Wake Forest Espionage | Page 3 | The Boneyard

Wake Forest Espionage

Status
Not open for further replies.
I get a kick that Va Tech says they hold themselves to a higher standard when they clearly didn't.
 
Dogdeacon said:
1.'Shocked if they didn't take it' - really, shocked?! It is clearly cheating and you don't think any of the individuals involved had even a 2nd thought about it? Just doing it secretly is proof enough of knowledge that its wrong. Right and wrong seems pretty black & white.
2. 'Not a big deal for anyone but guy giving the info out' - So no feelings about the players who were screwed over by this? If this were the Patriots everyone would be calling for wins wiped off the board. This is only not a huge deal because Wake football isn't good anyway. Lots of game results and especially POINT SPREADS were affected here.
3. The NCAA isn't the one to punish, but I think the conference AND especially the individual schools have grounds to suspend their coaches for violations of ethics. This should gain traction because Louisville are known cheaters and Petrino known liar. Maybe the depth of the information provided limits the advantage gained, but the spirit of college competition was violated and I think the violation is actually worse by those that cheated because Wake isn't that good.

Some of the UConn centric reactions in this thread are pretty bizarre to me as UConn & Wake Forest grad. My experiences were in the 80's and 90's but...
A. Wake Football way bigger deal on campus than at UConn, has always played in a big stadium, fall weekends revolve around football games. Its no football school, but culturally football is the most important sport. (legacy, achievement, rep it is golf, but that doesn't exactly draw crowds).
B. Wake Forest has Norm Snead & Brian Piccolo as resonating alumnus
C. Wake has always been in the ACC, luck of location. Its not on merit or fair or whatever but such is UConn's screwed over fate and I don't see how trashing any luckier school helps or even makes anyone feel better.
Expand ...

1. Yes, really shocked. They weren't the only school that took the information and didn't report it. I didn't say they didn't have second thoughts. I also didn't say it was right. I think your feelings on it are stronger due to your affiliation to the school. Stealing signals is "wrong" and "cheating" and coaches try and do it every single game. Is it right? Is it wrong? Just doing it secretly means it was wrong? LOL, okay. As if they had the option to make it known publicly that they had this information AND intended to use it, because the coaches at Wake are soooo stupid they wouldn't bother to change their game plan. (Of course, Wake knew they had the info, and changed their game plan).

2. Sure I feel bad for the players at Wake. I don't feel bad for those affected by the "POINT SPREADS". Considering gambling on sports is illegal just about everywhere, it's kind of you to come off your "right and wrong"/"black and white" high horse just long enough to be concerned for people breaking the law. For the record, I have no problem with gambling, I think sports books should be legal, I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy, you literally said "Lots of game results and especially POINT SPREADS were affected here.",(emphasis added) so you're clearly more concerned about the spreads, than the actual results of the games. That's a very interesting (read: hypocritical) take on the story.

3. What specific rule did they break to justify punishment?

4. The reason this became a problem is because of a scumbag from Wake Forest handing out information. This happened over multiple years, and we don't yet know how many other schools are involved. So yes, I think it's WAY MORE shocking that someone with two WF degrees, who is also a former player, and a former coach, would then, over a few years, distribute game plan information to opponents, than it is to hear that those opponents would accept and use that information.
 
Last edited:
WingU-Conn said:
1. Yes, really shocked. They weren't the only school that took the information and didn't report it. I didn't say they didn't have second thoughts. I also didn't say it was right. I think your feelings on it are stronger due to your affiliation to the school. Stealing signals is "wrong" and "cheating" and coaches try and do it every single game. Is it right? Is it wrong? Just doing it secretly means it was wrong? LOL, okay. As if they had the option to make it known publicly that they had this information AND intended to use it, because the coaches at Wake are soooo stupid they wouldn't bother to change their game plan. (Of course, Wake knew they had the info, and changed their game plan).

