (This assumes Science, Math, and English courses for three years, with an additional English class as a senior. Some states require only 10. Some require 11. Some require 12.) His GPA before his senior year was less than a 2.0. Hypothetically, let's say Bledsoe makes a B in Consumer Math, C's in Intro to Chemistry, Biology, and English II, a D in English I, and an F in English III.

If you replace one 0 (the score an F gets you) with a B, you've suddenly gained 7"points". (In this example, Bledsoe re-took English III in summer school and earned a B.) If the same kid got a B on his other three core courses (say, English IV, Algebra II, and Biology II), his "points" for his senior year add up to 16. Those sixteen (and his previous 11) give him the 2.5 GPA.

If a kid actually takes it seriously and a coach stays on his butt (or a teacher or a parent or an administrator), it's really easy to raise core course GPA's to acceptable levels. It just sounds as if Bledsoe began taking his coursework seriously his senior year (something more than just athletes seem to do).

Really, nothing to see that's too far out of the realm of possibility at all.

[WMR]

I looked at it differently, dab. I read the inteview and see a landlord mad enough to make problems for Bledsoe and his mother because they ran out on the rent. Maybe she's looking to small claims court and a way to get back her money. Maybe she's the type to talk all day long. Maybe she's looking for hush money.

I don't really trust anything she says.

That's what immediately sprang to my mind as well. Hearing the landlord still wants several thousand dollars makes everything else she claims suspect.

Funny that the NY Times prints this crap the same day UCONN gets hit with 8 major rules violations by the NCAA. TOTAL coincidence I'm sure. :rolleyes:

[WMR]

All of these allegations ALLEGEDLY took place while Cal was still at Memphis and G was coaching at UK.

[Hoosier Red]

That's what immediately sprang to my mind as well. Hearing the landlord still wants several thousand dollars makes everything else she claims suspect.

Funny that the NY Times prints this crap the same day UCONN gets hit with 8 major rules violations by the NCAA. TOTAL coincidence I'm sure. :rolleyes:

Why would the NY times be trying to protect UConn?

[Hoosier Red]

I teach in a high school and see GPA's go up like this every year. We've got a kid this year who's gone from a 1.75 to a 2.5 by re-taking two core courses (English I and Algebra II) and getting good marks in upper level courses.

Think of it this way: a student needs 25 "points" in his 10 core courses. (This assumes Science, Math, and English courses for three years, with an additional English class as a senior. Some states require only 10. Some require 11. Some require 12.) His GPA before his senior year was less than a 2.0. Hypothetically, let's say Bledsoe makes a B in Consumer Math, C's in Intro to Chemistry, Biology, and English II, a D in English I, and an F in English III.

If you replace one 0 (the score an F gets you) with a B, you've suddenly gained 7"points". (In this example, Bledsoe re-took English III in summer school and earned a B.) If the same kid got a B on his other three core courses (say, English IV, Algebra II, and Biology II), his "points" for his senior year add up to 16. Those sixteen (and his previous 11) give him the 2.5 GPA.

If a kid actually takes it seriously and a coach stays on his butt (or a teacher or a parent or an administrator), it's really easy to raise core course GPA's to acceptable levels. It just sounds as if Bledsoe began taking his coursework seriously his senior year (something more than just athletes seem to do).

Really, nothing to see that's too far out of the realm of possibility at all.

Fair enough. The whole system is rife with potential to be exploited so the line between exploiting a crappy system and "cheating" is pretty grey.

I mean seriously an "on-line" biology course?

[WMR]

Why would the NY times be trying to protect UConn?

Who knows what the connection is.

Biggest paper in New England publishes this story the SAME DAY the biggest college basketball team in New England is hit with major rules violations?

[Hoosier Red]

All of these allegations ALLEGEDLY took place while Cal was still at Memphis and G was coaching at UK.

Bledsoe didn't sign with Kentucky until after Calipari was hired. IF Cal signed a guy who cheated the system to get eligible, it's on him. Sorry.

[WMR]

Bledsoe didn't sign with Kentucky until after Calipari was hired. IF Cal signed a guy who cheated the system, it's on him. Sorry.

Of course it will come down on him. Hell it already is. Point is, he didn't have anything to do with Eric while all this alleged 'STUFF' was going down.

[Hoosier Red]

Who knows what the connection is.

Biggest paper in New England publishes this story the SAME DAY the biggest college basketball team in New England is hit with major rules violations?

That's a weak deflection WMR. First of all the NY Times is a national paper. It considers itself to be the "paper of record"(a big deal in journalism circles.) With a story as big as Kentucky possibly playing someone who was ineligible, they break that story every day as soon as they are able. They don't hold on to it until either a) something happens to a NE school so they can "protect" it or b) Until after something happens at a NE school so that it has it's own storyline.

Follow your reasoning to its logical conclusion, do you think the Times knew about this story for some time and had the sources necessary to print it but didn't?
Or that they had just gotten enough sources but should have held onto the story until the UConn story had been fully played out?

I can all but guarantee you that with a)the Kentucky story being as potentially huge as it is, and b)the competition to get a story like this out and break the news as hard as it is, the only consideration given was if there were enough sources to go to print. They wouldn't have cared if the entire Big East had gone on probation they would have printed the story as soon as they had enough sources to make it "legitimate."

[WMR]

That's a weak deflection WMR. First of all the NY Times is a national paper. It considers itself to be the "paper of record"(a big deal in journalism circles.) With a story as big as Kentucky possibly playing someone who was ineligible, they break that story every day as soon as they are able. They don't hold on to it until either a) something happens to a NE school so they can "protect" it or b) Until after something happens at a NE school so that it has it's own storyline.

Follow your reasoning to its logical conclusion, do you think the Times knew about this story for some time and had the sources necessary to print it but didn't?
Or that they had just gotten enough sources but should have held onto the story until the UConn story had been fully played out?

I can all but guarantee you that with a)the Kentucky story being as potentially huge as it is, and b)the competition to get a story like this out and break the news as hard as it is, the only consideration given was if there were enough sources to go to print. They wouldn't have cared if the entire Big East had gone on probation they would have printed the story as soon as they had enough sources to make it "legitimate."

Not buying it.

Of course, I wouldn't use the NYT for anything other than lining my bird cage.

edit: The NYT considers themselves the 'paper of record'?? LOL, Good for them. I don't.

[Hoosier Red]

Of course it will come down on him. Hell it already is. Point is, he didn't have anything to do with Eric while all this alleged 'STUFF' was going down.

I know and he didn't know about Marcus Camby talking to an agent, and how was he to know that Derrick Rose drove from Chicago to Detroit to take his SAT's, and he certainly would have put a stop to all these terrible things going on if only he knew.

The good news for Cal is that if these allegations do stick, he'll have a nice fall back coaching Lebron James somewhere in the NBA.

[WMR]

I know and he didn't know about Marcus Camby talking to an agent, and how was he to know that Derrick Rose drove from Chicago to Detroit to take his SAT's, and he certainly would have put a stop to all these terrible things going on if only he knew.

The good news for Cal is that if these allegations do stick, he'll have a nice fall back coaching Lebron James somewhere in the NBA.

And I know that you along with every other Hoosier, Cardinal, and Volunteer will be praying every night to baby Jesus that the worst comes to pass. :D

[Scrap Irony]

I mean seriously an "on-line" biology course?

Most of our summer school kids take on-line courses. It costs the kid $170 and is available to all of them, not just star athletes. (Like we'd ever have one of those.)

For a poor school district (or one that's trying to keep a better eye on the bottom line), it's far cheaper than paying somewhere between $2500 and $5000 for a Biology teacher to come in for two or three weeks, especially when considering other kids need everything from Basic Health to Agriscience to US History (not to mention the four Englishes, four maths, and at least three other sciences).

You pay an Instructional Aide $10 an hour to watch 30 or so kids while they try to puzzle out problems on their own. If they need help on particular problems, there's always a teacher around to help (generally for free, as most teachers are easy marks willing to work with a student who truly wants help).

I'm guessing Bledsoe is like about 25% of the students in my high school (or almost any low income public high school, for that matter). He didn't listen to his teachers. His parents didn't care or see the value in an education (or wasn't all that willing to put in extra time it takes). He was lazy in the extreme (as it takes work to fail in today's educational world of quadruple redundancies, individualized learning plans, and No Child Left Behind.

[Scrap Irony]

Funny that the NY Times prints this crap the same day UCONN gets hit with 8 major rules violations by the NCAA. TOTAL coincidence I'm sure. :rolleyes:

Wow. Talk about grasping for straws.

The reputation of the NY Times is beyond reproach, but, yeah, they're probably planning their reporting around their hatred for UK. :rolleyes:

[Hoosier Red]

Not buying it.

Of course, I wouldn't use the NYT for anything other than lining my bird cage.



So which was it?
Did they know about the story early and hold on until the UConn thing broke?
Sports Editor: DANGIT, UCONN hit with 8 violations, I can't have this, think of all the UCONN alums who read my paper? It's okay, think, think,
Wait I've got it. Thamel,Evans, don't you have a Kentucky story that I told you to put in the drawer a month ago to hold onto until a NE school got hit with bad news from the NCAA? I knew that would come in handy.

Or did the Times "discover" this story in the 10 hours after UCONN was hit?
Sports Editor: DANGIT, UCONN hit with 8 violations, I can't have this, think of all the UCONN alums who read my paper? It's okay, think, think,
Wait I've got it. THamel, Evans, I need something on Kentucky.
Evans; But what about this UCONN story, shouldn't we cover this?
Sports Editor: No, silly, we're based in New York, we can't possibly write a story on a NE team's violations. We need something to take peoples attention away from that.
Thamel: But Why Kentucky? I mean there's a lot of schools out there, Kansas, Oklahoma, USC,
Sports Editor: No no, it has to be Kentucky. The Kansas story has already been broken, and lets face it, it's not exactly news when Oklahoma or USC breaks the rules. No it has to be Kentucky. I bet they used an ineligible player. In the next ten hours I want you to find the high school transcripts for each of their players from last year, talk to the coaches and teachers at those schools find some bitter rival coaches(I'll grant this may have happened yesterday) and call Kentucky just to get their useless denial.

[WMR]

The reputation of the NY Times is beyond reproach

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I'll have to remember that one.

[WMR]

So which was it?
Did they know about the story early and hold on until the UConn thing broke?
Sports Editor: DANGIT, UCONN hit with 8 violations, I can't have this, think of all the UCONN alums who read my paper? It's okay, think, think,
Wait I've got it. Thamel,Evans, don't you have a Kentucky story that I told you to put in the drawer a month ago to hold onto until a NE school got hit with bad news from the NCAA? I knew that would come in handy.

Or did the Times "discover" this story in the 10 hours after UCONN was hit?
Sports Editor: DANGIT, UCONN hit with 8 violations, I can't have this, think of all the UCONN alums who read my paper? It's okay, think, think,
Wait I've got it. THamel, Evans, I need something on Kentucky.
Evans; But what about this UCONN story, shouldn't we cover this?
Sports Editor: No, silly, we're based in New York, we can't possibly write a story on a NE team's violations. We need something to take peoples attention away from that.
Thamel: But Why Kentucky? I mean there's a lot of schools out there, Kansas, Oklahoma, USC,
Sports Editor: No no, it has to be Kentucky. The Kansas story has already been broken, and lets face it, it's not exactly news when Oklahoma or USC breaks the rules. No it has to be Kentucky. I bet they used an ineligible player. In the next ten hours I want you to find the high school transcripts for each of their players from last year, talk to the coaches and teachers at those schools find some bitter rival coaches(I'll grant this may have happened yesterday) and call Kentucky just to get their useless denial.

The weakness is that they printed this crap article in the first place.

'UNNAMED COLLEGE COACH'

LMAO.

[Scrap Irony]

So, WMR, you're saying the New York Times is intentionally making up a story to keep interested eyes away from UConn?

Really?

[WMR]

No but I think they've had this weak-ass article on a shelf somewhere for some time now.

And I would love to tell you more about what I think about the NYT, but site rules prevent that.

[Hoosier Red]

The weakness is that they printed this crap article in the first place.

'UNNAMED COLLEGE COACH'

LMAO.

Lots of articles use unnamed sources. And admittedly there are grey areas where it should and shouldn't be used. But tell me why you think its crap in this case?

Just curious why you think so little of the NY Times? Due to their editorial board? Or their reporting? Have they specifically reported something inaccurately that made you decide they weren't worthwhile? Because quite honestly if the NY Times isn't considered to be a worthwhile journalistic source, I struggle to think who would be.

[WMR]

Because quite honestly if the NY Times isn't considered to be a worthwhile journalistic source, I struggle to think who would be.

You might be onto something there.

[Hoosier Red]

No but I think they've had this weak-ass article on a shelf somewhere for some time now.



So it's understandable that you think the story's weak, but obviously it had interest.
You think they would sit on it,(until a northeastern school or someone they were trying to protect) had a big violation, and risk being scooped by another site?

I mean in your opinion, there's not much to report on, so it's not inconceivable that another site could also do very little reporting and stumble upon it. I know you think the media is out to get Coach Cal so it's not like ESPN and Fox Sports and the Kentucky Herald Leader wouldn't be motivated. But you think the Times would risk being scooped and sit on the story?
WHY?

Absolutely no chance that this happened.

That's like saying the Watergate story wouldn't have broken if the Redskins hadn't lost to the Cowboys and the Post needed a bigger story to distract their audience.

[Hoosier Red]

You might be onto something there.

Fair enough. But do me a favor. Every time you post any article, link, etc. You should also put, "This site is not as well thought of as the New York Times."

[WMR]

Fair enough. But do me a favor. Every time you post any article, link, etc. You should also put, "This site is not as well thought of as the New York Times."

I link to sites all the times. Hell, even the holy NYT. Doesn't mean I'm buying all or any of what they're selling.

[WMR]

Hoosier are you watching the US v. Turkey?

[WMR]

So it's understandable that you think the story's weak, but obviously it had interest.
You think they would sit on it,(until a northeastern school or someone they were trying to protect) had a big violation, and risk being scooped by another site?

I mean in your opinion, there's not much to report on, so it's not inconceivable that another site could also do very little reporting and stumble upon it. I know you think the media is out to get Coach Cal so it's not like ESPN and Fox Sports and the Kentucky Herald Leader wouldn't be motivated. But you think the Times would risk being scooped and sit on the story?
WHY?

Absolutely no chance that this happened.

That's like saying the Watergate story wouldn't have broken if the Redskins hadn't lost to the Cowboys and the Post needed a bigger story to distract their audience.

Who's the sports editor over there at the NYT, these days... probably married to a UCONN grad.

[Hoosier Red]

Hoosier are you watching the US v. Turkey?

Back and forth on my computer. Brilliant cross by Altidore, too bad Dempsey couldn't get there.
Spector's looked worse than horrific.

[WMR]

Cool, I'm going to post something in the WC thread. you should respond.

[Scrap Irony]

So you trust no journalistic sources?

So, if anyone breaks a story on Kentucky, you wouldn't believe them?

Nice, that.

Saves valuable thinking time.

[WMR]

So you trust no journalistic sources?

So, if anyone breaks a story on Kentucky, you wouldn't believe them?

Nice, that.

Saves valuable thinking time.

Of course not. I judge every piece of journalism I encounter by the same standard. GIVE ME EVIDENCE. EVIDENCE. Not a bunch of suppositional crap.

I expect at least a SMIDGEN of evidence of wrong-doing by a University before you basically drag them through the mud.

[Scrap Irony]

But they weren't dragging the university through the mud.

They reported that Eric Bledsoe might be guilty of cheating while still in high school, both academically and through illegal payments. It said nothing about Calipari or Kentucky.

There was very little supposition in the article.

[WMR]

But they weren't dragging the university through the mud.

They reported that Eric Bledsoe might be guilty of cheating while still in high school, both academically and through illegal payments. It said nothing about Calipari or Kentucky.

There was very little supposition in the article.

The aspersions they were casting are clear. SO AND SO unnamed coach says, 'You need xxx amount of dollars to get this kid.'

Kid goes to UK to play for Satan himself John Calipari.

My guess for the sore loser is Mr. King of the On-Court Chicken Dance.

[WMR]

If they had limited the scope of the article to the landlady and that issue, I wouldn't have had as much a problem with the article. BUT they didn't do that, because then you can't drag Kentucky into it.

[WMR]

http://www.truebluekentucky.com/index.php/forums/2-true-blue-hoops/501556-eric-bledsoe-stuff-just-got-home.html?start=20#501684

[Hoosier Red]

Of course not. I judge every piece of journalism I encounter by the same standard. GIVE ME EVIDENCE. EVIDENCE. Not a bunch of suppositional crap.

I expect at least a SMIDGEN of evidence of wrong-doing by a University before you basically drag them through the mud.

What constitutes evidence in your mind?

The story is that the NCAA is investigating. Should they not report that?
They looked into what potentially the NCAA was investigating.

They interviewed the landlady(and give fair treatment to the coach who denies her claim)

They reviewed the transcript through his junior year and interviewed an "experienced compliance officer" who explained what would need to happen in order for Bledsoe to become eligible.

