cbs sports article--ncaa deflect about uconn ship

[husky99]

http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/26283066/31921832

 

[UChusky916]

The haters can't leave us alone... it means they're concerned.

I love it

 

[IMind]

Not to horrid an article... I do like how they make something sinister about Michael Bradley receiving financial aid...

"He'll no doubt end up not really incurring that debt, right? So who's ultimately paying for that, and when?"

Cause kids with no money never get financial aid from a state school. That never happens anywhere... so someone must be paying off some loans or something, right?

*Have I mentioned lately how much I loathe CBS Sports*

 

[tykurez]

Jacobs getting his name in the spotlight! Isn't that his ultimate goal?

 

[Yonick]

Jacobs must love this because his article was picked up by a CBS blog. BTW, 99% of these schools would not fire their coach over the Miles situation, and the scolie situation involving Bradley. It's just another blog guy trying to be controversial to increase his number of hits.

 

[Drumguy]

First off, it's not journalism, it's a blog. You can say what you want to and voice opinions on a blog. That said, the rant should be about how UConn was punished by the APR while schools across the country (do I hear Kentucky) work the APR rules so they don't lose any scholarships. Come on. How many one and dones since Squid got there? What's the likelihood that UK is reporting the APR honestly? Where's the indignity of WWW being an agent and recruiting for the Squid, or the rapper who's an agent in the team locker room? Those are real stories worthy of a journalist. But journalism requires work, so expect Jacobs to sit back and write his opinion blog and cry that the NCAA won't talk to him.

 

[Scot-e]

Same old story. Why don't we write a story that documents how many teams shuffled things around to bring in players this year- give examples and send it off for comment by the talking heads?
I agree if we were not NC and AD was not AD this would be a non-story. If it was a non- story we would have a crappy team so no one would care. I'll take the continued mud throwing.
It also continues to amaze me how unpopular a coach JC is on the national stage. He has a target on his back- I admire his ability to keep his eye on the ball and do what he does on the court. I would be a hot mess taking the beating he has over the last 5 years.

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

If a program gets stronger despite restrictions, it doesn't necessarily prove that those restrictions had no effect or were not strong enough. It may frustrate the crap out of opponents of the program that Jim Calhoun seemed undeterred, but to retroactively change your opinion about those restrictions because they didn't have the effect of damaging the program isn't seeking justice, it's having a vendetta.

 

[HuskyBballFan]

If a program gets stronger despite restrictions, it doesn't necessarily prove that those restrictions had no effect or were not strong enough. It may frustrate the crap out of opponents of the program that Jim Calhoun seemed undeterred, but to retroactively change your opinion about those restrictions because they didn't have the effect of damaging the program isn't seeking justice, it's having a vendetta.

Agreed. One year ago everybody said our recruiting had fallen off, in large part due to the NCAA investigation and looming sanctions. We couldn't land the big fish like Knight, Joseph, or Selby. Now, the narrative is that it's too easy for us to recruit and the investigation had no effect at all.

What happened in those 12 months? We won a National Championship (with players who had nothing to do with the investigation) which is the best possible thing a program can do to help recruiting. Before the NC, we had a one man recruiting class (Boatright) who we were lucky to get. I'm convinced there's no chance we get Daniels without the NC and who knows if Calhoun commits as early as he did without it either.

Bottom line is had last year been an unsuccessful season, we would not be recruiting at such a high level.

 

[ctchamps]

The focus of the article is the NCAA and its lack of accessibility and a problem with a particular rule that schools can end run legally. But the writer paints UConn as a renegade program, even as he states UConn is innocent in this particular matter. He gets two digs for the price of one. And he does try to make the issue that there will be something underhanded in the way Bradley will get his debt taken care of. This is absolute conjecture that is underhanded even if it isn't slanderous. I guess he wants the NCAA to fix it's standards even as he takes liberty with the standards in his writing. Classic case of double standards.

 

[EricLA]

i didn't have any problem with it until the last sentence. 99% of the other schools out there would have fired a 3 time NC and HOF coach? Pearl's actions including lying to the NCAA had having the audacity to ask parents of recruits to lie for him to the NCAA as well were substantially more egregious and yet it took tennessee months to fire him. and he has nowhere near the history JC does. so really, mr. blogmaster needs to do some homework before making incorrect statements like that.