2. Sure I feel bad for the players at Wake. I don't feel bad for those affected by the "POINT SPREADS". Considering gambling on sports is illegal just about everywhere, it's kind of you to come off your "right and wrong"/"black and white" high horse just long enough to be concerned for people breaking the law. For the record, I have no problem with gambling, I think sports books should be legal, I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy, you literally said "Lots of game results and especially POINT SPREADS were affected here.",(emphasis added) so you're clearly more concerned about the spreads, than the actual results of the games. That's a very interesting (read: hypocritical) take on the story.

3. What specific rule did they break to justify punishment?

4. The reason this became a problem is because of a scumbag from Wake Forest handing out information. This happened over multiple years, and we don't yet know how many other schools are involved. So yes, I think it's WAY MORE shocking that someone with two WF degrees, who is also a former player, and a former coach, would then, over a few years, distribute game plan information to opponents, than it is to hear that those opponents would accept and use that information.
Expand ...
You read a lot into what I wrote. I went to Wake over 20yrs ago for a grad degree, I think I've seen one of their football games since and I don't follow them, couldn't name their coach, a player on any of their teams etc..
1. Yes stealing signs and stealing plays is way different. I.e. in baseball everyone tries to steal signs from 2nd base, but use a camera in the outfield & relay it to batsmen and its a big deal. Likewise Patriots videotaping play signals still resonates. In this case ANYONE had the option of immediately reporting to Wake that the radio d ouche bag was providing plays and someone could have put an end to it a long time ago. That is what is most amazing to me. Either it isn't a big deal (so go ahead and rat him out) or it is a big deal and keeping it secret and taking the benefit are scumbag moves.
2. Emphasis on point spreads because its illegal (shaving) and possible source of profit (so maybe that's also part of why this one guy did it), where there is cheating there is often more cheating. Emphasis was wondering if there is more to come on this or if someone profited. I don't bet.
3. Every school has an honor code and an ethics clause, for students, professors, coaches. Look especially at places like Army. I'm not reading the NCAA rulebook to respond, but I'd bet its not allowed to steal the other teams playbook - maybe can get off on technicality that it was handed to them but I'd 'prosecute' based on obtained by illicit means. By prosecute I mean school, conference or ncaa justify penalties, sanctions, etc..
4. Maybe I am more cynical than you. To me it is rarely shocking when there is one bad person, its the enablers and massive nature of this conspiracy (too strong a word I know) that I personally find more surprising. There is always someone with an axe to grind and its totally psycho that this guy went so far and for so long, but despite the known hypocrisy of college athletics I'm continually amazed that one rule bend begets another begets another etc... Louisville is really disgusting in this regard with multiple Pitino scandals, hiring Petrino and now their statement on this in comparison to Virginia Tech's.
 
huskymedic said:
FootballScoop Staff ‏@FootballScoop 2m2 minutes ago
Louisville AD says their OC received info from Tommy Elrod and shared it with Louisville’s defensive staff
View attachment 17672
FootballScoop Staff ‏@FootballScoop 2m 2 minutes ago
So coaches on both sides of the ball at Louisville knew about this leak from Wake…and no one there thought to do the right thing.
Expand ...

Sure sounds like Swofford swatted Jurich on his initial statement: U of L suspends Galloway for bowl game
 
.-.
Dogdeacon said:
What was Swofford's statement?
Expand ...

There was no Swofford statement in the article:

>>Jurich said he's been in regular contact with ACC commissioner John Swofford and that the Cardinals will accept any other disciplinary action the conference deems appropriate.

In his statement on Wednesday, Jurich had seemed to dismiss the seriousness of Louisville receiving information about Wake Forest plays, noting that the plays ended up never being run in the game, and he said that he was disappointed that the issue had brought "undue attention" to U of L's football staff.

Jurich received widespread criticism from major national outlets for the tone of his statement. The tone clearly shifted in his new statement Friday, which he said came about upon a careful and thorough review of the incident.<<
 
The part I can't wrap my head around is how UL could think this was an unacceptable risk.

