Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="BlueMAB, post: 3393128, member: 920"]
I’ll refer you to my post about the NCAA treating UConn differently at the end of Calhoun’s tenure and the beginning of Ollie’s.
The landscape is/was different for UConn after the post-season ban. Also, Ollie inherited a program on probation, and within 5 years had that program in danger of being back on probation.

I’m not naive about what may have occurred at UConn. But most of those arguing UConn is in the wrong are ignoring the fact that the NCAA literally went out of its way to
ban us form the postseason. While jumping through hoops to protect other programs who have done worse.

So yes.  Context matters.

edit... and i don’t think I’ve seen one person who argues that Ollie should get paid admit that had he not cheated and lied about it, he would have been paid.

like I said earlier. The argument is about money. you can argue UConn would have fired him without the violations. Who cares? They would have had to pay him, and there wouldn’t be an argument. The only argument is whether he deserves the full amount or not. Because we don’t know what settlement offers were made and rejected, and by which side.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

First name of men's bb coach