They reviewed the circumstances to Bledsoe's high school move. They interviewed the coach at his former high school who described it as "suspicious." And it's not like the former high school coach has an ax to grind, he was trying to help Bledsoe get into a Christian high school when he found out that he was going to transfer.

They interviewed a teacher at Bledsoe's second high school. Then the principal at the high school who gave his account as to how again it was possible for Bledsoe to make the necessary grades.

Who should they have talked to and didn't(or didn't attempt to.)
What should they have included or omitted?


Who's the sports editor over there at the NYT, these days... probably married to a UCONN grad.

Tom Jolly is the sports editor. He could be a UCONN grad(I checked, he didn't) and it wouldn't have played a part into breaking the Kentucky story.

I'm not trying to sell you the Times believe it or not, the article is investigative journalism which has a lot of ethical and journalistic issues. But its an important type of journalism, and everything I read in this piece is factual. The article lays out the facts for the reader and lets the reader make up his own mind. I don't know where the fault of the Times is here.

But I think it's too easy to simply attack the Times and say "The Times? Why should I believe them?"

[dabvu2498]

http://www.truebluekentucky.com/index.php/forums/2-true-blue-hoops/501556-eric-bledsoe-stuff-just-got-home.html?start=20#501684

Now there's a source of journalistic integrity.

[WMR]

Now there's a source of journalistic integrity.

LOL he knows the NCAA rule book.

[dabvu2498]

LOL he knows the NCAA rule book.

Yeah. I doubt it.

[WMR]

What constitutes evidence in your mind?

The story is that the NCAA is investigating. Should they not report that?
They looked into what potentially the NCAA was investigating.

They interviewed the landlady(and give fair treatment to the coach who denies her claim)

They reviewed the transcript through his junior year and interviewed an "experienced compliance officer" who explained what would need to happen in order for Bledsoe to become eligible.

They reviewed the circumstances to Bledsoe's high school move. They interviewed the coach at his former high school who described it as "suspicious." And it's not like the former high school coach has an ax to grind, he was trying to help Bledsoe get into a Christian high school when he found out that he was going to transfer.

They interviewed a teacher at Bledsoe's second high school. Then the principal at the high school who gave his account as to how again it was possible for Bledsoe to make the necessary grades.

Who should they have talked to and didn't(or didn't attempt to.)
What should they have included or omitted?



Tom Jolly is the sports editor. He could be a UCONN grad(I checked, he didn't) and it wouldn't have played a part into breaking the Kentucky story.

I'm not trying to sell you the Times believe it or not, the article is investigative journalism which has a lot of ethical and journalistic issues. But its an important type of journalism, and everything I read in this piece is factual. The article lays out the facts for the reader and lets the reader make up his own mind. I don't know where the fault of the Times is here.

But I think it's too easy to simply attack the Times and say "The Times? Why should I believe them?"

The grade stuff is fine too. That's a total non-story IMO.

Get back to that UNNAMED COLLEGE COACH. Crap like that seems better suited for TMZ Sports than the NEW YORK TIMES, but maybe I just overestimated them. :dunno:

[WMR]

Yeah. I doubt it.

I never would have guessed that. :D

[dabvu2498]

I never would have guessed that. :D

Mostly because what he said isn't true.

[WMR]

Mostly because what he said isn't true.

Really. What's the rule?

[dabvu2498]

Really. What's the rule?

Here's the entire NCAA rulebook. http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D110.pdf

Specifically, see Section 12 - Amateurism. More specifically:


12.1.2 Amateur Status. An individual loses amateur status and thus shall not be eligible for intercollegiate competition in a particular sport if the individual:

(a) Uses his or her athletics skill (directly or indirectly) for pay in any form in that sport;



12.1.2.1 Prohibited Forms of Pay. “Pay,” as used in Bylaw 12.1.2 above, includes, but is not limited to, the following:

12.1.2.1.1 Salary, Gratuity or Compensation. Any direct or indirect salary, gratuity or comparable compensation.

Nowhere does it mention the "pay back" scenario proposed by Maggard.

I dare you to ask Maggard for specific examples of where this "pay back" has happened. I'd do it, but it'd never get posted. I've made 4 posts there and none of them has ever seen the light of day.

[Hoosier Red]

The grade stuff is fine too. That's a total non-story IMO.

Get back to that UNNAMED COLLEGE COACH. Crap like that seems better suited for TMZ Sports than the NEW YORK TIMES, but maybe I just overestimated them. :dunno:

I just don't understand what's crap about it. You really seem hung up on this "unnamed college coach" thing. In both instances in this article where the Times used an unnamed source, they gave the reason why the source wanted to remain unnamed. From a journalistic standpoint this seems reasonable.

Any smart person would TOTALLY ignore the "unnamed college coach" claiming that Ford asked for money. For every good ball player that goes to one school, you can find 3 other coaches who lost that kid who will attempt to save face by claiming the winning school cheated..... it's so old had and passe' that it's boring to me by now.
Taken from Marc Maggard(who it should be noted has not been offered a job at the NY Times. Though maybe that's becasue they deem him too credible.)

Call me crazy but I don't understand how the coach is saving face here. In my mind, it would only be saving face if the coach identified himself.
Now, it doesn't mean that the coach isn't lying or bitter at Calipari's success or 100 other things but saving face doesn't really make sense to me.

[RiverRat13]

Why would Calipari recruit a kid who got a 14 on his ACT the first time he took it coming off the heels of the Rose fiasco? To me, that is the question. He is the coach of a top 3 program. He doesn't need to take the chances like he did at UMass and at Memphis.

Sorry, you can't keep recruiting guys who qualify at the last minute and then throw your hands up and say "I didn't know!"

[Joseph]

This is a little bit like holding in football.

It happens on every play, the officials just don't call it. In the same vein I'd bet most every college is doing something that is a violation of the ncaa bylaws and is either getting away with it, or are unaware of it.

The implications that Cal is consciously dirty is only as accurate as saying Coach K, Calhoun, Pitino, Kennedy, Huggins, Mack and on and on are dirty as well.

The witchhunt is unnecessary, they are all witches. Including whomever coaches YOUR team. Get over it.

[joshnky]

The witchhunt is unnecessary, they are all witches. Including whomever coaches YOUR team. Get over it.

I 100% agree with you and hope that you're directing this to UK fans as well. The reason UofL fans rejoice at bad news for Cal is UK fans seem to have this "holier than thou" complex about their coach and their program.

On a side note, this story just lends further support to the fact that Cal is going to be watched extremely closely. This NYT reporter likely has nothing against UK but he wants to make a name for himself as the one who finally cracked the teflon suit that Cal seems to wear. Things that likely would be missed at another program will be exposed at UK because Calipari has the spotlight on him.

[guttle11]

This is a little bit like holding in football.

It happens on every play, the officials just don't call it. In the same vein I'd bet most every college is doing something that is a violation of the ncaa bylaws and is either getting away with it, or are unaware of it.

The implications that Cal is consciously dirty is only as accurate as saying Coach K, Calhoun, Pitino, Kennedy, Huggins, Mack and on and on are dirty as well.

The witchhunt is unnecessary, they are all witches. Including whomever coaches YOUR team. Get over it.

It's a nice deflection, but it's not at all accurate. It is accurate to say that many programs live in a shade of gray, dealing with AAU leaches, entourages, and back channel recruiting during dark periods, criminal records, exceptions when it comes to a school's minimum standards... Sketchy? Yup, maybe even unethical, but 99% of that isn't even a violation as the rule is written. The NCAA only clears the haze when things get out of hand, like the AAU package deals.

An agent paying a player, a player ruled ineligible because of a bogus ACT score, and a recruit allegedly having rent paid and grade doctoring in HS are as serious as it gets. Those are not things that happen at every program, under every coach.

To me, either Calipari is truly clueless about what goes on with his players/recruits, or he's just smart enough to skirt by personally (unlike Bozeman, Sampson, Floyd or Calhoun). It's only damaged his former programs to date. With every accusation, and yes it's only an accusation with Bledsoe, the latter seems more and more likely.

[WMR]

Check the sig. Great post, and from a non-UK fan to boot.

I really wish people would at least give him the Camby situation. He turned his own freaking program into the NCAA.

[Scrap Irony]

It's a nice deflection, but it's not at all accurate. It is accurate to say that many programs live in a shade of gray, dealing with AAU leaches, entourages, and back channel recruiting during dark periods, criminal records, exceptions when it comes to a school's minimum standards... Sketchy? Yup, maybe even unethical, but 99% of that isn't even a violation as the rule is written. The NCAA only clears the haze when things get out of hand, like the AAU package deals.

Deflection? Perhaps.

However, all Division I coaches cheat. All of them.

All Division I programs are dirty. All of them.

It's the level of cheating that occurs is the question.

Coach K is dirty, as is Roy Williams, as was Dean Smith, as was John Wooden.

It's the nature of the beast. The NCAA "handbook" is longer than Ulysses and twice as difficult to understand. Some coaches wallow around in the dirt. Some dab it behind their ears and insist their clean.

Do I think Calipari does some questionable things that skirt NCAA rules?

Absolutely.

But he needs to stand in line among the "best and brightest" the NCAA has. Pitino, K, Williams, Self, and Calhoun are just as filthy.

[guttle11]

Deflection? Perhaps.

However, all Division I coaches cheat. All of them.

All Division I programs are dirty. All of them.

It's the level of cheating that occurs is the question.

Coach K is dirty, as is Roy Williams, as was Dean Smith, as was John Wooden.

It's the nature of the beast. The NCAA "handbook" is longer than Ulysses and twice as difficult to understand. Some coaches wallow around in the dirt. Some dab it behind their ears and insist their clean.

Do I think Calipari does some questionable things that skirt NCAA rules?

Absolutely.

But he needs to stand in line among the "best and brightest" the NCAA has. Pitino, K, Williams, Self, and Calhoun are just as filthy.

We can agree that most programs commit violations, but "Cheating" assumes intent. It never gets reported, but every program reports violations, or potential violations, to the NCAA. Most are nothing more than bumping into a player's family at the mall and saying more than hello then walking away, or a phone call that lasts 3 minutes too long. Compliance offices laugh as they send the fax. Technically a violation, but not at all cheating.

If Coach A knows about something and looks the other way or tries to cover it up, that's cheating. If Coach B finds out and self-reports, that's just a violation.

"Dirty" applies more to ethics, and on that we can agree. Coaches mislead (or outright lie), work the AAU system and live right on the edge of the rules. You have to live in the muck to win in big time college hoops, but doing so is not necessarily "cheating". Not every program is out there paying players, changing grades, ignoring practice rules, accepting welding certificates, you name it. Major violations are rare in the scheme of things, and most are self-reported. A Tim Floyd or Todd Bozeman situation does happen, but it's not a complete Wild West scenario that many people would lead you to believe. More like the average Joe Smith doing his income tax return. Just because he goes to the edge with deductions and may miss a decimal point, it doesn't lump him in with guys that launder and hide barrels of income.

[Cedric]

They deserve whatever they get. And we all know this story won't end well. Never does with Cal. Only ends well for him.

[WVRed]

They deserve whatever they get. And we all know this story won't end well. Never does with Cal. Only ends well for him.

The way I am treating it is this, if he does a 180 and takes an NBA job, I will know something is up.

[Reds4Life]

They deserve whatever they get. And we all know this story won't end well. Never does with Cal. Only ends well for him.

It will end up with him leaving for a truckload of cash in the NBA, and his previous employer holding the bag. Nothing new.

The amusing part of all this isn't the Cal is going to be investigated, again, it's the fact that UK fans are suprised by it. You had to know what you were getting when this guy was hired. Nothing but a self inflicted wound that didn't have to be.

[Scrap Irony]

We can agree that most programs commit violations, but "Cheating" assumes intent...

"Dirty" applies more to ethics, and on that we can agree. Coaches mislead (or outright lie), work the AAU system and live right on the edge of the rules. You have to live in the muck to win in big time college hoops, but doing so is not necessarily "cheating".

I don't know a coach in America that abides by the 20-hour per week practice rule. Ditto summer coaching. Same with contacting, lying to, and assisting recruits. Those are all rules that all coaches break.

Many HS recruits-- I'd guess half of them-- have academic or integrity questions in their background. About a quarter of them have serious questions. Every coach looks the other way if a recruit is good enough or if they need him enough. All of them.

Bill Walton smoked pot while at UCLA. Wooden knew and ignored it.

William Avery (among others) would have never been admitted to Duke unless they could also play basketball at a superior level. Roy Williams took a kid who was basically passed through high school after he flunked out at Kansas. John Thompson took a kid who started a race riot on his team and the entire campus cheered. Adolph Rupp paid kids for jobs they never did.

You say it's only Calipari who's cheating? Please.

IF Cal is cheating (and I maintain that he's never been caught doing anything remotely bad) the way fans claim, every prospect in America would go to his team. (Or, at the very least, he'd get his pick of prospects across the nation.)

Are they all going to Kentucky?

Nope.

They go to Kentucky. And Duke. And North Carolina. And UConn. And Kansas. And UCLA. And Butler. And everywhere else.

If one cheats, they all do.

[redsfanmia]

Bill Walton smoked pot while at UCLA. Wooden knew and ignored it.

Don't forget that Sam Gilbert bankrolled the UCLA basketball program for years and Wooden looked the other way.

[guttle11]

I don't know a coach in America that abides by the 20-hour per week practice rule.

I do.


Many HS recruits-- I'd guess half of them-- have academic or integrity questions in their background. About a quarter of them have serious questions. Every coach looks the other way if a recruit is good enough or if they need him enough. All of them.

Bill Walton smoked pot while at UCLA. Wooden knew and ignored it.

50% and 25% are hyperbole, but we're not disagreeing with the overall point here. Problem is, academic issues and issues in life aren't potential violations. No rule against taking a bad student (provided they legitimately meet NCAA standards) or a kid with a police record. It's up to the school.

I can tell you this much, 25% of recruits do not have serious academic issues. Most can meet the minimum NCAA standards with relative ease, because they are "minimum". They're set up so that every kid without a learning disability can meet them if they put forth effort. And many with a learning disability can meet them if they get the proper tutoring and guidance.


William Avery (among others) would have never been admitted to Duke unless they could also play basketball at a superior level. Roy Williams took a kid who was basically passed through high school after he flunked out at Kansas. John Thompson took a kid who started a race riot on his team and the entire campus cheered. Adolph Rupp paid kids for jobs they never did.

Avery being admitted to Duke has nothing to do with the NCAA. If he met the NCAA standards, that's all that matters. Who Duke chooses to admit and the reasons for doing so is entirely up to the school. Every school has a certain number of athletes they'll accept that fall between the NCAA and the school's standards. In no way does that even approach a violation or being "dirty". Schools admit non-student athletes in the same manner all the time. Heck, the most prestigious schools in the country often exempt the most students from the tough admissions requirements.

The diploma factory issue you mention with Williams wasn't an actual violation until the NCAA clamped down. Diploma factories were quite a broad issue for many years, but within the last 5-10 years the NCAA is watching these schools more closely.

Taking a kid that started a race riot - not cheating. Not even close to cheating.

Rupp paying players was cheating. Not at all like the others.


You say it's only Calipari who's cheating? Please.

Um, that's not at all what I said. You're deflecting and reading what you want to read. "Cheating" happens. There's no pattern, no typical case. Sometimes coaches and programs cheat, from the SEC on down to the worst D-3 conference. In fact, I named at least 4 other known cheaters in earlier posts. Of course it happens, but it's not universal.


IF Cal is cheating (and I maintain that he's never been caught doing anything remotely bad) the way fans claim, every prospect in America would go to his team. (Or, at the very least, he'd get his pick of prospects across the nation.)

Are they all going to Kentucky?

Nope.

They go to Kentucky. And Duke. And North Carolina. And UConn. And Kansas. And UCLA. And Butler. And everywhere else.


If one cheats, they all do.


This is quite a doozy. So he can't be cheating because he doesn't get every top 5 star prospect? Is he going to have a roster of 13 one and done freshmen every year? And that would still leave between 10 and 50 top prospects in a given year for other schools.

The truth is that, no, Cal has never been caught and held responsible for violations. But with what I do know about the whole process, it would be very difficult for me to believe he had no knowledge of what went on with Camby and Rose. Coaches know what their recruits and players eat for breakfast, they know their favorite barbers, teachers, uncles, friends, advisers, girlfriends and interests. Basically, they know the kid as well as anyone other than mom, dad, and/or grandma. I'm more inclined to believe that every program is out there committing major violations regularly...and I know with 100% factual certainty that's not true. There's at least one clean program that reports every potential violation that surfaces and never comes close to committing a major one.

[Scrap Irony]

Do tell, guttle. Who's the one?

Because I know every Division I coach I've met, talked to, or talked about with those that would know (close to 50, fwiw) treat the 20-hour rule as a joke. They know its wrong. They know it's cheating. They do it anyway.

All. Of. Them.

