Warde Manuel

[caw]

Fair enough. I would like to give him the benefit of the doubt and let him truly explain his position.

 

[nomar]

Fair enough. I would like to give him the benefit of the doubt and let him truly explain his position.

Good luck.

 

[freescooter]

oh come on, guys. We're talking about Quinnipiac, Stony Brook, New Hampshire...

 

[nomar]

Two facts:

1. This is the worst UConn team, talent-wise, in a quarter century
2. Our good teams struggled with bad teams too many times to count

I'm done with this discussion.

 

[HuskyBballFan]

oh come on, guys. We're talking about Quinnipiac, Stony Brook, New Hampshire...

So what you're saying is....you didn't actually watch the Quinnipiac game.

 

[Gurleyman]

oh come on, guys. We're talking about Quinnipiac, Stony Brook, New Hampshire...

And we're talking about Tyler Olander as a starting center with no size around him. He was meant to be a face-up four off the bench.

 

[huskymedic]

The media is making Manuel look incompetent. Katz, Vitale and just about every talking head is taking mild shots at Manuel and supporting Ollie along with the coaching community.He either has to get a contract worked out NOW with Ollie or hire somebody else but doing nothing is making him look stupid.

... and you don't think JC is behind this??? To cave now would make WM look weaker than most on this board already thinks he is. Just because the noise gets louder - it doesn't mean he has to jump up to turn the volume down. If he blows past February with action - have @ it.

 

[upstater]

I think you are extrapolating his words and/or actions way too much. He has said from the start that he needs to see him in action as a head coach. Obviously that implies that he is "looking for something" to prove that, yes, he is head coach material. But that doesn't mean he lacks confidence in Ollie or is questioning his ability. To say he doesn't know is not the same as he thinks he isn't good enough. We all have to show that we deserve our paychecks. I don't take my annual review as an insult or lack of confidence just as I don't take interviews as some sort of statment about what people think of my abilities. We all deal with "show me" requirements in life and especially if we have never done the job before.

Manuel has reponsibilities. Obviously we don't all agree but I happen to think it was a responsible thing to not turn the program over to an unproven head coach and give him a long term contract. He was the best choice given the circumstances and we all (except maybe freescooter) hope he has what it takes to be a great head coach. Once he shows it, then Manuel can give him a long term contract without worrying that it is irresponsible to do so. Remember, it costs money to buy out a coach when you fire him. To set up a university with limited and shrinking funding to have to do so by hiring an unproven coach and giving him a long term contract is seen by many as irresponsible. Once Ollie has had enough time to prove himself, it will could no longer be viewed as irresponsible to extend him.

We could disagree on some of these points but to say that what Manuel has done is stupid or crazy is just not rational. Just because you think there might have been a better way to go about it doesn't make his decision crazy enough to warrant crucifying the guy daily.

We'll never agree. I've said this countless times, it's pennywise and pound foolish to worry about a 3 year contract at the same rate.

In my estimation, Manuel is doing long-term damage to UConn basketball right now as we speak.

The streets are littered with Arkansases, Houstons, UNLVs, and such programs that were bball powerhouses in the last three decades. UConn has natural advantages over all three--but these schools haven't even been part of the conversation in recent years.

 

[upstater]

... and you don't think JC is behind this??? To cave now would make WM look weaker than most on this board already thinks he is. Just because the noise gets louder - it doesn't mean he has to jump up to turn the volume down. If he blows past February with action - have @ it.

I don't really care if Manuel looks like Charles Atlas at the beach when he was a kid. Makes no difference to me.

 

[caw]

I don't really care if Manuel looks like Charles Atlas at the beach when he was a kid. Makes no difference to me.

I agree, what matters more: A) being right or B) looking weak. I pick A over B all day long.

 

[freescooter]

We'll never agree. I've said this countless times, it's pennywise and pound foolish to worry about a 3 year contract at the same rate.

In my estimation, Manuel is doing long-term damage to UConn basketball right now as we speak.

The streets are littered with Arkansases, Houstons, UNLVs, and such programs that were bball powerhouses in the last three decades. UConn has natural advantages over all three--but these schools haven't even been part of the conversation in recent years.

We could well end up there but it has absolutely zero to do with Kevin Ollie's contract. It has to do with the fact that we're being left to fend for ourselves in the Big Mess. Look,Calhoun has to bear some responsibility for this too. I know you will deny it, and have some nonsense about APR and all the rest, but UConn is cleaning up the mess that was created on his watch. Probation. Loss of scholarships. Negative national perception. Kevin Ollie's one year deal. every single one of those things came about because of something Jim Calhoun did or didn't do. Every one. And our being left behind by the ACC, he contributed to that, too. In reality, if Calhoun had been almost any other coach, he'd have been fired back about 4 years ago for the things that happened on his watch. Even if he had survived the Nate Miles and other scandals, the APR thing would have finished him. Only at UConn does he go out a hero, then on top of that gets to name his replacement, then publicly undercuts him with bs about returning to coaching...Jim, you did grand things. now grab the clubs, drive down to Hilton head and send a postcard every now and then.