I mean whatever potential "on the field" advantage UL could have gained was far outweighed by the repercussions if they got caught accepting stolen WF plans. Oh, and the kind of dude who would betray his alma mater doesn't seem like a safe bet to guard a dirty little secret.

At least with the last scandal at UL the hookers and blow probably lead to some big recruits and wins. This scandal was all risk, no reward.... Just further proof the only think worse than a dirty program is a really dumb dirty program.

As for Swofford and Jurich it reminds me of my old college buddy. My buddy started dating a stripper. She was stunningly beautiful and built for racing but had the wild side one would expect from a stripper. Eventually my buddy fell for her and asked her to move in. For weeks I heard about sex scenes which sounded stolen from the annuals of Penthouse forum till one day I received a call from a broken friend. My buddy explained he showed up early from work and walked into his beloved girl in full frenzy with another man. Her response was simply "you knew exactly what I was when you asked me to move in...you can't have it both ways" and she actually smiled while she said it. My guess is Jurich probably has the same smile and answer every time Swofford brings up the integrity issue with Louisville.
 
dwalks93 said:
The part I can't wrap my head around is how UL could think this was an unacceptable risk.

I mean whatever potential "on the field" advantage UL could have gained was far outweighed by the repercussions if they got caught accepting stolen WF plans. Oh, and the kind of dude who would betray his alma mater doesn't seem like a safe bet to guard a dirty little secret.

At least with the last scandal at UL the hookers and blow probably lead to some big recruits and wins. This scandal was all risk, no reward.... Just further proof the only think worse than a dirty program is a really dumb dirty program.

As for Swofford and Jurich it reminds me of my old college buddy. My buddy started dating a stripper. She was stunningly beautiful and built for racing but had the wild side one would expect from a stripper. Eventually my buddy fell for her and asked her to move in. For weeks I heard about sex scenes which sounded stolen from the annuals of Penthouse forum till one day I received a call from a broken friend. My buddy explained he showed up early from work and walked into his beloved girl in full frenzy with another man. Her response was simply "you knew exactly what I was when you asked me to move in...you can't have it both ways" and she actually smiled while she said it. My guess is Jurich probably has the same smile and answer every time Swofford brings up the integrity issue with Louisville.
Expand ...
Photos?!?
 
Are the Wake guy and the car wash guy one and the same? Where's conspiracy kitty?
 
.-.
My guess is Elrod really wanted to get back into coaching.
 
uconnphil2016 said:
This is throwing a wrench in Verducci's plan to fax our playbooks in their entirety to our 2017 opponents
Expand ...

You could probably read Verducci's playbook from cover to cover in the time it takes you to conduct some serious business in the lavatory. You could then use it for its only worthwhile purpose.
 
huskymedic said:
Brian Hamilton@BrianHamiltonSI 3 mins ago
ACC fines Louisville and Virginia Tech $25,000 apiece following its review of internal investigation conducted by Wake Forest.


ESPN:The ACC has fined Louisville and Virginia Tech $25,000 each for taking leaked information from Wake Forest radio broadcaster Tommy Elrod. Statement from commissioner John Swofford:
Expand ...
Wow, $25K isn't even a slap on the wrist. I don't see how they don't void their wins v Wake this year. That trivializes what happened to players at Wake - what do they get for being embarrassed, practicing to no avail and competing despite disadvantages? In the end this is piles onto damage for Wake, they look ineffectual at controlling info and affecting punishment - might hurt recruiting.

If this had happened to a big-time program they'd majorly take down the folks that used info.
 
Wake went 1-1, in the two games where we know information was obtained. The NCAA vacates wins, does the conference have the power to do that?

The ACC's punishment is going to hurt recruiting at Wake???? If I'm a recruit I'm not worried about how the ACC punished another program, instead I'm wondering how is it that Wake had a guy with 2 degrees from WF, who also played AND coached at WF, decide to sell inside information.