[Scrap Irony]

So he can't be cheating because he doesn't get every top 5 star prospect? Is he going to have a roster of 13 one and done freshmen every year? And that would still leave between 10 and 50 top prospects in a given year for other schools.

No, I don't think Kentucky is clean. I think they're all dirty.

All of them.

I think, if only Kentucky was cheating (as some seem to think), they'd get not only Knight and Canter, but Barnes, Irving, and Selby as well. And, if KU, UNC Duke and UK are the only ones cheating, then how to explain the UCLA haul from two years ago or the OSU haul this year?

If one is true, all is.

Logic says so.

[WMR]

MM and others are verifying the report that Eric Bledsoe is filing a suit. He'll probably name the Times and Pete Thamel at least... glad to see the kid fighting back. It's got to be very embarrassing to have things that are supposed to be protected and private published nationwide.

[guttle11]

No, I don't think Kentucky is clean. I think they're all dirty.

All of them.

I think, if only Kentucky was cheating (as some seem to think), they'd get not only Knight and Canter, but Barnes, Irving, and Selby as well. And, if KU, UNC Duke and UK are the only ones cheating, then how to explain the UCLA haul from two years ago or the OSU haul this year?

If one is true, all is.

Logic says so.

You don't seem to understand the difference between wading through the sliminess and actually cheating to get players, or not reporting violations that do pop up. That is not a fine line. It's a Grand Canyon.

Nor do I think you really understand why programs do cross the line into "cheating". Pete Bell was a movie character, there aren't many real life Pete Bell's out there, doing whatever necessary to build that superstar team. The big time classes happen because kids develop friendships playing with and against other top level players in the AAU circuit and every year a handful of them stick together for college. That trend seems to be growing as the landscape changes due to the one and done rule. It's evolved from the Kevin Durant/Michael Beasley mold of dominating on your own to the Thad 5 mold of coming together to play for a title while you have to be there. Matta and Calipari are masters at cultivating that culture. Oden, Conley and Cook decided to play together as HS sophs. Matta was just the guy to win them over. You can be sure Matta didn't and isn't cheating. In the past 5 years Ohio State has transformed itself into the industry leader in openness and honesty with the NCAA. They'd probably report a kid picking up a quarter off the ground at this point.

Again, every program pushes the edge. Every program reports violations. They happen, most of them are completely honest mistakes or out of the blue randomness. It's designed to be a self-policing society, and thus over 99% of violations are self-reported. The book is so large with so many changes each year that most fall under the ".... happens" column. Overall they number well into the thousands each year in D-1 alone. The Compliance Office at the NCAA has fax machines that almost never stop rolling. However, major violations that can lead to ineligibility and big punishment are actually rare for a 347 program D-1 field. The truly dirty programs are the ones that hide, cover up, or play the plausible deniability card.

[Hoosier Red]

MM and others are verifying the report that Eric Bledsoe is filing a suit. He'll probably name the Times and Pete Thamel at least... glad to see the kid fighting back. It's got to be very embarrassing to have things that are supposed to be protected and private published nationwide.

He'll lose if he sues the Times. He may win if he sues his high school. But there is nothing in the Times story that is inaccurate. I would ask you to find me one thing the Times stated was a fact that wasn't.

I agree with Guttle, it's a weak deflection to say, "everyone cheats." Everyone doesn't cheat. Some schools have cheated in the past and been caught. Some schools have probably cheated in the past and not been caught.

It's true that William Avery never would have been admitted to Duke had he not been able to play basketball, but the Cincinnati Conservatory of Music probably admits a number of students who couldn't get into UC if they couldn't play the Flute, Violin, or Sing, or Dance, or Act. None of those things are NCAA violations.

[WMR]

Wow, so you're telling me you think the Times should be allowed to co-opt illegally obtained documents and use them as a part of their hatchet job without paying any consequences?

[Hoosier Red]

Wow, so you're telling me you think the Times should be allowed to co-opt illegally obtained documents and use them as a part of their hatchet job without paying any consequences?

Freedom of the press is absolute. It is not their responsibility to ensure that the school takes care of the kid's rights(which I'm not sure the school isn't forbidden from providing the information. I wouldn't think so but I'm not a lawyer.)

Unless they paid the school for the information or used other means of illegally obtaining the information, than sorry as long as they have access to the information than I'm not sure what they did wrong?

If they ask the school for Bledsoe's transcripts through his junior year and the school provides them, why shouldn't the Times be able to report on the transcripts?

And it's not as if the information of his academic issues is new. Google search Eric Bledsoe Transcript, and set the date range of say 4/1/09-5/30/09. You get a number of links(some reputable, some not.)

[Hoosier Red]

What I don't understand here WMR is why you insist on killing the messenger. It's not as though the Times made up a bunch of lies and is sending the NCAA to hound Kentucky.

The Times found out that the NCAA is investigating. The violations if proven true would be MAJOR violations which would if nothing else more than likely require Kentucky to forfeit all their wins from this year.

If a neutral observer was reading that article, I don't think they would be swayed one way or the other, so it's not like the NY Times wrote a hatchet piece with a bunch of unfounded allegations by the writer with no corroboration. They gave both sides to the story where possible, explained what is making the NCAA skeptical of Bledsoe and Parker HS's side, and gave the Parker HS coaches side of it.

If a "hatchet" piece is any article that brings up something potentially unpleasant about Kentucky, than I guess this is a hatchet piece.

If the concern is that because of this piece, Calipari will be stained by the "guilty until proven innocent" crowd, that's probably true. But it's also part of what Kentucky knew they were getting when they hired Calipari.
If the article had been written about a recruit going to UC, tOSU, Xavier, or Butler, there would be less presumption of guilt because those coaches do not have the public history that Calipari does.

[WMR]

I was over at the Ohio State athletic offices and we were talking about Bledsoe and a certain higher of up in the football program reminded me that the NYT did this in the summer of 2004 about OSU and Clarett. Now Clarett had other problems which led to his dismissal but what they reported was completely untrue. They said in the article that Clarett was having grades changed at OSU and in HS. They said that he had left a midterm exam before finishing yet still got a passing grade. Again it was found out later to be total bull. Their source was a jilted OSU faculty member who was the one giving them the information.

Now like I said Clarett was an idiot for other reasons but as far as the NYT article they were completely wrong and off base. This is something to remember for anyone who has already leaped to a conclusion of truth. The further this plays out I have a good feeling the more people will question the article as a whole. Its just funny how its the same type of story from the same paper about another top program. So to those I have seen that say well this writer from the NYT is known to get things correct I would like to remind those people of this NYT article that getting the facts straight and checking their sources when its comes to Universities and their academic control was completely wrong..

Remember I am only talking about the academic issues of the story. Not the individuals as a whole. So don't connect the players. Thats not the point here.

Hmm.

[WMR]

Freedom of the press is absolute. It is not their responsibility to ensure that the school takes care of the kid's rights(which I'm not sure the school isn't forbidden from providing the information. I wouldn't think so but I'm not a lawyer.)

Unless they paid the school for the information or used other means of illegally obtaining the information, than sorry as long as they have access to the information than I'm not sure what they did wrong?

If they ask the school for Bledsoe's transcripts through his junior year and the school provides them, why shouldn't the Times be able to report on the transcripts?

And it's not as if the information of his academic issues is new. Google search Eric Bledsoe Transcript, and set the date range of say 4/1/09-5/30/09. You get a number of links(some reputable, some not.)

It's dirty pool, plain and simple. But that seems to be the MO of the New York Times.

[Hoosier Red]

It's dirty pool, plain and simple. But that seems to be the MO of the New York Times.

How is it dirty pool? I really don't understand what's dirty about what they did? What ethical standards did they break?

Show me the article with regards to Ohio State, because I can guarantee you that they emphatically did not say he was having his grades changed, or that he walked out of a mid term exam, or anything of the sort.
They may have reported that the NCAA was investigating such an allegation. AS THEY SHOULD.

Just like in this article, the New York Times writer at no point stated that Eric Bledsoe had his grades changed in high school or that he had his rent paid, or that his coach was demanding money from college coaches. They don't even imply that these allegations happened. They reported that the NCAA is investigating, these are the allegations.

This isn't semantics. Accuracy is very important in journalism. And my frustration as a former journalist is that lazy readers will read this, and if nothing comes of the investigation, they'll say "The New York Times said Bledsoe had his rent paid, and had his grades changed. And they were proven wrong. The New York Times sucks. I wouldn't wrap my bird cage with it."

Anyone who reads that story and says "The New York Times said Bledsoe was receiving money either a)believes Bledsoe was receiving money and only read what they wanted to in order to confirm this or b) believed the New York Times is out to get Kentucky basketball to either cover up some UCONN recruiting violations or because they personally dislike Coach Cal.

[Hoosier Red]

Show me the article with regards to Ohio State, because I can guarantee you that they emphatically did not say he was having his grades changed, or that he walked out of a mid term exam, or anything of the sort.
They may have reported that the NCAA was investigating such an allegation. AS THEY SHOULD.

To be fair, I actually went back and found the original tOSU/Clarett article.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/13/sports/colleges-when-values-collide-clarett-got-unusual-aid-in-ohio-state-class.html?pagewanted=2
and I found out that while the article did state Clarett skipped out of a mid term exam, that point was not disputed. To my knowledge it wasn't proven "wrong" either.


Both the professor and teacher's assistant actually agreed that Clarett hadn't finished his mid term exam.
The associate professor in charge of the course and the graduate student who oversaw Clarett's work agree on these details, but they differ markedly on the meaning of what happened.

As for the tutor's writing papers for Clarett, the Times again does not assert this as fact. It points out that the teaching assistants and professors have their suspicions, it points out one particular player who the teacher specifically accused of cheating, and it details the efforts to reach that player.

[Scrap Irony]

You don't seem to understand the difference between wading through the sliminess and actually cheating to get players, or not reporting violations that do pop up. That is not a fine line. It's a Grand Canyon.

Nor do I think you really understand why programs do cross the line into "cheating". Pete Bell was a movie character, there aren't many real life Pete Bell's out there, doing whatever necessary to build that superstar team. The big time classes happen because kids develop friendships playing with and against other top level players in the AAU circuit and every year a handful of them stick together for college. That trend seems to be growing as the landscape changes due to the one and done rule. It's evolved from the Kevin Durant/Michael Beasley mold of dominating on your own to the Thad 5 mold of coming together to play for a title while you have to be there. Matta and Calipari are masters at cultivating that culture. Oden, Conley and Cook decided to play together as HS sophs. Matta was just the guy to win them over. You can be sure Matta didn't and isn't cheating. In the past 5 years Ohio State has transformed itself into the industry leader in openness and honesty with the NCAA. They'd probably report a kid picking up a quarter off the ground at this point.

Again, every program pushes the edge. Every program reports violations. They happen, most of them are completely honest mistakes or out of the blue randomness. It's designed to be a self-policing society, and thus over 99% of violations are self-reported. The book is so large with so many changes each year that most fall under the ".... happens" column. Overall they number well into the thousands each year in D-1 alone. The Compliance Office at the NCAA has fax machines that almost never stop rolling. However, major violations that can lead to ineligibility and big punishment are actually rare for a 347 program D-1 field. The truly dirty programs are the ones that hide, cover up, or play the plausible deniability card.

Let me see if I get this right:

You agree with me that some schools cheat.

You also agree that all schools "bend" rules.



I guess my main argument is one of common sense, guttle. Let's say Kansas University, to pull a name out of the hat, is paying money and giving other improper benefits to recruits. Let's also say Ohio State is only offering a free education and nothing more.

Common sense says:
1) Some of the best recruits are going to flock to the school offering a free education AND more stuff.
2) Those that are offered free stuff but choose another school (those with personal integrity enough not to cheat, in other words) will tell the NCAA about the cheaters.

Since neither of those has happened, logically, you must assume:
1) Either all schools are guilty.
or
2) All schools are innocent.

Since some schools have been caught paying athletes and giving improper benefits, I think it's safe to assume which one we should believe.

Correct me if I'm wrong, please. I got a B- in Logic 101, so maybe I've missed something. Seriously.

[macro]

...and now for some complete and utter nonsense, do you know what this is?

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_wGr8njEWjtI/ScLAOn7XdxI/AAAAAAAACQQ/TWGgU9HCOiM/s400/Mandy+1.JPG

Answer: It's the cupcake cake version of this:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_wGr8njEWjtI/ScK_0X1GYgI/AAAAAAAACQI/0BjPIgpJ6Ac/s400/Mandy+2.gif

:lol:

Source: http://www.cakewrecks.com/2009/03/twins.html

[Hoosier Red]

It's dirty pool, plain and simple. But that seems to be the MO of the New York Times.

Forgive me all for beating a dead horse, but a lot of the the things being posted with regards to agendas, dirty pool, and sketchy reporting and hatchet pieces are just driving me crazy.(It's not a drive, it's a really short putt I'll grant.)

I've seen in here and in PM's with WMR that the New York Times has an agenda(presumably anti-UK but I've yet to see a coherent agenda that they have.)
1) What is the agenda?
2) Why in your mind does the New York Times hate UK?

I've seen in the thread and elsewhere that the NY Times had sketchy and or slanted reporting.
1) I've seen nothing brought up as evidence to support this. What made this sketchier reporting than any other investigative reporting for the last 100 years? What amounted to an unbalanced report? Was any allegation brought up without presenting the High School's side of things?

As I said in my PM to WMR, I think we can all agree that UK basketball is a national topic of interest. The fact that the NCAA is investigating the eligibility of one of the players lends credence to the fact that this isn't just a witch hunt by the paper. Someone at the NCAA has determined that at the very least, it's worth looking into. And remember, the NCAA looked and then the NY Times reported they were looking. It's not like the Times went to Birmingham trying to dig up dirt and then called the NCAA.


So please do tell what piece of information was missing from the article? What was available that the paper consciously omitted?

[Scrap Irony]

...And remember, the NCAA looked and then the NY Times reported they were looking. It's not like the Times went to Birmingham trying to dig up dirt and then called the NCAA.


So please do tell what piece of information was missing from the article? What was available that the paper consciously omitted?

Actually, the NY Times has, reportedly, been to Alabama and investigated since February (the last time the NCAA went to Alabama in investigating Bledsoe, apparenty). It's taken since February to get this much information, apparenty.

[dabvu2498]

Common sense says:
1) Some of the best recruits are going to flock to the school offering a free education AND more stuff.
2) Those that are offered free stuff but choose another school (those with personal integrity enough not to cheat, in other words) will tell the NCAA about the cheaters.

Since neither of those has happened, logically, you must assume:
1) Either all schools are guilty.
or
2) All schools are innocent.

Since some schools have been caught paying athletes and giving improper benefits, I think it's safe to assume which one we should believe.

Correct me if I'm wrong, please. I got a B- in Logic 101, so maybe I've missed something. Seriously.



Disagree entirely. Some kids (and their parents) want to go to a school where things are done the right way. Where the kids gets a free education and all the benefits of an athlic scholarship and that's it. Where athletes go to class, get decent grades and end up graduating. Where you never have to worry about the NCAA examining every facet of the program on a yearly basis.

And it does happen.

There are coaches (and programs) out there that, I believe, are above reproach. That don't even violate the 20 hour rule. (20 hours is a lot, if you think about it.)

[Hoosier Red]

Let me see if I get this right:

You agree with me that some schools cheat.

You also agree that all schools "bend" rules.



I guess my main argument is one of common sense, guttle. Let's say Kansas University, to pull a name out of the hat, is paying money and giving other improper benefits to recruits. Let's also say Ohio State is only offering a free education and nothing more.

Common sense says:
1) Some of the best recruits are going to flock to the school offering a free education AND more stuff.
2) Those that are offered free stuff but choose another school (those with personal integrity enough not to cheat, in other words) will tell the NCAA about the cheaters.

Since neither of those has happened, logically, you must assume:
1) Either all schools are guilty.
or
2) All schools are innocent.

Since some schools have been caught paying athletes and giving improper benefits, I think it's safe to assume which one we should believe.

Correct me if I'm wrong, please. I got a B- in Logic 101, so maybe I've missed something. Seriously.

I don't think you can make blanket assumptions like that Scrap to be honest for a couple of reasons;

1) I'm not sure "clean" players care that much to be honest. I also think as guttle mentioned there are a lot of gray areas where recruits decide not to get bogged down. There's a reason for instance that Kelvin Sanctions was caught by the OU and later IU compliance staff. It's not as if recruits really pay attention to how many times a coach has called them this week.

2) If you accuse a team of cheating you have to be 1000000000000% sure. Most players probably haven't put the time or energy into rooting out the cheaters.
Look at the case of Bruce Pearl(a coach but still) He taped Deon Thomas admitting that Illinois was offering him $80,000 and a Chevy Blazer.(Really? a Blazer? No wonder Illinois sucks. If you're going to cheat, do it in style. Look at UNLV.) In any event, even with Thomas on tape, the NCAA still didn't find Illinois guilty. Who paid the price? Bruce Pearl. Lou Henson never lost his job, but left Illinois a conquering hero. Jimmy Collins, the assistant who was alleged to have offered the money and crappy SUV, stayed at Illinois before going on to become the coach at UIC. Pearl on the other hand was blackballed. Say what you want about him, but it's clear he can coach, he won a D2 national championship at Southern Indiana. Still it took him 9 years to get a job at UW-Milwaukee. The lesson? Don't Snitch.

