Raphael "Blaze" Chillious | Page 4 | The Boneyard

Raphael "Blaze" Chillious

Chief00 said:
Is there somewhere one can read the entire transcript not someone’s interpretation of select words. For example, what does “jokingly” mean?
Expand ...
As stated in previous post.....the feds will not release it to the NCAA until trials are over......just reporters watching the trial.
 
Chief00 said:
Hopefully, no one will take this the wrong way, but are we suppose to believe an assistant coach gets $4,500 then sways one of the top recruits in the country to a sneaker company AND his school AND pockets the remainder?
Expand ...
This trial was not about the recruits.....first trial was and the dollar amount went up to $100,000.00......this trial was about bribing college coaches to steer them to Dawkins......Chilious was apparently interested in recruiting money
 
Chief00 said:
Hopefully, no one will take this the wrong way, but are we suppose to believe an assistant coach gets $4,500 then sways one of the top recruits in the country to a sneaker company AND his school AND pockets the remainder?
Expand ...

If recruits are that cheap, then it's no wonder Calipari and K have sufficient budget room to get them.

If recruits are that cheap, one wonders why Will Wade and Western Kentucky don't get more of them. Coaches get paid several million per year, surely a coach could spare $5k for a 4* recruit. Why even use sneaker money? It would just be one more potential snitch.

Chief, I'm with you. It's not plausible $4.5k is meaningful.
 
pj said:
If recruits are that cheap, then it's no wonder Calipari and K have sufficient budget room to get them.

If recruits are that cheap, one wonders why Will Wade and Western Kentucky don't get more of them. Coaches get paid several million per year, surely a coach could spare $5k for a 4* recruit. Why even use sneaker money? It would just be one more potential snitch.

Chief, I'm with you. It's not plausible $4.5k is meaningful.
Expand ...

you aren't getting it.......the recruits or there friends...get paid separately from what is at issue here.......for example Fultz got 10K....his high school coach got 30K.....

The offer on the table is to pay the assistant coaches to steer the recruit to the adviser and pay the recruits to go to the schools where the coaches have been paid to steer the recruit to that adviser. So yes, Chief is right but neither you nor him seem to understand the entire scheme. The first trial was about payment to recruits etc. This trial is about bribing the assistant coaches.......hence the much lower dollar amount. This money goes to the coach....not the recruit unless the coach decides otherwise,
 
SECONN said:
you aren't getting it..the recruits or there friends...get paid separately from what is at issue here..for example Fultz got 10K....his high school coach got 30K.....

The offer on the table is to pay the assistant coaches to steer the recruit to the adviser and pay the recruits to go to the schools where the coaches have been paid to steer the recruit to that adviser. So yes, Chief is right but neither you nor him seem to understand the entire scheme. The first trial was about payment to recruits etc. This trial is about bribing the assistant coaches..hence the much lower dollar amount. This money goes to the coach....not the recruit unless the coach decides otherwise,
Expand ...

You're right, I don't get it. These assistants are getting annual salaries of $300k. Is $4k meaningful for them? Especially if it could be illegal? Or an NCAA violation that jeopardizes their ability to stay employed?
 
pj said:
You're right, I don't get it. These assistants are getting annual salaries of $300k. Is $4k meaningful for them? Especially if it could be illegal? Or an NCAA violation that jeopardizes their ability to stay employed?
Expand ...

It's 5k to do something they have likely no opinion on and might even not follow through on and that up to now nobody gave a care about.

It's like if someone gave you 1k to have your significant other go to a certain hairdresser. You want what's best for your SO, and this person is putting their money where there mouth is. Maybe you put in that good word. Neither you nor your SO will likely notice a difference in the cut quality. Maybe in the end you find your integrity and don't even bring it up. Still get to keep the money.
 
.-.
auror said:
It's 5k to do something they have likely no opinion on and might even not follow through on and that up to now nobody gave a care about.

It's like if someone gave you 1k to have your significant other go to a certain hairdresser. You want what's best for your SO, and this person is putting their money where there mouth is. Maybe you put in that good word. Neither you nor your SO will likely notice a difference in the cut quality. Maybe in the end you find your integrity and don't even bring it up. Still get to keep the money.
Expand ...
Also trying to understand the crime - I guess it would be stuff such as mail fraud, bank and tax fraud. People get legally paid to influence others all the time - so is it really about the mechanics of how someone is being compensated from an FBI perspective? I understand NCAA association rules are different but breaking those isn’t necessarily a crime.
 