WTF is going on at WF that someone would betray the program like that? What recruit thinks "Well I would choose school A, but the ACC was kind of lax in their punishments, of schools B & C, so I'll choose school D instead"? I don't see how that's a logical train of thought.
 
Last edited:
In the vein of the schools involved not taking this seriously, Louisville suspended the co-offensive coordinator in response to this. From the statement by the WF coach, they had to scrap their offensive game plan because they discovered that Louisville had that information. An offensive coordinator couldn't do much with the opponent's offensive plan, so he had to have shared it with the Cardinals defensive coaches. Why aren't any of those coaches suspended?
 
.-.
WingU-Conn said:
Wake went 1-1, in the two games where we know information was obtained. The NCAA vacates wins, does the conference have the power to do that?

The ACC's punishment is going to hurt recruiting at Wake???? If I'm a recruit I'm not worried about how the ACC punished another program, instead I'm wondering how is it that Wake had a guy with 2 degrees from WF, who also played AND coached at WF, decided to sell inside information.

WTF is going on at WF that someone would betray the program like that? What recruit thinks "Well I would choose school A, but the ACC was kind of lax in their punishments, of schools B & C, so I'll choose school D instead"? I don't see how that's a logical train of thought.
Expand ...
Your reading comprehension is off. Also please stop making straw men arguments attributable to others. I wrote a sentence that opened with piling onto damage (a pile is a collection of $ hit) and mentioned in this pile things like controlling info and having clout - meaning effective at enforcing consequences if there is a breach. This isn't limited to punishment that has a negative impact as in your narrow scenario, its along same vein of a program that has alumni connections, fan support etc.. that helps things happen (i.e. Louisville donors support Pitino = he keeps his job) in contrast Wake has little support/power. Nonetheless the overall point is clear that the ENTIRE PILE is going to have a negative effect on recruiting.

The recruit takeaway is pretty simple, negative recruiting versus Wake = tell recruits be careful you might not get to compete on level playing field, their coaches are so disorganized this happened for 2 years before it got caught, they must have done something awful for someone to take revenge like that, they couldn't protect their players (who would send their son there after hearing the QB's Dad's comments?), etc.. (etc means there is more, not spelling every bit out for ya). Then you even said; 'WTF is going on at Wake' - that's indicative you may understand about the pile too and a negative perception is out there. So far this seems to be one individual with an axe to grind, but who knows if there is more and who knows if he ever tells his side of the story he exposes or accuses Wake of more.
 
Sounds like Army got info too. If so it will be interesting to see how they respond. All that not lying or CHEATING or tolerating those who do might be tough to enforce after seeing the program turn around.
 
Dogdeacon said:
Your reading comprehension is off. Also please stop making straw men arguments attributable to others. I wrote a sentence that opened with piling onto damage (a pile is a collection of $ hit) and mentioned in this pile things like controlling info and having clout - meaning effective at enforcing consequences if there is a breach. This isn't limited to punishment that has a negative impact as in your narrow scenario, its along same vein of a program that has alumni connections, fan support etc.. that helps things happen (i.e. Louisville donors support Pitino = he keeps his job) in contrast Wake has little support/power. Nonetheless the overall point is clear that the ENTIRE PILE is going to have a negative effect on recruiting.

The recruit takeaway is pretty simple, negative recruiting versus Wake = tell recruits be careful you might not get to compete on level playing field, their coaches are so disorganized this happened for 2 years before it got caught, they must have done something awful for someone to take revenge like that, they couldn't protect their players (who would send their son there after hearing the QB's Dad's comments?), etc.. (etc means there is more, not spelling every bit out for ya). Then you even said; 'WTF is going on at Wake' - that's indicative you may understand about the pile too and a negative perception is out there. So far this seems to be one individual with an axe to grind, but who knows if there is more and who knows if he ever tells his side of the story he exposes or accuses Wake of more.
Expand ...

My comprehension is off? Strawman?