3) Many of the "clean" players may decide to go to a "clean" university just because they figure the hassle isn't worth it. I honestly don't know but I can't imagine there are many celebrations for 10 year, 15 year anniversary's of the Fab Five at Michigan. But I bet UC will have a 20 year reunion of the 1992 Bearcats. Maybe players don't want to go somewhere if they're afraid the banners won't stay up. I'm probably giving too much credit to 18 year old boys

4) No matter whether there's gray area or not, or if every team is doing it or not(don't worry I'm an IU fan, I'm familiar with this argument) if the NCAA catches someone playing an ineligible player, paying a player, whatever rules are clearly being broken. They have to punish that university. Otherwise what do they exist for?

[Hoosier Red]

Actually, the NY Times has, reportedly, been to Alabama and investigated since February (the last time the NCAA went to Alabama in investigating Bledsoe, apparenty). It's taken since February to get this much information, apparenty.

So again, NCAA investigates, the NY Times follows. What's the issue?

You have to admit this. If what the landlord is alleging is true, than there's a story. If any of this is true, it's a huge story. If it's true, than UK just had a season go down the drain.

The very fact that there's enough credibility for the NCAA to keep investigating shows that it's at least a story to this point.

And no, the paper should not wait until the NCAA findings come in before writing a story. Unless you didn't think OJ was a legitimate news story, or Ben Rothelisberger, or Michael Vick.

To be honest, I don't think any of this is going to stick. Whether something happened or not is honestly immaterial. I don't think the NCAA will ever be able to prove something happened, so the story probably goes no further.

And 10 years from now when the next coach at Kansas State is being investigated by the NCAA, and the NY Times college basketball reporter starts a story about how Kansas State's being investigated. Someone will talk about how they remember back in 2010 when the NY Times said that Eric Bledsoe was getting paid and was having his grades fixed. And I'll hopefully be around to slap around the next group of internet faithful.

[Joseph]

As a UK fan, I am all for fairness and equality in terms of 'do the crime do the time'. I just don't think there is a crime of any intent here. If Bledsoe did something prior to coming to UK, and the NCAA vetted him. It should be a situation where no penalty is handed down to UK.

Forgive me if I am inferring, or misinterpreting posts, but to me it seems a LOT of folks on here are just steadfast in their determination to slam UK. Hey, i get it, UK is the Yankees and to some extent they are being coached by college basketballs version of Tony LaRussa. It's understandable to 'hate' that, but at some point it just becomes piling on and redundant.

I love my boy WMR, he knows I've got nothing but respect for his defense of our boys in blue but it seems like he's fighting a losing battle entirely. He produces a 'fact' someone else just either ignores it or just rejects it because it came from a UK fan.

In this case for example, does it at all matter that the NCAA cleared Bledsoe to join the university and team? It doesn't seem to, not at all. All this does is seem to get people screaming Cal is a cheater [despite evidence to the contrary]. When i bring up the statement that 'if Cals a cheater, so is everyone else' the argument then becomes "No Cal's a cheater [along with a select few others], most everyone else is just pushing the envelope".

It really seems like this whole thread has devolved into a big ol'

"Did not"

"Did too"

"Did not"

"Did too"

Albeit more intelligently spoken and by people whom generally are more reasonable than kids.

[Scrap Irony]

Disagree entirely. Some kids (and their parents) want to go to a school where things are done the right way. Where the kids gets a free education and all the benefits of an athlic scholarship and that's it. Where athletes go to class, get decent grades and end up graduating. Where you never have to worry about the NCAA examining every facet of the program on a yearly basis.

And it does happen.

There are coaches (and programs) out there that, I believe, are above reproach. That don't even violate the 20 hour rule. (20 hours is a lot, if you think about it.)

Again, if those kids care so much about integrity, then someone somewhere would have said something by now.

Imagine a team at, say, Vandy. This Vandy team has Barry Goheen and Scott Draud, and Will Perdue and Billy McCaffery in its starting five. This same Vandy team gets beaten in the NCAA's by, let's say, a Louisville team coached by Rick Pitino.

Now, Vandy is above reproach and each of these boys has been given only the scholarship and opportunity of an education they were promised. Nothing more.

But each of these boys were also recruited by dirty old Pitino and UofL. Pitino offered each of them, say $5,000 per semester plus however many $100 handshakes boosters could afford. The boys all chose Vandy because they were good Vandy boys and not dirty old UofL players.

Don't you think:

1) At least one of these fine, upstanding young men with serious personal integrity would inform the NCAA of the nefarious and ill-gotten shenanigans in River City?
2) After the loss, at least one of the young men would blurt something about Louisville paying its players or offering them money?

Am I saying that all athletes get paid?

Yeah, I guess I am.

It makes sense, doesn't it? I know it's cynical, but I can't come up with any other explanation. If one cheats, all cheat. Otherwise, the one would be extraordinarily good at recruiting. Since many of those that got caught cheating weren't at "big" schools, it stands to reason that those schools also cheat.

[Scrap Irony]

So again, NCAA investigates, the NY Times follows. What's the issue?

You have to admit this. If what the landlord is alleging is true, than there's a story. If any of this is true, it's a huge story. If it's true, than UK just had a season go down the drain.

The very fact that there's enough credibility for the NCAA to keep investigating shows that it's at least a story to this point.

They stopped investigating in February, if reports are true. And I agree with you about the NY Times. They should report all the news that's fit to print.

But the cynic in me says that those two have been at this story since February and this is what they've found:

A landlord who's mad (deservedly, IMO) Bledsoe and his mom skipped out owing her serious cash tells a story about a coach who paid (cash) three months' rent. Not even remotely proveable and, really, not much of a story.

Secondly, a HS kid who did really well his senior year so that he could get eligible to go to college. If I had a nickel for every time that happened, I could wipe my butt with Ben Franklins for the rest of my life and still could live a life of ease.

That's it.

There's not much there there, you know?

[Scrap Irony]

As a UK fan, I am all for fairness and equality in terms of 'do the crime do the time'. I just don't think there is a crime of any intent here. If Bledsoe did something prior to coming to UK, and the NCAA vetted him. It should be a situation where no penalty is handed down to UK.

Derrick Rose and Memphis would disagree with you.

Vehemently.

[dabvu2498]

Scrap -- I think your perception of those who cheat is way broader than reality.

There are 336 D1 scholarship schools. Assuming each is fully-funded and carrying a full roster, that's 4368 D1 scholarship basketball players.

Are all of them getting some nefarious payment? If not, what would you say the percentage is?

[Scrap Irony]

Dunno.

I've met a crapload of deep pocketed boosters who were willing to shell out $1000s for tickets, bets, gear, and other college-related stuff. Why would you be so incredulous that thy give a couple hundred a game to the guys who they live through?

According to many (including the LHL), late 70's and early 80's UK teams regularly received $100 handshakes. Sam Bowie claimed that he could make a couple grand if he had a good game against a big rival.

Same thing with the UCLA teams of the late 60's and early 70's and Sam Gilbert, who allegedly gave hundreds of thousands to players.

So, to answer your question with another question, does each of those 336 Division I schools have at least one booster nuts enough and rich enough to ignore the rules?

[dabvu2498]

So, to answer your question with another question, does each of those 336 Division I schools have at least one booster nuts enough and rich enough to ignore the rules?

Possibly... But most coaches/athletic department administrators are scared enough of scandal to do everything in their power to keep those types away from their players.

[Scrap Irony]

Maybe. I hope you're right, dab. I really do.

But I know coaches. I've met and interviewed a few of them. Whatever they can do to get an edge, they're gonna do. I haven't met one yet that didn't have a burning desire for winning. (And I don't mean someone that just doesn't like to lose. I mean absolutely torn apart by losses and losing. I mean throw the Monopoly game in the fire after losing type of losing.)

They're nothing if not ultra-ultra competitive.

And the cynical side of my nature insists that any edge-- legal or not, cheating or not-- is one each of them would take.

[Hoosier Red]

I've always thought that if players were being paid at a rate you suggest Scrap, they wouldn't be so eager to leave for the NBA. Maybe I'm crazy.

[Scrap Irony]

Where did I say how much they were being paid, Hoosier?

I just said paid.

And a million dollars-- the average salary among 1st round NBA players (which most underclassmen are)-- is a lot more than even my jaded eye would insist they're getting.

It's like any other job. Except, of course, they can't tell.

[WMR]

Forgive me all for beating a dead horse, but a lot of the the things being posted with regards to agendas, dirty pool, and sketchy reporting and hatchet pieces are just driving me crazy.(It's not a drive, it's a really short putt I'll grant.)

I've seen in here and in PM's with WMR that the New York Times has an agenda(presumably anti-UK but I've yet to see a coherent agenda that they have.)
1) What is the agenda?
2) Why in your mind does the New York Times hate UK?

I've seen in the thread and elsewhere that the NY Times had sketchy and or slanted reporting.
1) I've seen nothing brought up as evidence to support this. What made this sketchier reporting than any other investigative reporting for the last 100 years? What amounted to an unbalanced report? Was any allegation brought up without presenting the High School's side of things?

As I said in my PM to WMR, I think we can all agree that UK basketball is a national topic of interest. The fact that the NCAA is investigating the eligibility of one of the players lends credence to the fact that this isn't just a witch hunt by the paper. Someone at the NCAA has determined that at the very least, it's worth looking into. And remember, the NCAA looked and then the NY Times reported they were looking. It's not like the Times went to Birmingham trying to dig up dirt and then called the NCAA.


So please do tell what piece of information was missing from the article? What was available that the paper consciously omitted?

It's not necessarily an anti-UK agenda, it's a crappy reporting with no ethical standards agenda.

I wonder how you would feel if the NYT wrote an article like this about your child?

[WMR]

They stopped investigating in February, if reports are true. And I agree with you about the NY Times. They should report all the news that's fit to print.

But the cynic in me says that those two have been at this story since February and this is what they've found:

A landlord who's mad (deservedly, IMO) Bledsoe and his mom skipped out owing her serious cash tells a story about a coach who paid (cash) three months' rent. Not even remotely proveable and, really, not much of a story.

Secondly, a HS kid who did really well his senior year so that he could get eligible to go to college. If I had a nickel for every time that happened, I could wipe my butt with Ben Franklins for the rest of my life and still could live a life of ease.

That's it.

There's not much there there, you know?
Matt Jones wrote a very good blog about the weak nature of this article, and how even other media members were surprised how weak it was...

http://kentuckysportsradio.com/?p=53115


Unfortunately for me, much of my weekend has been spent dealing with Pete Thamel’s article in the New York Times concerning Eric Bledsoe’s high school transcripts and coach association. When I first read the story on Friday night, I thought it was likely to be overblown by media folks (and it has) and seemed to contain very little mean in its chargrilled packaging. As the weekend has progressed, the last conclusion seems to have been confirmed as every reporter I have spoken with, both local and national, devalued the importance of the article, and most questioned the decision by the Times and Thamel to publish the story. Those most sympathetic to Pete simply said that there “wasn’t really that much there” and those that were a bit more critical anonymously made statements such as “people think the Times’ stories have more credibility because it is the Times. But that story was junk.” Then there is CBS Sports.com’s Gregg Doyel who has used Twitter to blast the Times and Thamel and has pointed out (in a very Doyelesque way) that they either needed to prove Bledsoe cheated “or just shaddup.” It remains to be seen if the story is much ado about nothing, but what is clear is that Thamel’s Friday night of Memorial Day Weekend Dump did not have the sizzle he might have hoped.

[Hoosier Red]

Matt Jones wrote a very good blog about the weak nature of this article, and how even other media members were surprised how weak it was...

http://kentuckysportsradio.com/?p=53115

Seriously WMR? That's what you have, a Kentucky blog, quoting Greg Doyle and anonymous media sources.
A quick note on anonymous sources because you brought this point up earlier, notice the New York Times writer used two anonymous sources, identified them to the degree he could, and stated the reason they were going to remain anonymous. Matt Jones just said "every reporter I spoke with local and national" Obviously a blog post doesn't have the journalistic rules that a newspaper article does, but if you're trying to establish credibility, then that's not the way to do it.

And again, all they said really was, "there's not much there," or "the story is junk." That's an opinion and of course reasonable minds can disagree but I wish someone would tell me how THE NCAA INVESTIGATING THE ELIGIBILITY OF A UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY PLAYER is not newsworthy. Even if nothing comes of this, it's at least newsworthy that it was being questioned. Sorry Doyel, it's not the New York Times job to "prove" anything. It's their job to report on newsworthy events as they are happening.

Even if Scrap's reports are true,(and I have my doubts that the New York Times, which has very few national basketball writers, would have someone in Alabama for three months even when the NCAA investigation had gone cold) but even if those are true, obviously something brought the NCAA back as they are again currently looking into the issues. For whatever reason the NCAA is back, and the Times article details what they are looking into. Someone tell me how that is not newsworthy.

The second half of the blog goes off on a diatribe about how Pat Forde is out to get UK which doesn't really have much to do with the New York Times.


It's not necessarily an anti-UK agenda, it's a crappy reporting with no ethical standards agenda.

Define the ethics(journalistic or otherwise) that were broken. Did Thamel break any laws in obtaining the information? Did he not do everything he could to give both sides to the story?
If a non-biased reader can come away from that story and say, "I don't think much of that will stick," in my mind that's the mark of a good story with solid reporting.


I wonder how you would feel if the NYT wrote an article like this about your child?

If it was my kid, I'd be pissed. But I'd be pissed at the landlady who (if she's lying) was lying about where the payments came from. I'd be pissed at the teacher from Parker who said my kid wasn't a very good student. It's not the media's responsibility to be nice to your kid.
Your obvious benevolence towards poor little children being taken advantage of by the mean mean media is truly touching. It would be more touching if it extended to those who don't happen to play basketball at UK.

[Cedric]

Holy heck. Greg Doyle? I wouldn't quote him if I wanted to win some internet fight.

[Joseph]

100$ handshakes absolutely exist. a friend from high school [not just some random guy I went to school with, but an actual friend] went to WVU [but was recruited by Miami and others]. These booster dinners he attended during recruitment and after enrollment netted him quite a bit of money.

Let's just say when he left for college he drove a little pontiac fiero. When he came home after that first year he drove a BMW.

[Scrap Irony]

...Even if Scrap's reports are true,(and I have my doubts that the New York Times, which has very few national basketball writers, would have someone in Alabama for three months even when the NCAA investigation had gone cold) but even if those are true, obviously something brought the NCAA back as they are again currently looking into the issues. For whatever reason the NCAA is back, and the Times article details what they are looking into. Someone tell me how that is not newsworthy.

Again, not what I said, Hoosier. I said they've been at it for months now after the NCAA concluded its investigation in February. I'm guessing they spent some time in Alabama, but I don't think anyone would spend three or four months in Alabama if they didn't have to. ;)

Three or four months on a story is a long, long time. Typically, you get two or three weeks at most. If you're a part of a bigger paper (with a national reputation) and you're secure enough in your job, you might get up to six weeks. If you're on your own and writing the article "spec", you obviously get as long as you can go without getting paid.

Both reporters are paid reporters by the NYT. That means a deadline. I'm guessing an editor demanded what they had and told them to move on. What they had isn't much. At all.

It's the same stuff you'd see at virtually any school across America, Division I, Division II, NAIA, whathaveyou.

The landlord's quotes are questionable at best.
The grade point issue is easily explained and a non-story.

The most damning piece of "evidence" is a quote by an angry ex-landlord who is still owed serious money and an anonymous quote from a coach who said Bledsoe's coach wanted cash.

(BTW, Bledsoe's HS coach didn't want him at UK-- was in fact really, really ticked he went to Kentucky. Said it in the papers, doubted whether he could co-exist with Wall, said it wasn't a good fit, etc. Does that sound like a guy who got paid off?)

If not for the names attached (Kentucky, Calipari, Bledsoe), it wouldn't be news.

[Hoosier Red]

Again, not what I said, Hoosier. I said they've been at it for months now after the NCAA concluded its investigation in February. I'm guessing they spent some time in Alabama, but I don't think anyone would spend three or four months in Alabama if they didn't have to.

I apologize if I misunderstood Scrap.


If not for the names attached (Kentucky, Calipari, Bledsoe), it wouldn't be news.
But that's been my point all along. The fact that it's big names, and the NCAA investigating means that it is in fact news.
I agree, if the NCAA was looking into the eligibility of a University of Indianapolis player, I doubt the NY Times would pick up that story. If you want Kentucky to play Division 2 basketball, they probably won't have to deal with this aggravation.
The fact that every other media outlet picked up the story as soon as the Times printed it shows that it was news.

I think what the point I've been trying to make throughout this whole argument is that this wasn't some expose by the NY Times.