Chief00 said:
Thanks but this dude is pleading guilty to accepting $22,000 not $4,500. I could see how the $22,000 could happen. Gives the recruit or family proxy $10,000 to $15,000 and pockets the rest.
Expand ...

The $4,500 is part of the total $22,000 that he admits too... who knows how much they haven’t connected dots to.
 
Now we know why the athletic dept is losing money...
 
CL82 said:
No his takeaway is that the 'would have been offered and likely accepted' is supposition. It's a valid observation.
Expand ...

I thought my point about Norlander was pretty obvious.

You understood it. It's slanderous to publicly state, unequivocally, that someone would do something illegal and/or unethical, especially if you weren't at the meeting and don't know the context of the discussion. Who can know what Chillious would have done then or in the future, no matter what he said at the time, when responding to the "offer" for future "help".

Recruiting is a relation-based process and it's doubtful many coaches would burn any possible future relationships. The ones with integrity would just leave and make a mental or written note about what happened and tell their head coach "we need to stay away from these guys." Hopefully our coaches have integrity.
[/QUOTE]
 
UConnStats said:
I’m sorry, but Chillious is and has been a joke. He rode Markell Fultz’s coattails into a little bit of respect, but no matter where he has gone the team has been a train wreck. He clearly can’t coach, and given that Otz played a big role in recruiting Fultz too, I’m not sure what other proof there is that he’s even a good recruiter.

This is all without even mentioning that he was willing to take bribes to steer kids he coached towards specific agents. He’s a loser through any lens.
Expand ...
Not unlike his former boss at UConn who road Calhoun and Napier’s coattails.
 
.-.
Chief00 said:
Also trying to understand the crime - I guess it would be stuff such as mail fraud, bank and tax fraud. People get legally paid to influence others all the time - so is it really about the mechanics of how someone is being compensated from an FBI perspective? I understand NCAA association rules are different but breaking those isn’t necessarily a crime.
Expand ...

That's the argument their lawyers made. NCAA violation but no federal crime. Evans ended up pleading guilty to federal conspiracy bribery. I thought there were some wire fraud stuff, but that may be in the sneaker company trial, not this one. I would assume as government employees they are held to a pretty high standard on this stuff.
 
UConnNick said:
While it's unfair to speculate about what Chillous would have done if offered money, the mere fact that he was in attendance at such a meeting is disturbing, at the very least.
Expand ...
I hear you - but also at a summer AAU tournament in Vegas and gets invited up to a beautiful hotel suite for some drinks and chat with other coaches and guys with sneaker connections - for better or worse it’s not exactly out of the college basketball mainstream.
 
UConnNick said:
While it's unfair to speculate about what Chillous would have done if offered money, the mere fact that he was in attendance at such a meeting is disturbing, at the very least.
Expand ...

Have you guys even been reading the recent stuff on people being offered but not getting money from them?

Because, well, there are coaches in the same boat who are currently employed by UConn.
 
Chief00 said:
I hear you - but also at a summer AAU tournament in Vegas and gets invited up to a beautiful hotel suite for some drinks and chat with other coaches and guys with sneaker connections - for better or worse it’s not exactly out of the college basketball mainstream.
Expand ...

Sure, I get that, however these coaches aren't naive...they're all insiders and know what's going on. A free party is what it is, but as you can readily see just from this thread, guilt by mere association is something to be avoided, particularly with UCONN's past history of NCAA violations. You're asking for trouble.
 
.-.
upstater said:
Have you guys even been reading the recent stuff on people being offered but not getting money from them?

Because, well, there are coaches in the same boat who are currently employed by UConn.
Expand ...
?
 
How does a coach teach and coach a player that the kid knows they both got paid for the kid to play there ? I just read that Fulton is not doing so well in the NBA?


darn autocorrect t. fULTZ
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,329
Messages
4,564,374
Members
10,464
Latest member
Rollskies27


Top Bottom