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

His last sentence is correct. 99% of coaches are not hall of famers like Calhoun, just like 99% of the programs out there would have been crippled by the sanctions for years. UConn benefitted from the confluence of a number of tremendously positive situations just as the sanctions were imposed. Kemba. The 2011 recruiting class. The best recruit being a home state kid who grew up a fan of the school. And maybe most of all, the dogged determination of JC himself. Those are the reasons why UConn is strong, not because the sanctions were somehow too wimpy. That's hard to swallow for some.

 

[Kitaman]

I just hope they don't try to victimize MB. The kid has been through a lot and he apparently is fine with his decision. Go after Calhoun, or the Univ all you want but leave MB alone.

 

[UConn5]

This is all happening because UConn won the national championship this past year. Daniels, Drummond, the criticism, everything. If UConn just makes the sweet 16 last year and Kemba Walker leaves school then you don't have writers complaining about the fact that the NCAA sanctions did nothing to hurt UConn. You probably don't have Daniels coming to UConn and who really knows about Drummond.

In one year UConn has gone from a program that looked like it may not be able to get back to the status they once had in the earlier 2000's to a 3 title national champion with a legit shot at repeating.

I think the specter of next year ending with UConn winning #4 has a lot of writers scared and/or pissed because they feel UConn shouldn't even be playing hte tournament...and perhaps most of all, because they probably don't like JC. Sucks to be them.

 

[rbny1]

The ultimate revenge against dumb writers will be to win a second consecutive national championship. I will be very happy, indeed, if we win again and the writers are apoplectic. Go to it, Jim!

 

[tykurez]

The ultimate revenge against dumb writers will be to win a second consecutive national championship. I will be very happy, indeed, if we win again and the writers are apoplectic. Go to it, Jim!

There's nothing I'd want more than to win back-to-back 'ships ... but what about that would make writers apologetic? My feeling is it would have the opposite effect. I say bring it on!

 

[rbny1]

There's nothing I'd want more than to win back-to-back 'ships ... but what about that would make writers apologetic? My feeling is it would have the opposite effect. I say bring it on!

Apoplectic, not apologetic.

 

[CL82]

I wasn't thrilled with all the hate against the program out there but if that is cost of winning, I can live with it. What we're seeing now, is nothing compared to what we'll see if Calhoun wins NC4 while under both "textgate" and APR sanctions. Somehow I think that I'll be able to live with that as well - pretty easily matter of fact.

 

[orangehomer]

If a program gets stronger despite restrictions, it doesn't necessarily prove that those restrictions had no effect or were not strong enough. It may frustrate the crap out of opponents of the program that Jim Calhoun seemed undeterred, but to retroactively change your opinion about those restrictions because they didn't have the effect of damaging the program isn't seeking justice, it's having a vendetta.

i think this is a pretty good position to have as a uconn fan. i think the overreaction from the national media is that the sanctions were meant to punish calhoun, but at the end of the day it feels like calhoun got all the players he wanted, and the only person to get punished was the kid that had to give up his scholarship.

 

[DogMania]

I'm one who's often against or at least on the fence when it comes to skirting around the rules, but in this case I can't wait till JC figures out how to squeeze through the next loophole.

The NCAA if full of bureaucracy, inconsistencies, favoritism and antiquated when it comes to the current state of the amateurism/professionalism paradigm. They will either have to revamp their whole culture or run the risk of the BCS conference schools bolting from the NCAA for good.

As I've said before, this whole situation is much a do about nothing. I realize the perception that adding AD has caused, but adding him had nothing to do with trying to get around the rules and lift our noise to the NCAA. It has everything to do with the sudden change of mind by the best in-state recruit the program has had in quite some time, if not ever. If AD was not from CT, it is unlikely he would have considered even coming to UConn at this late stage. I guess if it was a recruit of his stature from another state who wanted to come here at this late stage the program might have taken the same exact steps to get him in, though I wonder if the current president and interim AD would have wanted the ensuing firestorm. Since AD is a CT kid who wants to attend his state college and has been rumored as a huge lean to that institution for a long time, it probably was viewed as a manageable PR situation, which in fact it has been. Bottom line, the University, the NCAA, and most who understand the situation find this a non-issue.