Thamel wasn't trying to prove that Kentucky is crooked, or that Bledsoe did something wrong, or that Calipari should be punished. So when you say they "don't have much" they didn't need much. They are simply reporting that the NCAA is looking into the eligibility of a UK player. That's the story. Once the premise of the story is that the NCAA is looking into Eric Bledsoe's eligibility, the questions become 1) What are the alleged incidents that would potentially make him ineligible and 2) How credible are those allegations.
The story I think answers both of those questions.

Agree or disagree?

[Scrap Irony]

I've agreed with you from the start. Is it news? Absolutely.

The question is: should it be news?

[Hoosier Red]

You'll have to forgive me Scrap, my arguments were more with those(WMR) calling this a hatchet piece and poor journalism.

Should it be news? That's a gray area. I think as long as the article is written in a way that is fair to Bledsoe, and doesn't try to presume guilt than yes it's news.

I was thinking of this in terms of the legal system. The fact that the NCAA is looking into his eligibility to me gets this to at least "The DA is investigating" like the Rothelisberger case, given what we know there's certainly not enough to "convict" and there may not even be enough to for a "grand jury indictment" to stretch the analogy.
But given Calipari's past(2 vacated seasons whatever his reasons) and given the high profile of both the player and the program, I'd have to say it's news.

[WMR]

Again, not what I said, Hoosier. I said they've been at it for months now after the NCAA concluded its investigation in February. I'm guessing they spent some time in Alabama, but I don't think anyone would spend three or four months in Alabama if they didn't have to. ;)

Three or four months on a story is a long, long time. Typically, you get two or three weeks at most. If you're a part of a bigger paper (with a national reputation) and you're secure enough in your job, you might get up to six weeks. If you're on your own and writing the article "spec", you obviously get as long as you can go without getting paid.

Both reporters are paid reporters by the NYT. That means a deadline. I'm guessing an editor demanded what they had and told them to move on. What they had isn't much. At all.

It's the same stuff you'd see at virtually any school across America, Division I, Division II, NAIA, whathaveyou.

The landlord's quotes are questionable at best.
The grade point issue is easily explained and a non-story.

The most damning piece of "evidence" is a quote by an angry ex-landlord who is still owed serious money and an anonymous quote from a coach who said Bledsoe's coach wanted cash.

(BTW, Bledsoe's HS coach didn't want him at UK-- was in fact really, really ticked he went to Kentucky. Said it in the papers, doubted whether he could co-exist with Wall, said it wasn't a good fit, etc. Does that sound like a guy who got paid off?)

If not for the names attached (Kentucky, Calipari, Bledsoe), it wouldn't be news.

Maybe if those idiots at the Times had thrown in a little something about that to counter-balance their one-sided reporting it wouldn't stink as bad as it does.

Here, I'll even write some copy for them....
An unnamed coach said that Bledsoe's coach said you needed XXX amount of dollars to get this kid to your school. This, however, contrasts strongly with what the coach publicly stated throughout the Bledsoe recruitment and how, in his opinion, 'Eric going to play with John Wall was a mistake.'

Not nearly as titillating, huh. :rolleyes: The 'lip service' they paid to the 'OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY' was laughably weak.

There is good news and bad news... the bad news is that you're going to see 'reputable' papers sinking to this level of 'reporting', and lower, more and more often in efforts of self-preservation. They need clicks and they need eyeballs. Desperately.

The good news is that newspapers are on their way out and even horse-crap reporting like this that would be better-served on TMZ Sports STILL won't save them, ultimately.

All that being typed, I'm done with this topic until/unless some actual EVIDENCE comes to light. I've wasted too many ones and zeroes on the New York Times and their horrible 'article' already.

[Hoosier Red]

Maybe if those idiots at the Times had thrown in a little something about that to counter-balance their one-sided reporting it wouldn't stink as bad as it does.

Here, I'll even write some copy for them....
An unnamed coach said that Bledsoe's coach said you needed XXX amount of dollars to get this kid to your school. This, however, contrasts strongly with what the coach publicly stated throughout the Bledsoe recruitment and how, in his opinion, 'Eric going to play with John Wall was a mistake.'

Not nearly as titillating, huh. :rolleyes: The 'lip service' they paid to the 'OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY' was laughably weak.

All that being typed, I'm done with this topic until/unless some actual EVIDENCE comes to light. I've wasted too many ones and zeroes on the New York Times and their horrible 'article' already.

Sigh.... WMR, if after reading this article, you've come to the conclusion that Pete Thamel was accusing Bledsoe(and his mother and coach) of what is being alleged by others, or was otherwise implying that Bledsoe(and others) were guilty, or was trying to somehow frame the story to imply guilt, then you are quite honestly looking for something to be defensive about.

I apologize for making you "waste" 1's and 0's, I'd just like you to be accurate when you make baseless accusations of bias, or shoddy reporting, or hatchet jobs, or whatever you've now decided this was now.

I mean sure the New York Times sucks, and is a shill for UConn, and has an agenda against John Calipari, and likes to ruin a kid's reputation for sport, and exists essentially to piss you off. But at the very least if you're going to attack something about the article, man up when someone shows you that you're wrong.

Or do you still believe this was a desperate attempt to cover up UConn's violations.
Or do you still believe that when the NCAA is investigating the eligibility of one of the top 5 teams from the past year, it's not news?
Apparantly you still believe that getting a quote from the high school coach, the high school principal, attempting to reach Bledsoe, his mom, and Coach Calipari is considered a laughable attempt to show the other side.

By the way the fact that the high school coach was "asking for money" from coaches doesn't mean that Kentucky paid him. Perhaps they didn't and that's why he bad mouthed them. I don't know what the situation would mean for Bledsoe, but it probably wouldn't be good for the coach.

[joshnky]

This is only somewhat related but apparently the NCAA is going to "crack-down" on the top tier programs in men's basketball.

USA Today Article (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/2010-06-02-ncaa-investigations_N.htm)

Also, I never realized how few people they had dedicated to enforcement. It comes as no surprise that there is corruption when they only have 3 (now 6) people devoted to policing men's basketball.

[WVRed]

I thought this would be a better question to be asked in this thread rather than the one for John Wooden, but here goes:

If John Wooden was in his 40's and coaching in today's day and age, do you believe he would be treated the same way that many treat Calipari?

Obviously Cal isn't in the same league when it comes to national titles, but both were known for having "semi-pro" teams, similar abilities to attract a crowd with their personality, and even questionable connections (Cal with WWW, Wooden with Sam Gilbert).

[WVRed]

Probably belongs in the draft thread, but FIVE first round picks tonight. Sets a NCAA record.

[durl]

Probably belongs in the draft thread, but FIVE first round picks tonight. Sets a NCAA record.

An interesting record. While impressive at face value, it simply means that the program lost 5 good players at one time. I would have felt better about this record if it were preceded by a NCAA Championship. :cool:

[WMR]

Kentucky will start next season less talented 'on paper' but they have a chance to be a better team by the end of the season. Look for at least 3 of UK's freshmen to return for the 2011 season.

[WVRed]

Kentucky will start next season less talented 'on paper' but they have a chance to be a better team by the end of the season. Look for at least 3 of UK's freshmen to return for the 2011 season.

I'm guessing Kanter and Knight are for sure gone. Terrence Jones depending on how well he does and a likely monster season for Lamb to jump. Poole will be back unless something happens aka Dodson.

I view this team coming in like the 2008-2009 Memphis team under Cal. Probably not as good as the team the year before as they will lose some games early on, but come SEC and tournament time they will be no worse than a 2 seed in the tournament.

I still say that next seasons team will be the building block (hopefully if enough players return) for a monster season in 2011-2012 when we get Teague, Gilchrist, and possibly Quincy Miller and Johnny O'Bryant.

[Hoosier Red]

Kentucky will start next season less talented 'on paper' but they have a chance to be a better team by the end of the season. Look for at least 3 of UK's freshmen to return for the 2011 season.

I actually agree with this. UK has to balance their impressive recruiting of individual players with how everyone fits into a team concept. Last year's recruiting class was almost too good.

One thing I think Calipari really accomplished though was that it didn't appear to an outsider that he had trouble getting the 5 NBA first round picks to play within the team concept. Maybe he did and I missed it, but if you can get 5 guys that good to play defense as hard as they did, that says something.

[cumberlandreds]

I actually agree with this. UK has to balance their impressive recruiting of individual players with how everyone fits into a team concept. Last year's recruiting class was almost too good.

One thing I think Calipari really accomplished though was that it didn't appear to an outsider that he had trouble getting the 5 NBA first round picks to play within the team concept. Maybe he did and I missed it, but if you can get 5 guys that good to play defense as hard as they did, that says something.

You did miss it. They improved defensively as the year went along. There was huge difference at the end of the season. IMO, Calipari did a great job of getting everyone to buy into the team concept. The inexperience factor killed them in the NCAA's. Having zero NCAA tournment is a near impossible thing to overcome to win it all.

[Hoosier Red]

You did miss it. They improved defensively as the year went along. There was huge difference at the end of the season. IMO, Calipari did a great job of getting everyone to buy into the team concept. The inexperience factor killed them in the NCAA's. Having zero NCAA tournment is a near impossible thing to overcome to win it all.

Sorry I wrote that poorly. I actually meant it as a positive. I thought it was impressive that they were playing within the team concept from what I could see.

One thing I think Calipari really accomplished though was that it didn't appear to an outsider that he had trouble getting the 5 NBA first round picks to play within the team concept. Maybe he did(have trouble) and I missed it, but if you can get 5 guys that good to play defense as hard as they did, that says something.

[cumberlandreds]

Sorry I wrote that poorly. I actually meant it as a positive. I thought it was impressive that they were playing within the team concept from what I could see.

One thing I think Calipari really accomplished though was that it didn't appear to an outsider that he had trouble getting the 5 NBA first round picks to play within the team concept. Maybe he did(have trouble) and I missed it, but if you can get 5 guys that good to play defense as hard as they did, that says something.

Ah,I see. I think he did have many problems that were kept quiet. He did mention he had more challenges this year than any other and some things would be done differently this season. What exactly that meant is up to interpretation but I would say it was certainly a challenge to get everyone to buy into a team concept. Calipari is a master salesman and I think he could get most anyone into the same boat together.

[Scrap Irony]

How much do you trust TMZ? Lots of unnamed sources and enough vague references to make a first year journalism major blush, but they did get the Oklahoma situation correct.

Much ado about nothing?

Or is it smoke and fire?

[Reds4Life]

How much do you trust TMZ? Lots of unnamed sources and enough vague references to make a first year journalism major blush, but they did get the Oklahoma situation correct.

Much ado about nothing?

Or is it smoke and fire?

It's no suprise, but I doubt much will come of it. UK brought this on themselves when they hired Calipari. This type of thing will go on until he leaves, or is fired because the reports turned out to be true.

If he suddenly bails for the NBA, you know the hammer is coming for UK. Just like he did at UMass, and Memphis.

[WVRed]

How much do you trust TMZ? Lots of unnamed sources and enough vague references to make a first year journalism major blush, but they did get the Oklahoma situation correct.

Much ado about nothing?

Or is it smoke and fire?

Much ado about nothing.

R4L is right though. The constant rumors (and wishing) regarding Kentucky and Cal will continue as long as he is coach here. Same with being mentioned for NBA jobs. Not only will Cal be mentioned in a lot of favorable job scenarios, but fans who despise Kentucky will want to see him gone.

[WMR]

Get used to 2 things:

1. UK getting the #1 recruiting class every year

2. Rumors about Cal and UK .... jobs, violations, you name it...

[Hoosier Red]

How much do you trust TMZ? Lots of unnamed sources and enough vague references to make a first year journalism major blush, but they did get the Oklahoma situation correct.

Much ado about nothing?

Or is it smoke and fire?

Well the TMZ article is correct on the facts so to speak. The NCAA is investigating. The only new information is that it seems to encompass more than just Bledsoe or Cousins(I think that's who the original inquiries were into, maybe Orton.)

The NCAA investigating and any of the inquiries sticking are two entirely different things.

The biggest problem with recruiting one and done players is that they have no specific motivation not to talk to an agent.
IF(NOTICE I SAID IF) one of the players knew he was going pro, and talked to an agent in his second semester, there's no punishment available. The NCAA probably won't find out until after the season, and in this case it's after he's been drafted. Unless the NBA wants to suspend a player for a year for talking with a professional agent than there's not a lot that can be done. But that's much more of an NCAA problem then one specific to Kentucky.

I mean Wall, Bledsoe, Cousins and Orton were at Kentucky for all of 7 months, unless they want to, why would they feel any loyalty to the program or care if it gets in trouble?

[Javy Pornstache]

I mean Wall, Bledsoe, Cousins and Orton were at Kentucky for all of 7 months, unless they want to, why would they feel any loyalty to the program or care if it gets in trouble?

I understand you may be speaking rhetorically there, but, though I can't speak for Orton, I can personally tell you there is certainly loyalty to UK from John, Demarcus and EB, and you will see that as they return many times over the years for basketball camps, public appearances, team get-togethers, etc. I do know what you mean about players in a lot of cases not caring about the rules if they are merely making a pitstop at a place they never intend on returning after their eight months there or whatever. This is why it's so important to recruit not only on talent but on character as well.

[Scrap Irony]

I assumed the two players are Wall and Cousins, Hoosier.

Wall's "questionable history" is because of his relationaship with his AAU coaches, the Clifton brothers. His main coach, Brian Clifton, was an agent for a short period of time and passed some sort of test to make that official before he once again went back to coaching an AAU team, having never signed an official client. Then, after Wall left Kentucky, when he signed his Reebok contract, Clifton was his advisor/ agent.

Since Clifton helped broker that deal, the NCAA might have questions about his role previous. (Apparently, a father figure who deserves much of the credit for turning Wall around cannot then help that same kid later on in life.)

The second item is Cousins' choice of agent, I would think. He's a ham-and-egger who's only clients previous were European. Not only that, he's based in Seattle. How did he "get" Cousins, a Brimingham kid who then moved to Kentucky? Cynics would say he offered some cash early to turn the kid's head toward the Emerald City. (Of course, he could have also out-worked other agents, too. And it's not like Cousins and his family have always done the easy thing. They have a history of doing things their own way.)

[Scrap Irony]

I understand you may be speaking rhetorically there, but, though I can't speak for Orton, I can personally tell you there is certainly loyalty to UK from John, Demarcus and EB, and you will see that as they return many times over the years for basketball camps, public appearances, team get-togethers, etc. I do know what you mean about players in a lot of cases not caring about the rules if they are merely making a pitstop at a place they never intend on returning after their eight months there or whatever. This is why it's so important to recruit not only on talent but on character as well.

Just to piggyback on your comment, it is amazing how much Cousins and Wall seemed to love Cal and Kentucky. Both stated they wanted to stay, but couldn't afford to. While that may be lip service, they are (along with Bledsoe) special guests at some of Cal's camps over the summer. None of them had to do that and all three did. (Along with Patterson, IIRC.)

[Hoosier Red]

I understand you may be speaking rhetorically there, but, though I can't speak for Orton, I can personally tell you there is certainly loyalty to UK from John, Demarcus and EB, and you will see that as they return many times over the years for basketball camps, public appearances, team get-togethers, etc. I do know what you mean about players in a lot of cases not caring about the rules if they are merely making a pitstop at a place they never intend on returning after their eight months there or whatever. This is why it's so important to recruit not only on talent but on character as well.

Yeah I was speaking rhetorically. I don't know any of the UK player's intentions.
In the old system where a player was in college for two, three or four years, he had an economic incentive not to make himself ineligible through grades or agent dealings or anything because they would miss time and it would look bad on them before the draft.
Even if they expected to go pro, there was more uncertainty so a player wouldn't want to screw up his fall back option.
And of course as many of us have experienced, after four years of being campus you develop more of an affinity to the place.

If a player comes through Kentucky, or Indiana, or UC, or tOSU in one year and is a top draft pick, what does he care if they're put on probation after he signs his rookie contract? It's not like whatever school he attended even gave him a special opportunity to showcase his game, any school would have done it.

I'd be interested to see if University's can start putting language in the scholarship offers that if they have to say vacate wins or if the players' actions while under scholarship jeapordize the school that they can sue the player for damages?

[Scrap Irony]

Interesting idea, Hoosier. I would think, however, that high-level prospects wouldn't go to a school that puts that in their LOIs. (I'm certain that other schools would have something to say about that language.)

[WVRed]

In other news, here is Daniel Orton's recent pro debut:

1-8 from the field
1-4 FT
3 points
5 Fouls (four of which were offensive and three of which were in the Magic’s first five possessions)
4 Turnovers
2 Rebounds
1 Block
Ejected for Fighting

[Betterread]

I understand you may be speaking rhetorically there, but, though I can't speak for Orton, I can personally tell you there is certainly loyalty to UK from John, Demarcus and EB, and you will see that as they return many times over the years for basketball camps, public appearances, team get-togethers, etc. I do know what you mean about players in a lot of cases not caring about the rules if they are merely making a pitstop at a place they never intend on returning after their eight months there or whatever. This is why it's so important to recruit not only on talent but on character as well.