Dogdeacon said:
Wow, $25K isn't even a slap on the wrist. I don't see how they don't void their wins v Wake this year. That trivializes what happened to players at Wake - what do they get for being embarrassed, practicing to no avail and competing despite disadvantages? In the end this is piles onto damage for Wake, they look ineffectual at controlling info and affecting punishment - might hurt recruiting.
Expand ...

This paragraph is a mess. The typos make it difficult to understand to begin with. But far worse, the grammatical structure makes your nuanced argument difficult to follow. It's unclear what the phrase "might hurt recruiting" refers to exactly, it could be a number of things.

Does it refer to "this" at the beginning of the sentence? That doesn't help clear up much anyway, because we don't know what "this" refers to. It could refer to a number of things.

Dogdeacon said:
Your reading comprehension is off. Also please stop making straw men arguments attributable to others. I wrote a sentence that opened with piling onto damage (a pile is a collection of $ hit) and mentioned in this pile things like controlling info and having clout - meaning effective at enforcing consequences if there is a breach.
Expand ...

You wrote a post that opened with a complaint about the amount of the fine, then a complaint that the ACC didn't void wins. Then argued that the players weren't getting justice, and finished with "this is piles (sic) onto damage..." Which of those things does "this" refer to? It can't be all three.

It's a poorly written mess. Instead of challenging the comprehension of others, take a step back and consider whether or not your post is clear. Your explanation makes sense, but nobody made a strawman. Whether you were saying the punishment could directly, or indirectly, impact recruiting; your point is it could impact recruiting. In that respect, I still disagree.

Yes, I agree the entire pile is obviously a bad look for Wake and will harm the program and recruiting. But I disagree with your argument that the ACC's chosen punishment would have any impact on recruiting. It won't do anything to make a bad situation for Wake worse. That's not a strawman, that's your opinion, and I just happen disagree with it, life goes on.
 
WingU-Conn said:
My comprehension is off? Strawman?
QUOTE]
What recruit thinks "Well I would choose school A, but the ACC was kind of lax in their punishments, of schools B & C, so I'll choose school D instead"? I don't see how that's a logical train of thought.
Expand ...
That's the strawman. Clear & concise I trust
 
Dogdeacon said:
That's the strawman. Clear & concise I trust
Expand ...

Clear, concise, and incorrect.

Do you no longer maintain that the punishment could have a negative impact on recruiting? If so, progress. If not, then that's not a strawman, it's a representation of the argument you already made.

OBVIOUSLY, there's more to recruiting than the statement I wrote and you quoted. Which is kind of the point. The punishment will have no impact on recruiting, it's all the other stuff.
 
I wrote two paragraphs on how the entire thing could negatively impact the program. However, for clarity and specificity I agree it is impossible, arbitrary and myopic to attribute any recruiting failures directly to the punishment or lack thereof. The punishment is indicative of lack of respect (again to be 1000% clear, amongst other things), that persists and has impact. Capice?

Now please state that your A, B, C, D thingy was a strawman. Meaning you gave the impression that this scenario was my argument, then defeated it.
What recruit thinks "Well I would choose school A, but the ACC was kind of lax in their punishments, of schools B & C, so I'll choose school D instead"? I don't see how that's a logical train of thought.
Expand ...
 
.-.
huskymedic said:
Brian Hamilton@BrianHamiltonSI 3 mins ago
ACC fines Louisville and Virginia Tech $25,000 apiece following its review of internal investigation conducted by Wake Forest.


ESPN:The ACC has fined Louisville and Virginia Tech $25,000 each for taking leaked information from Wake Forest radio broadcaster Tommy Elrod. Statement from commissioner John Swofford:
Expand ...

Brett McMurphy@McMurphyESPN 17 mins ago
Georgia has fined former Virginia Tech assistant Shane Beamer $25,000 for his role in #WakeyLeaks

SicEmDawgs.com@SicEmDawgscom 37 mins ago
Statement from UGA assistant football coach Shane Beamer. #WakeyLeaks

20.jpg
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,285
Messages
4,561,408
Members
10,455
Latest member
UConnGabby


Top Bottom