The fact that the linked article/blog added nothing more than stating the NCAA has nothing to say, speaks volumes.

As for Jacobs, I continue to find it head scratching that the state's biggest news paper continues to keep him on the payroll. I realize that controversy often sells papers, but a weakened program would IMO have a much worse consequence. I'm all for free press and keeping people and institutions accountable, but why would someone who is reporting on the State School's program want to draw negative attention that even the NCAA would not to dust under the carpet and move on. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think Jacobs would get just as many if not more readers if he wrote more in support of the program than digging up stones that could hurt the program.

Now in this case, there's nothing the NCAA or anyone can do. No rules were broken. I'm sure some at the NCAA aren't happy about UConn getting around the ship reductions, though based on their response, they likely see this as I painted it above (local kid changes his mind scenario) and simply has chosen to move on. Now this could result in them adding more to the rules, not allowing a program to bump a current scholarship athlete to walk-on status in order to make room for a recruit. I'm sure if you asked any of the current D1 coaches, they'd tell you that they would have done the same thing and want the rules left well enough alone. As I noted above, I don't think this is the case of a program not accepting their penalties and thumbing their nose at the governing institution. I would not be surprised if the NCAA changes the rule moving forward, not allowing this course of action, because there will be programs that will try to do this in order to get around their ship reductions.

Frankly, I can't think of a good reason why a program would ever need to do what UConn just did, other than to add one or however man more players over their allotted sum. Hum...well I guess there's one weak reason, where a player simply wants to go to a specific school badly enough that happens to be over the limit, allowing a program to bump a current player(s) into either a needs based aid situation or pay-their-own-way instead of running him or them from the program, which often happens. Even in that case, it does open the door to a program to have a competitive advantage over the programs that stick to their allotted number of ships, 13 in most cases. I, like many were shocked that a recruited athlete can't choose to attend the college of their choice via aid, loans and/or their own dollars and walk-0n. Does anyone know if this is restricted to just basketball. There seems to be a lot of FB players that walk-on and I find it hard to believe that the NCAA would not allow that to happen. I wonder if this rule is something that an student athlete could bring the NCAA to court for. Imagine if a recruit was being recruited by say, 10 programs and doesn't get accepted by any of them and decides that the only school he can afford is the home state school, but by attending there, or any of the other 10 schools he would not be allowed to walk on to the sport he plays unless that school counted him against their scholarship total. Hum...does this not sit well with anyone else? If anything, allowing a program to bump a student athlete who is already on scholarship to make room for a prospective recruit seems more egregious than allowing the recruit to work out way to secure the funds needed to attend the school and walk on to the program.

People often fail to consider that that NCAA, as much as they want in principle well behaved members, they also want to have a quality product. They constantly walk a narrow line between collegiate athleticism (i.e. true "student" athletes) and making lots of money. They realize that it's not good for the top brands (UNC, UK, Dook, KU, etc.) to not be good year-in, year-out. The fact that they realize the "death sentence" was bad for both the Associate and members that were penalized so severely in the past, shows they're trying to balance keeping the membership accountable and clean while keeping the quality of the product high. One just wonders how often they look the other way. In this case, they looked, saw that no rule was broken, and simply moved on. So should everyone else.

 

[CL82]

Just read the article. I don't have a problem with it.

Emmert and Co. look compliant and complacent in place of proactive and perturbed over how UConn's seemingly gotten stronger despite sanctions for violations that would've forced 99 percent of programs to find a new head coach.

He's not saying Calhoun should be fired, just that most other programs would have needed a change, presumedly to be able to continue to recruit.

 

[tykurez]

Apoplectic, not apologetic.

Sorry, read it too fast. In that case, I agree!

 

[Waquoit]

Y'all have to take these kinds of articles for what they are - comedy. All the anti-UConn, anti-JC people out there thought that the party was over when the NCAA whacked the Huskies. Instead, they win the Big East, the Big Dance and bring in the best recruiting class. The pundits have been turned into slack-jawed mush. All they can say is "Yeah, but.." It's hilarious. Embrace the humor, don't try to debate it.
Like the other CBS guy said, Calhoun is the baddest bad-ass in the game - at the age of 68 and 800+ wins into his career. LOL!