You're right, If loyalty= greed. They do these things because they are paid, up front. I feel sorry for KU fans. The number and intensity of your misplaced ideals is truly unique - wait, I forgot about USC fans.

[Joseph]

You're right, If loyalty= greed. They do these things because they are paid, up front. I feel sorry for KU fans. The number and intensity of your misplaced ideals is truly unique - wait, I forgot about USC fans.

Yeah, I feel sorry for Kansas fans too.

[dabvu2498]

I understand you may be speaking rhetorically there, but, though I can't speak for Orton, I can personally tell you there is certainly loyalty to UK from John, Demarcus and EB, and you will see that as they return many times over the years for basketball camps, public appearances, team get-togethers, etc. I do know what you mean about players in a lot of cases not caring about the rules if they are merely making a pitstop at a place they never intend on returning after their eight months there or whatever. This is why it's so important to recruit not only on talent but on character as well.


I hate to be cynical (well, not really), but I wonder how much of those guys' loyalty would be affected if Calipari would decide to take a job elsewhere.

I tend to thing players' loyalties tend to reside more in coaches than programs nowadays (see all the UK guys that have worked for Pitino @ UL).

[Javy Pornstache]

You're right, If loyalty= greed. They do these things because they are paid, up front. I feel sorry for KU fans. The number and intensity of your misplaced ideals is truly unique - wait, I forgot about USC fans.

Yeah. Paid up front. Okay. What was up with the dig on Cousins in that other thread, UK fan must've cut you off in traffic today.

[Javy Pornstache]

I hate to be cynical (well, not really), but I wonder how much of those guys' loyalty would be affected if Calipari would decide to take a job elsewhere.

I tend to thing players' loyalties tend to reside more in coaches than programs nowadays (see all the UK guys that have worked for Pitino @ UL).

You are correct, that's the case mostly. I know these guys love it there, in Lexington in particular, one wants to immediately move back with his first house... but there is definitely loyalty that's exclusive to Calipari as well.

[WVRed]

I hate to be cynical (well, not really), but I wonder how much of those guys' loyalty would be affected if Calipari would decide to take a job elsewhere.

I tend to thing players' loyalties tend to reside more in coaches than programs nowadays (see all the UK guys that have worked for Pitino @ UL).

Using the same logic, it will be interesting to see if Derrick Rose and/or Tyreke Evans attend any UK games while Cal is the coach.

[bucksfan2]

Using the same logic, it will be interesting to see if Derrick Rose and/or Tyreke Evans attend any UK games while Cal is the coach.

I would hope that Cal would disassociate himself from Rose. If he doesn't I just don't think he will ever learn his lesson.

[Scrap Irony]

IF Derrick Rose cheated. There is no proof he cheated, only that he might have cheated. (Neither the NCAA nor its clearinghouse need irrefutable proof of guilt and operate on no assumption thereof.)

[dabvu2498]

I would hope that Cal would disassociate himself from Rose. If he doesn't I just don't think he will ever learn his lesson.

In '09, as news of Rose's misconduct was coming out, Cal was making a big deal about going to see him play in the playoffs and that kind of thing.

Didn't hear a lot of that this spring.


Using the same logic, it will be interesting to see if Derrick Rose and/or Tyreke Evans attend any UK games while Cal is the coach.

To me, it doesn't sound like Rose was ever interested in being on a college campus in the first place.

[Cedric]

IF Derrick Rose cheated. There is no proof he cheated, only that he might have cheated. (Neither the NCAA nor its clearinghouse need irrefutable proof of guilt and operate on no assumption thereof.)

OJ is innocent also!

[Scrap Irony]

Instead of throwing down veiled insults, why not take part in the discussion, Cedric? Do you have anything to add that might change any minds or do you just troll?

[WVRed]

Instead of throwing down veiled insults, why not take part in the discussion, Cedric? Do you have anything to add that might change any minds or do you just troll?

I agree, this is getting old. Until something actually does happen where Kentucky actually does receive the hammer (and not some Kroger tabloid such as TMZ reporting it), then come back with the "We told you so" comments.

[guttle11]

TMZ is not just some Kroger tabloid anymore. They break a ton of stories that turn out to be true. They have a lot of sources and pay top dollar for good info. No outlet is perfect and by no means would I take what they report as gospel, but they're credible enough for you to not just brush aside a TMZ report.

And besides, all TMZ reported was that the NCAA is investigating some allegations. That's probably true, they look into hundreds of allegations every year, doesn't mean anything more will come of it, nor did TMZ claim to have info that proves anything.

[WMR]

Instead of throwing down veiled insults, why not take part in the discussion, Cedric? Do you have anything to add that might change any minds or do you just troll?

Cedric likes to try to troll UK fans. My advice would be to put him on your ignore list. Voila, no more trolling from Cedric. ;)

[WVRed]

Just saw UK might be trying to get involved with Austin Rivers. Interesting to say the least.

[TeamSelig]

Whats the scoop on this Rivers kid?

[WVRed]

Whats the scoop on this Rivers kid?

Son of Doc Rivers, no 3 prospect overall by Scout and Rivals behind Michael Gilchrist and Quincy Miller. Originally committed to Florida but backed off and is looking around. Thought to be a Duke lean.

Think Stephen Curry. Great shooter and can also run the point if needed, but not so great on defense.

Aside from Rivers, two others to keep your eyes on:

Quincy Miller, who I mentioned above, is another Raleigh product. Was thought to be in with Duke but Louisville has crept into the picture. A 6'8 PF who likely will fill out into the Kevin Durant mold.

Anthony Davis, who has really shot up the boards. He is a 7'0 who can absolutely run the floor and also has range. Was a SG starting out when he was smaller, but had a pretty nice growth spurt. This is the type of player that Cal covets for the DDMO.

[Revering4Blue]

Good news Kentucky fans : John Calipari's recruiting reputation is getting a boost. Need I mention this is bad news for everyone else?

Calipari's been synonymous with NBA-bound point guards, sending the likes of Derrick Rose, Tyreke Evans and John Wall to the pros, two of whom were selected No. 1 overall. Well, with DeMarcus Cousins and Daniel Orton going in 2010's first round, prospective bigs are taking notice.

Amir Williams, a 6-foot-10 center from Detroit, told the Lexington Herald-Leader that a coach who can get big men into the NBA is a huge recruiting plus.

"That's real important," Williams said. "I want to go to a school that will use their 'bigs,' develop their 'bigs' and put them in the pros."

He's not the only one, either.

Recruits such as Anthony Davis and Kyle Wiltjer have elevated Kentucky on their short list and others figure to do the same. The dribble-drive offense may scare off some recruits (it's seen as more guard-friendly), but those concerns will evaporate as more and more big men get drafted.

"I think Calipari's reputation extends almost equally to big guys as point guards," analyst Brick Oettinger of the Prep Stars recruiting service told the paper. "How many other coaches had two freshman big men going in the NBA Draft? And not just this year. Ever."

Just when you thought Calipari couldn't do much better at recruiting

http://beyondthearc.nbcsports.com/

[WVRed]

Potential 2011 starting lineup:

PG-Marquis Teague
SG-Austin Rivers
SF-Michael Gilchrist
PF-Anthony Davis Jr./Quincy Miller
C-Johnny O'Bryant/Amir Williams

Not counting a bench that could feature Jon Hood, Doron Lamb, Darius Miller, and Deandre Liggins.

/=or

[joshnky]

Potential 2011 starting lineup:

PG-Marquis Teague
SG-Austin Rivers
SF-Michael Gilchrist
PF-Anthony Davis Jr./Quincy Miller
C-Johnny O'Bryant/Amir Williams

Not counting a bench that could feature Jon Hood, Doron Lamb, Darius Miller, and Deandre Liggins.

/=or

I know they're great prospects but will you be excited to start five freshmen? Although, in your scenario, I imagine that either Lamb or Miller will start and push either Teague or Rivers to the bench.

[WMR]

Cal won't start 5 freshmen his 3rd year on the job. It's highly likely that 3 (possibly more) of the 2010 guys stick around for at least a 2nd year.

[TeamSelig]

Lamb, Poole, Vargas are 2+ IMO.

[WMR]

IMO out of Knight, Jones, and Kanter at least one will return for a second season, with Kanter being the least likely to return.

[TeamSelig]

If I had to bet, I'd go with Jones. Kanter is just too good to stay another year IMO. Knight will be one of the few good PGs, so he is almost a lock IMO.

[WMR]

Knight's situation is an interesting one... he's already almost technically a soph... hell with summer classes he may be one now... he'd have to stumble quite a bit to fall out of the first round.

Knight would theoretically be able to be really close to graduating in only 2 years.

[Scrap Irony]

FWIW, both Kanter and Knight have expressed how important an education is in their lives. Knight went to HS at one of Florida's most difficult and advanced high schools with a weighted GPA over 4.5 and Kanter's Dad is a doctor.

That in itself might keep both kids at Kentucky longer than Wall, Cousins, et al. Add in the financial security both families enjoy and the supposed NBA lockout after this season and Calipari could be in quite a fine position this time next season.

Imagine a starting five of:

Knight
Teague
Gilchrist
Jones
Kanter

with

Lamb
Liggins
Poole
Miller
Vargas

coming off the bench. (And other non-signed recruits to come.

That's a stacked team right there.

[dabvu2498]

Knight's situation is an interesting one... he's already almost technically a soph... hell with summer classes he may be one now... he'd have to stumble quite a bit to fall out of the first round.

Knight would theoretically be able to be really close to graduating in only 2 years.

I knew I should've gone to school there.

[TeamSelig]

FWIW, both Kanter and Knight have expressed how important an education is in their lives. Knight went to HS at one of Florida's most difficult and advanced high schools with a weighted GPA over 4.5 and Kanter's Dad is a doctor.

That in itself might keep both kids at Kentucky longer than Wall, Cousins, et al. Add in the financial security both families enjoy and the supposed NBA lockout after this season and Calipari could be in quite a fine position this time next season.

Imagine a starting five of:

Knight
Teague
Gilchrist
Jones
Kanter

with

Lamb
Liggins
Poole
Miller
Vargas

coming off the bench. (And other non-signed recruits to come.

That's a stacked team right there.

That would be too good to be true. As for Kanter, his primary goal is to play in the NBA. Basically his reasoning for going to UK is a fast track to the NBA, or so I thought.

I think a lock out would be the best thing for UK ;)

[RiverRat13]

Rivers is going to Duke. It is basically a done deal.

If Knight was extremely concerned with his education, he would have went to Florida, a far and away better academic school than Kentucky. He is there for basketball.

A lock-out would perhaps give college basketball its best season in a couple of decades. Kentucky would be flat out loaded while Duke and Carolina would be pretty close behind.

[Scrap Irony]

Rivers to Duke was the old rumor, RiverRat. No done deal there, as K would announce that as soon as possible to also nab Quincy Miller (who's been a Duke lean but wavers back to UK as well) and perhaps challenge Calipari for recruiting dominance.

Florida is better academically than Kentucky? Depends on what you want to do. UK's engineering program is top ten nationally, as are their dentistry and agriculture programs. Florida's English department (especially creative writing) is top five or ten overall.

[RiverRat13]

I believe Rivers is being diplomatic. If he commits to Duke right after de-committing from Florida, it comes off as Coach K recruiting a kid who has already committed. And maybe his dad genuinely wants him to go through the process. But when all is said and done, he will sign with Duke.

[Scrap Irony]

Perhaps.

But why, then, did he initiate contact with Kentucky and agree to go to Midnight Madness? Rumors around the camp were that Rivers was thisclose to committing after Calipari mentioned Wall, Evans, Bledsoe, and Rose, while K mentioned... Reddick? Jay Williams? Bobby Hurley?

Rivers may very well commit to Duke (they've led for almost a year), but, were I Coach K, I'd be wary of Calipari and Kentucky.

[WMR]

Marquis Teague was a done deal to Louisville too.

[WMR]

If Knight was extremely concerned with his education, he would have went to Florida, a far and away better academic school than Kentucky. He is there for basketball.
.

:rolleyes:

Please get that garbage out of here. Seriously.

:lol:

[TeamSelig]

Actually, if there is a lock out, do you see some of the top guys going to smaller schools that way they have a guaranteed starting job?

Basically, do you think Marquis Teague stays with UK when Brandon Knight would be there (in his 2nd year) manning the PG position.

For fun.....

PG Knight (So) - Teague (Fr)
SG Lamb (So) - Liggins (Sr) - Hood (Jr)
SF Gilchrist (Fr) - D.Miller (Sr) - Poole (So)
PF Jones (So) - Q.Miller? (Fr)
C Kanter (So) - Vargas (So)

[RiverRat13]

Perhaps.

But why, then, did he initiate contact with Kentucky and agree to go to Midnight Madness? Rumors around the camp were that Rivers was thisclose to committing after Calipari mentioned Wall, Evans, Bledsoe, and Rose, while K mentioned... Reddick? Jay Williams? Bobby Hurley?

Rivers may very well commit to Duke (they've led for almost a year), but, were I Coach K, I'd be wary of Calipari and Kentucky.

He also initiated contact with UNC and agreed to visit Chapel Hill.

Smokescreen.

And Austin Rivers will be a top 5 pick in '12 whether Coach K, Roy, Cal, you or I coach him in his one college season. The Cal "develops" pros angle is less likely to work on Doc Rivers' kid.

[RiverRat13]

Actually, if there is a lock out, do you see some of the top guys going to smaller schools that way they have a guaranteed starting job?

Basically, do you think Marquis Teague stays with UK when Brandon Knight would be there (in his 2nd year) manning the PG position.

For fun.....

PG Knight (So) - Teague (Fr)
SG Lamb (So) - Liggins (Sr) - Hood (Jr)
SF Gilchrist (Fr) - D.Miller (Sr) - Poole (So)
PF Jones (So) - Q.Miller? (Fr)
C Kanter (So) - Vargas (So)

I would guess they all stay. Unlike his last two classes, I'm guessing Cal gets more guys to sign in the fall than the spring so they'll be locked in.

In '12 you'd have the UK roster you listed as the favorite, then Duke would have Irving, Rivers, Curry, Dawkins, both Plumlees, Hairston, and Gbinije. UNC would have everyone back from '11 plus McAdoo and whichever big they can land. Duke and Carolina would have enough talent that they would be the favorite to win the title many of the past years but will still be a step behind an absolutely loaded Kentucky team.

[TeamSelig]

NCAA would be interesting if the lock out happens.

1) You would have 2 recruiting classes
2) The draft is still just 2 rounds, it is basically 2 drafts combined in one... so some top talent might opt for a 3rd (or 2nd) season.
3) This makes the next recruiting class potentially join "stacked" teams which means it could push future players to play another year.

[joshnky]

UK's engineering program is top ten nationally

I'm sorry but this is just not true. They might have one program (likely related to ag) that has received a top ten ranking at one point but I can't find anything that remotely supports that claim. Even UK's website (http://www.uky.edu/webuk/subpages/nationalrank.html), which as expected touts every obscure honor possible, doesn't have an engineering top ten award.

UK has a terrific ag program (as well as pharmacy school) but not much else of national renown. The engineering school was actually ranked 86th by US News for 2009.

[Scrap Irony]

Interesting, johnky. The UK recruiters that come to our school have literature that says, "A Top 10 Engineering Program in the Nation". (I went to the school to find the brochure, so as to make certain.) No asterisks nor any small print to explain.

They mention electrical, mining, and mechanical specifically.

[Joseph]

Let's not go down the academia road please. EVERY school touts themselves as 'among the best'. UK, U of L, Iona, OSU, Mississippi.

I'd wager most public schools don't have a hill of beans worth of difference in them. We all just want 'ours' to be special because we went there.

[Hoosier Red]

Let's not go down the academia road please. EVERY school touts themselves as 'among the best'. UK, U of L, Iona, OSU, Mississippi.

I'd wager most public schools don't have a hill of beans worth of difference in them. We all just want 'ours' to be special because we went there.

That's true, but to RiverRat's point, if the education was truly the most important thing, than the kid wouldn't be going to a public university. But then again Amherst and MIT don't have much in the way of basketball teams.

If the kid's interested in education to the point where he'd spend an extra year doing something he's not being paid for, I'm guessing he wouldn't have chosen Kentucky to do it.

[WMR]

That's true, but to RiverRat's point, if the education was truly the most important thing, than the kid wouldn't be going to a public university. But then again Amherst and MIT don't have much in the way of basketball teams.

If the kid's interested in education to the point where he'd spend an extra year doing something he's not being paid for, I'm guessing he wouldn't have chosen Kentucky to do it.

If his goal is to receive a good education while playing for the coach who will get him best prepared to play point guard in the NBA, then UK was probably his best choice.

[joshnky]

If his goal is to receive a good education while playing for the coach who will get him best prepared to play point guard in the NBA, then UK was probably his best choice.

Not anything against Knight but I imagine that with the academically minded top prospects the goal is more to receive a college education with a top coach. Not that it isn't a good education but they recognize that while college education is important it can be found at any college. With the non-academically minded they clearly don't even care about the college education as evidenced by their grades even with watered down schedules.

Regardless, this is a pointless discussion. Knight is likely a very smart kid but he probably won't finish his degree before he leaves UK anyway.

[WMR]

Not anything against Knight but I imagine that with the academically minded top prospects the goal is more to receive a college education with a top coach. Not that it isn't a good education but they recognize that while college education is important it can be found at any college. With the non-academically minded they clearly don't even care about the college education as evidenced by their grades even with watered down schedules.

Regardless, this is a pointless discussion. Knight is likely a very smart kid but he probably won't finish his degree before he leaves UK anyway.

That's what I was implying.

You can get a good education at any school in the SEC, Big Ten, Big East, wherever... if you're willing to pursue challenging/interesting classes and put in the work. I'm sure Knight knows that. He cares about school and getting his education, but the ultimate goal is the NBA.

[Hoosier Red]

If his goal is to receive a good education while playing for the coach who will get him best prepared to play point guard in the NBA, then UK was probably his best choice.

I agree with that, but it makes it unlikely that he'll stay more than one year which is where the discussion was headed.

If he does stay more than one year, it won't be because of a dedication to education, but rather because he feels he can improve his draft stock.

[WMR]

I agree with that, but it makes it unlikely that he'll stay more than one year which is where the discussion was headed.

If he does stay more than one year, it won't be because of a dedication to education, but rather because he feels he can improve his draft stock.

See that's where I disagree a little bit. I think he could be motivated by both:

a) better preparing himself for the NBA

and

b) getting his degree in 2 years (or nearly so)

I think he would have had those goals anywhere, but it makes it easier for him to stay that extra year at UK because of the tutelage that he is receiving.

It's all just supposition in the end.

Hopefully he'll be a 4 year player, just like the rest of his teammates. ;) :D

[WVRed]

Apparently Anthony Davis has made his decision, but won't announce until he finishes up his visits at Ohio St and Syracuse.

He just visited Kentucky this past weekend, so the speculation is that UK is the favorite. Also visited DePaul, but there is no interest.

[cumberlandreds]

As you UK fans know the Cats will be playing three games in Canada next weekend. I just found out that Fox Sports South will be televising all three games. They will be broadcast statewide in Kentucky too if you don't get this channel. Below is my e-mail I got back from them:

Thank you for taking the time to write. For regular season games, we have to restrict distribution of men's basketball games to the SEC footprint, which does not include Virginia. However, those restrictions do not apply for "preseason" games, so we plan to televise all three games from Canada to our entire coverage area. If you have DirecTV's sports package, you will be able to view these games. Thank you for writing.

BTW,it's channels 646 if you get DTV's sports pack.

[Cedric]

post icon
‘Report’ Alleges Kentucky Paid for Davis; Durand Johnson Announces Top Six

By Adam Zagoria on August 04, 2010, 4:29PM

A completely unsubstantiated report from the Chicago Sun-Times alleges that Kentucky paid $200,000 to get Anthony Davis, a 6-foot-10 rising senior from Chicago Perspectives Charter.

“We haven’t asked anyone for anything and no one has offered us anything,” Anthony Davis Sr. told the paper.

Davis Sr. did not answer a phonecall or text message Wednesday afternoon.

Jevon Maymon, Davis”s AAU coach, said by text, “I don’t know anything about this.”

The Sun-Times offered no concrete evidence or proof that Kentucky paid for Davis, who burst onto the national scene this spring and summer after growing eight inches in the last year.

The paper cited “rumors/sources” on its Website, offering no evidence of the payment.

“It’s a little unfair for a kid to have to listen to those type of rumors if they aren’t true,” recruiting analyst Joe Henricksen told the Sun-Times.

No kidding.

Davis Sr. said his son has chosen a school, but will not disclose which one.

The Sun-Times and a Kentucky blog cite unnamed sources saying he has chosen Kentucky.

Davis said at the Peach Jam that his final three were Kentucky, Ohio State and Syracuse. He has visited the first two, but not Syracuse.

He also visited DePaul unofficially Monday, but it remains unclear if the Blue Demons are in the mix.

“Yes, it’s the LeBron wait and see time,” the father said Tuesday night by text, indicating that everyone must wait and see what his son announces.

[Hoosier Red]

post icon
‘Report’ Alleges Kentucky Paid for Davis; Durand Johnson Announces Top Six

By Adam Zagoria on August 04, 2010, 4:29PM

A completely unsubstantiated report from the Chicago Sun-Times alleges that Kentucky paid $200,000 to get Anthony Davis, a 6-foot-10 rising senior from Chicago Perspectives Charter.



W-E-A-K. I went to the mat defending the earlier NY Times piece. That piece had sources and was reporting on facts.

WMR, as a primer, this is what you're talking about when you say newspapers are going down hill. I wouldn't wipe my backside with that report.

[Cedric]

W-E-A-K. I went to the mat defending the earlier NY Times piece. That piece had sources and was reporting on facts.

WMR, as a primer, this is what you're talking about when you say newspapers are going down hill. I wouldn't wipe my backside with that report.

It is weak. Even if it comes out true later they shouldn't have published it.

[WVRed]

UK threatened a lawsuit and the story was completely rewritten.

These are probably the same sources who claimed Cal was coming to coach the Bulls.

[WMR]

http://www.ukathletics.com/auto_pdf/p_hotos/s_chools/kty/genrel/auto_pdf/legal10_0804_response

[Cedric]

Chicago Sun-Times now citing sources "from three separate universities" saying Anthony Davis Sr. asked for money - LINK (asked for $125,000-$150,000)

Sun-Times standing by story that Kentucky paid for 6-10 Anthony Davis.

NCAA has called Chicago Sun Times asking for where they received their info.

[Scrap Irony]

A Kentucky message board claims that Rick Pitino and Pat Forde are behind the stories (NY Times and Chicago Sun-Times) that have emerged alleging violations between recruits and Cal/UK. They're doing this because Pitino and company are looking for a way to get Calipari into court to cross examine him so that they can ruin his reputation. That same message board is also claimed a third article in the series will allege that WWW was the "bag man" that gave the cash to the Davis family.

Sadly, I could believe both parts of this ridiculous soap opera. One, that Pitino and Forde-- a prima donna who has been so far up Pitino's backside that he has to slide left when the TP comes into view-- would have the temerity to think and implement it, and, two, that Kentucky may be cheating. (Though the $200,000 figure is beyond ignorant. Most whispers of improper benefits involve used cars and spending money only.)

[WMR]

In the past 24 hours, the family of Anthony Davis has been subjected to an all out attack on their credibility based on nothing more than unnamed sources who supposedly "heard rumors". While rumors like these are commonly floated by "friends" of rival programs, it's unprecedented that a national media entity like the Chicago Sun Times would runs this sort of story.

The predictable part is the inclusion of the University of Kentucky and John Calipari into the storyline. The forces behind this "story" clearly intend to do damage to UK, Calipari and as an added benefit, the recruitment of Anthony Davis. By adding these names to the story, not only do they get another shot at UK/Cal, but they attempt to derail a recruitment of a top UK target. For those looking to harm UK/Cal, this is what you'd call a "win / win".

The truth of the matter is.... if you show me ANY top recruit, I'll find you two or three college programs who are willing to whisper "they cheated to get him" so they can have a valid reason to have FAILED to recruit and sign a top kid. It's the oldest trick in the book, honestly. You don't get a kid, you claim that someone cheated you out of him. It has been that way for decades.

While I've never been one to buy into the "they are out to get us" mentality that some UK supporters believe, this is a totally different animal. There is WAY too much smoke and absolutely zero fire... this is a planted story from the get go.

So, who could possibly be planting such information in the media on the day of the Pitino trial's closing arguments?? Well, let's first look at who it isn't.....

It certainly isn't any of the majority of reporters who came out in print and twitter condemning the Sun Times story as irresponsible journalism at the least and ridiculous journalism at the most. It's not hard to see who the 98% of those guys are and see whose name is conspicuously missing from the list of reporting heavyweights who failed to even utter a peep to denounce the Sun Times. Obviously, if you were the one who planted a story, you wouldn't come out publicly and criticize the writer and publisher of that same story. What did Pat Forde say about the story?

You see, I've heard my own rumors from great sources.... from people who get calls BEFORE stories get printed..... these people knew this sort of story was coming out long before it ran. This is the reason I wrote last week to be prepared for this sort of thing. There is a determined effort from the "friends of Pitino" crowd to cause damage to UK/Cal by floating these sorts of stories. The first strong evidence I got was during the "Eric Bledsoe" story. Pete Thamel was the front, but the story came from the same person who is almost certainly behind this "Davis want's money" story.

The sad part is, I don't think Michael O'Brien knew what he was doing. As Matt Jones posted yesterday, his accusation of cheating was written as an aside.... as if it were a minor point. However, the most telling part of his story was in the way it was so carefully worded as to say everything without saying anything that would leave him open to a lawsuit. This story was handed to O'Brien already written by someone who knew exactly how to do it... someone who has had practice at handing out anti UK/Cal stories that are resistant to lawsuits due to careful wording.

So what am I saying? Who do I believe is behind all these ridiculous stories? The rumor is that Pat Forde is the evil mastermind who is handing out these stories. I heard rumors about him looking for Bledsoe stuff, but when ESPN wouldn't run it, the rumors are he gave it to Pete Thamel, who he worked with at ESPN before Thamel moved on to the New York Times, a paper known to print anything.

The funniest part of this Davis story is how totally unbelievable it is to anyone who really is involved with recruiting in the first place. The days of bags of cash being handed out are gone. IF someone wanted to give improper benefits to a family, it wouldn't be a large cash sum like the 200k that the Sun Times accuses the recruit's father of asking for.

Additionally, does anyone really think John Calipari HAS to cheat? He's the hottest coach at the hottest program in the nation. He got John Wall when Wall's closest advisor was opposed to it. He got Marquis Teague while Teague's high school coach was employed by Rick Pitino (who claims to be opposed to using relationships to get recruits). He got Terrence Jones from the west coast after Jones had an emotional press conference and mistakenly chose Washington in front of the world. John Calipari has the most attractive package in the nation to offer recruits. He has NO NEED to cheat at all. And as everyone here knows, when John Calipari was coaching at Memphis, I always wrote that I never heard a single credible story where Cal was accused of doing something improper. He didn't cheat at Memphis and he certainly doesn't have to cheat at UK.

UPDATE 1: Be prepared to have William Wesley's name brought into this story as the "bag man" who supposedly paid Anthony Davis. I've heard credible rumors that phone calls are being made asking for remarks about this sort of story. The funniest part of this story is that William Wesley has no relationship at all with Anthony Davis or his family. But that's not going to stop this from being the rumor thrown out there to sensationalize the story.

This entire story is a setup designed to get UK/Cal to sue someone. The idea is to get Calipari on the witness stand in a lawsuit and attempt to damage him under cross examination. By bringing William Wesley's name into this fake story, any resulting lawsuit could attempt to depose Wesley as well. I fully expect Wesley to be named at some point in the near future for this very pupose

No doubt this idea was thought up in "less than 15 seconds" by someone who probably understands how a public lawsuit can damage a career. The problem is, Calipari isn't cheating, so there isn't any "smoking lasagna".

UPDATE 2: Now the Sun Times is standing behind the story they pulled down yesterday. They claim to have 3 separate universities that are saying they claim that they were asked for money by Anhony Davis' father. I call BS and I'm sure many others will as well. Not only do I find it hard to believe Mr. Davis ever asked for money, I find it impossible to believe that 3 separate universities would be sources for a story if he had asked for money.

This is further proof that this entire story is designed to do nothing more than create a situation where John Calipari is forced to become involved in a lawsuit. You'd have to wonder if the Sun Times thinks whatever they'd lose in any lawsuit would be minimal compared to the attention they'd get by being involved in a suit by Calipari/UK. Risk vs. reward perhaps?

Anyone reading this story has my full permission to repost this on any message board.

Marc Maggard

[Cedric]

I hate Kentucky with a passion and I still don't think this should have been reported without more information.

WWW obviously has serious connections with Cal and he finds a way to get involved with any Chicago kid. That's why people are saying his name a lot. People have been claiming for years that WWW and others are steering kids with money to Cal. This is just the first time a major outlet published the rumor.

[Hoosier Red]

So what am I saying? Who do I believe is behind all these ridiculous stories? The rumor is that Pat Forde is the evil mastermind who is handing out these stories. I heard rumors about him looking for Bledsoe stuff, but when ESPN wouldn't run it, the rumors are he gave it to Pete Thamel, who he worked with at ESPN before Thamel moved on to the New York Times, a paper known to print anything.

Marc Maggard

Wow WMR, do you even read this stuff before you post it? I mean that's some high level paranoia going on there. Obviously there's no love lost between Forde and UK/Calipari but really? Do you think he has nothing better to do with his summer vacation than place a story with competitors in order to get Calipari onto the stand and damage him?

I'd love for Marc Maggard to explain how the New York Times has a reputation to "print anything." You never bothered to explain what the NY Times printed that was UNTRUE in the first story, but I'd like to hear one other story that the New York Times has printed just to "throw it out there without any facts."

[WMR]

Wow WMR, do you even read this stuff before you post it? I mean that's some high level paranoia going on there. Obviously there's no love lost between Forde and UK/Calipari but really? Do you think he has nothing better to do with his summer vacation than place a story with competitors in order to get Calipari onto the stand and damage him?

I'd love for Marc Maggard to explain how the New York Times has a reputation to "print anything." You never bothered to explain what the NY Times printed that was UNTRUE in the first story, but I'd like to hear one other story that the New York Times has printed just to "throw it out there without any facts."

Funny, I was about to ask you the same thing about your posts. :beerme:

You're really demonstrating your ignorance when it comes to Pat Forde. Big time.

Forde's 'summer vacation'??? WOW, Do you ever re-read this 'stuff' before you post it? :lol: I'm sure Pat Forde is too busy sitting by the beach to help out his bestest buddy and meal ticket Pitino.

I would tell you to focus on your own program, but I'm not a sadist. ;)

I'm sure Pete Thamel and the NYT are appreciative of your dogged defending of their utter crap article, all these months later. :D

[WVRed]

A Kentucky message board claims that Rick Pitino and Pat Forde are behind the stories (NY Times and Chicago Sun-Times) that have emerged alleging violations between recruits and Cal/UK. They're doing this because Pitino and company are looking for a way to get Calipari into court to cross examine him so that they can ruin his reputation. That same message board is also claimed a third article in the series will allege that WWW was the "bag man" that gave the cash to the Davis family.

Sadly, I could believe both parts of this ridiculous soap opera. One, that Pitino and Forde-- a prima donna who has been so far up Pitino's backside that he has to slide left when the TP comes into view-- would have the temerity to think and implement it, and, two, that Kentucky may be cheating. (Though the $200,000 figure is beyond ignorant. Most whispers of improper benefits involve used cars and spending money only.)

Actually, I think it has more to do with the extortion trial going on this week than trying to ruin Cal's reputation. Keeps the heat off Rick Pitino and his sexual encounters with cougars.

[WMR]

Actually, I think it has more to do with the extortion trial going on this week than trying to ruin Cal's reputation. Keeps the heat off Rick Pitino and his sexual encounters with cougars.

It functions in a number of ways: hopefully goad Cal/UK into suing ... get eyes and minds off 15 second Pitino ... possibly get the kid to waiver on his probable commitment to UK (hurt UK recruiting)...

Tom Crean, Rick Pitino, and John Calipari walk into a bar...

they leave with a 2 star recruit, herpes, and a vacated FF.

I'll let you decide who is who. :lol:

[Hoosier Red]

Funny, I was about to ask you the same thing about your posts. :beerme:

You're really demonstrating your ignorance when it comes to Pat Forde. Big time.

Forde's 'summer vacation'??? WOW, Do you ever re-read this 'stuff' before you post it? :lol: I'm sure Pat Forde is too busy sitting by the beach to help out his bestest buddy and meal ticket Pitino.

I would tell you to focus on your own program, but I'm not a sadist. ;)

I'm sure Pete Thamel and the NYT are appreciative of your dogged defending of their utter crap article, all these months later. :D

See here's the thing. I happily claim ignorance to Pat Forde's dealings with Kentucky and Pitino. I just have a hard time believing the guy doesn't have enough going on that he willfully travels around the country digging up dirt,(not to use in his own column) but to feed to other writers as well. He may very well be doing whatever he can to dig up dirt on Calipari, he may be breaking every ethical standard ever set forth, but to do it so that other writers would profit. I guess I just don't see it. I'm not saying it's not possible, but rather it's not probable.

As for Thamel's article. I'm still waiting to see one thing he reported as fact that was not true. Assuming you can't or won't do that, I'll let the story stand for itself. As to ESPN not running that story(you've got to be kidding me, not only would they run it, but they did run it. As did every other newspaper, website and sports content provider in the country.) There is 100000000% no chance that ESPN would have told Pat Forde, "Yeah no thanks. We'll pass on that story. Let me know when you have something big."

Again, instead of running baseless assertions, how bout you actually show something resembling proof.

As an IU fan, I thought WE were paranoid.

[Scrap Irony]

The sources are easy. I don't know how many boosters, hangers-on, and university "representatives" whisper (and occasionally shout) about cheating, paying recruits, and academic fraud and opposing schools. Newspapers get hundreds of e-mails and phone calls over the course of a year with "absolute proof" so-and-so cheated to get so-and-so.

Most of the time, it's sour grapes. (Though there are times when it isn't.)

The suprising part is that the reporter (O'Brien?) came right back with his three source second report. It's snide, short, and really condescending to both UK and the Davis family. And the paper stood behind him. Completely behind him. Usually, when a rather large university with rather large pockets sends a letter like the one Kentucky sent to the Sun-Times, it's CYA time. Editors and whole departments get axed and reorganized for stories like these, if untrue. The paper, OTOH, hasn't blinked nor has it retracted anything. (Though changing the first story almost completely seemed like a clear admission of less than solid multiple source reporting.)

That means one of two things.

1) They have the smoking gun and are really playing this for all it's worth in the hopes of driving up interest and internet hits over the course of an extended time. Kentucky or the Davis family make another stink and the other shoe drops. Proof. Death penalty. Game over, aside from the I-told-you-so's from "haters" on sport message boards.

2) O'Brien knows his job is hanging by a thread and he desperately needs a major story. He hears whispers about Davis. He already doesn't like Cal and Kentucky. He "knows" they're dirty. He has a friend that used to report in state and that guy is full of stories about how dirty the program and Cal are. He calls the friend and gets a couple university sources for good measure. The newspaper needs hits so they run with it.

[Hoosier Red]

The sources are easy. I don't know how many boosters, hangers-on, and university "representatives" whisper (and occasionally shout) about cheating, paying recruits, and academic fraud and opposing schools. Newspapers get hundreds of e-mails and phone calls over the course of a year with "absolute proof" so-and-so cheated to get so-and-so.

Most of the time, it's sour grapes. (Though there are times when it isn't.)

The suprising part is that the reporter (O'Brien?) came right back with his three source second report. It's snide, short, and really condescending to both UK and the Davis family. And the paper stood behind him. Completely behind him. Usually, when a rather large university with rather large pockets sends a letter like the one Kentucky sent to the Sun-Times, it's CYA time. Editors and whole departments get axed and reorganized for stories like these, if untrue. The paper, OTOH, hasn't blinked nor has it retracted anything. (Though changing the first story almost completely seemed like a clear admission of less than solid multiple source reporting.)

That means one of two things.

1) They have the smoking gun and are really playing this for all it's worth in the hopes of driving up interest and internet hits over the course of an extended time. Kentucky or the Davis family make another stink and the other shoe drops. Proof. Death penalty. Game over, aside from the I-told-you-so's from "haters" on sport message boards.

2) O'Brien knows his job is hanging by a thread and he desperately needs a major story. He hears whispers about Davis. He already doesn't like Cal and Kentucky. He "knows" they're dirty. He has a friend that used to report in state and that guy is full of stories about how dirty the program and Cal are. He calls the friend and gets a couple university sources for good measure. The newspaper needs hits so they run with it.

I'm interested to see how this pans out. If I had a dollar to wager, I'd guess the Sun-Times has nothing. Nothing more than suspicion at least. But they're banking on the fact that this would be much worse for UK to go through a lawsuit than for them. Essentially every time it's brought up, someone else sees UK in a lawsuit with the Sun-Times and UK's reputation takes another hit.
Plus if the Sun-Times gave in now, they'd be admitting they have nothing. I think it's a big bluff. They've put all their chips on the table, and they're hoping UK blinks. Actually, they put all their chips, plus some other ones they borrowed from the bank, and some a friend lent them. If UK calls, they're screwed. Like out of business screwed.

The irony for me is that there's a chance everything reported on is true, but the reporter doesn't actually have real sources on it. So this could come down to whether UK knows that the reporter is right, but also knows that he doesn't know he's right.

[Scrap Irony]

$200,000?

Not likely.

UK almost got the death penalty for a couple grand in an Emery envelope. Louisville got into some serious hot water with used cars. Florida State's penchant for sneakers, UT's boosterettes and their Friday Night highlights, free books at LSU-- historically, college kids are bought cheap.

[Hoosier Red]

That's true, SMU's slush fund was allegedly 61,000 and that was spread out over at least a few players.

I should have been more clear. There's a chance that the player is in fact being paid(something), the reporter threw something out to see if it could stick but has no real proof, and UK knows that the kid is being paid but the reporter doesn't. Or at least UK knows a booster could be paying the player but doesn't know whether or not the reporter actually has proof.

As I said, it will be very interesting to see how this all shakes out. I doubt any of it sticks.

[WVRed]

That's true, SMU's slush fund was allegedly 61,000 and that was spread out over at least a few players.

I should have been more clear. There's a chance that the player is in fact being paid(something), the reporter threw something out to see if it could stick but has no real proof, and UK knows that the kid is being paid but the reporter doesn't. Or at least UK knows a booster could be paying the player but doesn't know whether or not the reporter actually has proof.

As I said, it will be very interesting to see how this all shakes out. I doubt any of it sticks.

If anything, I don't think UK should sue the Sun Times.

The Davis family, however, should.

John Calipari might get called to testify, but the "three unnamed sources" will be brought to light if it ever gets to trial.

That being said, it won't. The Sun Times is on shaky ground legally, they know it, and will settle out of court, a gag order attached, and print a small retraction on page A-17 that nobody will see.

The damage is already done. If Davis comes to UK, then all the whispers will be that he took money. If he goes to another school, it will be because of the story made him choose another school. I look for him to actually commit by the end of the month, and Syracuse, the other player, got a commitment from Rakeem Christmas, which leads me to think its down to UK and Ohio St.

I really think Pat Forde being behind this is a conspiracy theory at best. Do I think Forde has an axe to grind with Cal? Yes. But its kinda far fetched to constantly name him with everything going on. If he is involved, its because the Quick Rick camp wants the heat taken off them with the Sypher trial.

In the end, it's dirty Chicago news reporting. If anything, it's creating news rather than reporting it. Davis is a Chicago kid and spurned the hometown school. The same newspaper also ran with a John Calipari coming to coach the Bulls rumor.

As much as people will tie WWW to this, Kenny Payne deserves the credit. He has the Chicago recruiting connections and was a major reason Kentucky picked him up from Oregon.

[WVRed]

In other news, the Chicago Sun Times is reporting that Keith Bogans has signed with the Chicago Bulls and is asking for 2.5 million.

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/2574838,CST-SPT-swire07.article

[Javy Pornstache]

LOL @ offering a kid 200,000 to sign, like that wouldn't get out, this isn't the 1960s, kids aren't getting stuffed envelopes, and if they are it certainly isn't for THAT much. You guys that aren't in the UK beat think the Pat Forde stuff is paranoia, but it really isn't. This guy is obsessed, I mean to an unhealthy, stalkerish level, with Coach Calipari and UK. He literally went down to Alabama beating on doors to find ANYTHING he could on Eric B and Demarcus, and ESPN took him off the UK/UL beat he was on because of "conflict of interest" - it was at that time, that the only thing he'd even heard from his "fact-finding mission" was about EB's high school transcripts (which was nothing to begin with) and that was when he forwarded on to his buddy at the NYT, Thamel, for him to run this big "expose" since ESPN figured out the guy had gone off his rocker by this point and wanted nothing to do with it.

[WVRed]

LOL @ offering a kid 200,000 to sign, like that wouldn't get out, this isn't the 1960s, kids aren't getting stuffed envelopes, and if they are it certainly isn't for THAT much. You guys that aren't in the UK beat think the Pat Forde stuff is paranoia, but it really isn't. This guy is obsessed, I mean to an unhealthy, stalkerish level, with Coach Calipari and UK. He literally went down to Alabama beating on doors to find ANYTHING he could on Eric B and Demarcus, and ESPN took him off the UK/UL beat he was on because of "conflict of interest" - it was at that time, that the only thing he'd even heard from his "fact-finding mission" was about EB's high school transcripts (which was nothing to begin with) and that was when he forwarded on to his buddy at the NYT, Thamel, for him to run this big "expose" since ESPN figured out the guy had gone off his rocker by this point and wanted nothing to do with it.

I am a UK fan and subscriber at TBK and Marc Maggard is pretty much saying the exact same thing you are.

I just think its extreme to throw every negative rumor about UK in the direction of Pat Forde. I'm leaving open the possibility of that being true, but I also think its dirty Chicago news reporting. I would have said the same thing in Washington with Terrence Jones if something like this would have happened.

It's Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon. Except there's just one degree, and Kevin Bacon is Pat Forde.

[Reds4Life]

I wouldn't have been UK paying the $200k, it would have been WWW, and if you think he can't afford to pay that kind of money to recruits, you better think again.

Calipari doesn't help himself at all when he associates with guys like Wes, it just calls his reputation into question even more than it already has been. If he was smart, he'd cut all ties with that guy forever, it's not going to lead him down a pleasant path.

[Scrap Irony]

Do you know World Wide Wes, Red4Life? Have you met him?

If not, why cast aspersions?

And, as for WWW leading Cal down the wrong path, he's been around WWW for more than a decade now and all he's become is on of the top five coaches in the NCAA and its top recruiter.

[The Cowboy]

My best friend plays for UK and I'm LOL'ing at people on here who believe Cal doesn't cheat..

[Reds4Life]

Do you know World Wide Wes, Red4Life? Have you met him?

If not, why cast aspersions?

And, as for WWW leading Cal down the wrong path, he's been around WWW for more than a decade now and all he's become is on of the top five coaches in the NCAA and its top recruiter.

Yeah. He's also become the only coach in NCAA history to have Final Four's stripped from multiple schools because of violations to.

[Scrap Irony]

I think we've gone through this before. I know we have. So, either you don't listen or you choose not to.

Either way, one more time:

Calipari's first Final Four was vacated because Calipari himself went to the NCAA with the Camby/ agent situation. The second was vacated after the NCAA itself vetted the player in question.

Neither were Cal's fault. At all.

Caliapri has NEVER been implicated in any recruiting scandal. Ever. He's been named in less infractions than Roy Williams, Jim Boeheim, or Rick Pitino. As far as the NCAA is concerned, Caliapari is as clean as any coach in America.

[Scrap Irony]

My best friend plays for UK and I'm LOL'ing at people on here who believe Cal doesn't cheat..

Who, pray tell, is your best friend, Cowboy? Because, as hard as it is to believe, sometimes, people make up relationships. PM me if you'd rather not tell the world.

[Reds4Life]

I think we've gone through this before. I know we have. So, either you don't listen or you choose not to.

Either way, one more time:

Calipari's first Final Four was vacated because Calipari himself went to the NCAA with the Camby/ agent situation. The second was vacated after the NCAA itself vetted the player in question.

Neither were Cal's fault. At all.

Caliapri has NEVER been implicated in any recruiting scandal. Ever. He's been named in less infractions than Roy Williams, Jim Boeheim, or Rick Pitino. As far as the NCAA is concerned, Caliapari is as clean as any coach in America.

Still on his record my man. The official books show 0 Final Four appearances, which were stripped due to violation of NCAA rules. Period. That is a fact.

As for Cal's involvement, I don't know, and neither do you, but the record books speak for themselves.

[Scrap Irony]

Still on his record my man. The official books show 0 Final Four appearances, which were stripped due to violation of NCAA rules. Period. That is a fact.

As for Cal's involvement, I don't know, and neither do you, but the record books speak for themselves.

Yes, we do know because the NCAA itself said Calipari was NOT implicated in any wrongdoing in either case. Both had to do with playing ineligible players only. Both were ruled ineligible after the fact.

[Cedric]

Sports fans get extreme denial when their favorite team hires a player or coach. I'm a diehard Bengal fan and I have already forgotten all the dumb stuff T.O has done.

It's just the nature of sports. You defend someone until they burn you.

[Scrap Irony]

Sigh.

Not my favorite team nor coach.

But I HATE it when "fans" dog coaches and universities without a shred of proof. Calipari gets a bum rap when other coaches who do the same thing (and worse) get clean bills.

Roy Williams has cheated, gotten caught, and the world of basketball fans believe him clean. Coach K has been caught doing exactly what Calipari did, yet he's somehow a paragon of virtue?

Do I think Cal is clean? Of course not. Then again, I think ALL Division I coaches are dirty.

[WVRed]

Who, pray tell, is your best friend, Cowboy? Because, as hard as it is to believe, sometimes, people make up relationships. PM me if you'd rather not tell the world.

Yes, inquiring minds want to know (and I am an inquiring mind). :)

[WVRed]

I wouldn't have been UK paying the $200k, it would have been WWW, and if you think he can't afford to pay that kind of money to recruits, you better think again.

Calipari doesn't help himself at all when he associates with guys like Wes, it just calls his reputation into question even more than it already has been. If he was smart, he'd cut all ties with that guy forever, it's not going to lead him down a pleasant path.

Either way, a reputable source would have likely caught it. That much money exchanging hands would probably have ESPN covering it.

I said earlier in this thread, Kenny Payne is the one who deserves the credit if UK gets Davis, not WorldWide Wes.

[Javy Pornstache]

Still on his record my man. The official books show 0 Final Four appearances, which were stripped due to violation of NCAA rules. Period. That is a fact.

As for Cal's involvement, I don't know, and neither do you, but the record books speak for themselves.

Reading comprehension is obviously not your strong suit.

[RiverRat13]

he's been around WWW for more than a decade now and all he's become is on of the top five coaches in the NCAA and its top recruiter.

Sorry, this doesn't compute.

Top 3 recruiter? Yes.

Best recruiter? Possibly so.

Top 5 coach? No way, no how.

I do agree that there's no way Cal or anyone is promising Anthony Davis $200K.

[Javy Pornstache]

NM

[WVRed]

Sorry, this doesn't compute.

Top 3 recruiter? Yes.

Best recruiter? Possibly so.

Top 5 coach? No way, no how.

I do agree that there's no way Cal or anyone is promising Anthony Davis $200K.

I do agree with this, and it was one of my biggest drawbacks with Cal when he was hired.

The guy can recruit the best of the best and bring them to Lexington, but you have to honestly hope everything is clicking when they play.

This is where Cal and Quick Rick are similar (although you could make the argument Pitino has lost his recruiting edge). Both are/were excellent recruiters, but in-game coaches they were not.

Cal's teams, even at Memphis, always have a tendency to bow out a round earlier than they should. West Virginia this year, Missouri the year before, and losing the national championship to Kansas before that.

[Scrap Irony]

Who's better?

I'll accept K and Izzo.

Who else?

[RiverRat13]

Who's better?

I'll accept K and Izzo.

Who else?

Before we begin on that, could you clarify what you meant by top 5 coach in your original statement? I took it as coaching independent of recruiting since you listed recruiting separately. If so, I can come up with a pretty substantial list of guys I'd take over Calipari if given equal talent. If not, then I could see the argument for him being top 5.

By any definition, Roy Williams is clearly better. It would get a bit murky after that.

[Scrap Irony]

Top Five overall.

Roy Williams? That one's arguable.

Has Calipari ever done less with more like Williams did this past season? Seven McDonald's All-Americans garners how many wins? 20-17 was patently offensive for a team with that much talent.

[WVRed]

I would break it down this way:

Top Overall Coaches:
Tom Izzo
Coach K
Bill Self
Roy Williams

You could even make an argument for Jim Calhoun.

These are the guys who can sell ice to eskimos and back it up on the court. They are the complete package.

John Calipari and Bob Huggins are two that I believe could join the ranks but on different levels. Cal is a great recruiter while Huggins is a better in-game coach. A national championship by either one would put them in that category.

[The Cowboy]

nm

[WMR]

I would break it down this way:

Top Overall Coaches:
Tom Izzo
Coach K
Bill Self
Roy Williams

You could even make an argument for Jim Calhoun.

These are the guys who can sell ice to eskimos and back it up on the court. They are the complete package.

John Calipari and Bob Huggins are two that I believe could join the ranks but on different levels. Cal is a great recruiter while Huggins is a better in-game coach. A national championship by either one would put them in that category.

You're telling me you would take Calhoun or Self over Cal? That's nuts, IMO. I wouldn't take Cryin' Roy either but you can at least make a decent argument for Roy.

[WMR]

Before we begin on that, could you clarify what you meant by top 5 coach in your original statement? I took it as coaching independent of recruiting since you listed recruiting separately. If so, I can come up with a pretty substantial list of guys I'd take over Calipari if given equal talent. If not, then I could see the argument for him being top 5.

By any definition, Roy Williams is clearly better. It would get a bit murky after that.

Recruiting is at least 85% of "Coaching" these days in collegiate athletics.

As Billy G said when I asked him about recruiting, "It's the most important thing we do."

[WMR]

Time for a new thread already...

[WMR]

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=84437