 

[baggerbob]

I normally don't agree with Dickie V on anything , but even Dick realizes Ollie needs to be given an extension now for the long term good of the program. If Susan doesn't step up, and behind closed doors suggest to manuel, he has 1 of 2 choices an extension for Ollie, or new employment.

 

[Waquoit]

If talent was the only thing that impacted the outcome of games, NC State beats us by 30 last night.

Yeah, right.

 

[upstater]

We could well end up there but it has absolutely zero to do with Kevin Ollie's contract. It has to do with the fact that we're being left to fend for ourselves in the Big Mess. Look,Calhoun has to bear some responsibility for this too. I know you will deny it, and have some nonsense about APR and all the rest, but UConn is cleaning up the mess that was created on his watch. Probation. Loss of scholarships. Negative national perception. Kevin Ollie's one year deal. every single one of those things came about because of something Jim Calhoun did or didn't do. Every one. And our being left behind by the ACC, he contributed to that, too. In reality, if Calhoun had been almost any other coach, he'd have been fired back about 4 years ago for the things that happened on his watch. Even if he had survived the Nate Miles and other scandals, the APR thing would have finished him. Only at UConn does he go out a hero, then on top of that gets to name his replacement, then publicly undercuts him with bs about returning to coaching...Jim, you did grand things. now grab the clubs, drive down to Hilton head and send a postcard every now and then.

Bullshit

 

[freescooter]

Bull****

Proves my point...

 

[Pudge]

Calhoun & Auriemma is what separates us from UMASS & UNH. To ding him for "presumed" deficiencies from the view of the ACC ... is to ignore the story that we all know. We are fortunate to be with this University. If we needed to whitewash Calhoun for their application ... I would say frig YOU. We are better than most of those Universities with a better future.

 

[scrappy2.0]

Try answering the question instead of attacking me. You keep saying you see all these positives, then can't answer a simple question like what are they.

freescooter--if Kevin Ollie needs a basket --he has to ask for it from 24 feet--thats where are two main scorers are-and they are both 6-0 and under. We cant ask for a post play nor can we even ask for a slash from a guy who stands above 6-0. Its a limited team--that is honest truth. That being said we were tied with ahead of New Mexico with 2 minutes left and tied with Maryland who was supposed to win the ACC with two minutes left. The guys have played hard--my hope is that Omar Calhoun Philip Nolan and Wolf all increase time and play this year--that is the core of this team for next year. This is transition and we will likely be close to .500. If you can answer who is your go to guy to me--that s all I am asking.

 

[upstater]

Proves my point...

Louisville is on APR probation. It really hurt them. Hard to do for football, since in bball, 2 kids leaving ding your school. In football, it takes multiples. What a mess Louisville is in.

 

[freescooter]

Louisville is on APR probation. It really hurt them. Hard to do for football, since in bball, 2 kids leaving ding your school. In football, it takes multiples. What a mess Louisville is in.

And we're banned. We were on probation before. big difference.

Calhoun & Auriemma is what separates us from UMASS & UNH. To ding him for "presumed" deficiencies from the view of the ACC ... is to ignore the story that we all know. We are fortunate to be with this University. If we needed to whitewash Calhoun for their application ... I would say frig YOU. We are better than most of those Universities with a better future.

No. Being in the Big East, at least the "old" Big East is actually what separates us from UMass and UNH. Calhoun is what separates us from posers and wannabe programs like Villanova and St Johns and DePaul. Calhoun is what he is, but what he accomplished allowed him to get away with a huge amount of damage to the program and never be held accountable for it.

 

[upstater]

And we're banned. We were on probation before. big difference.

No. Being in the Big East, at least the "old" Big East is actually what separates us from UMass and UNH. Calhoun is what separates us from posers and wannabe programs like Villanova and St Johns and DePaul. Calhoun is what he is, but what he accomplished allowed him to get away with a huge amount of damage to the program and never be held accountable for it.

Uh, no. There is no difference. The only difference is when the NCAA chose to institute bans. Louisville missed multiple years but it's infractions were back 1 year each prior to ours.

No one cares.

You are way too impressionable.

 

[Gurleyman]

The APR problems were already corrected by the time we were punished for it. We had a specific group of players who didn't perform up to snuff academically, with various excuses for some of them, some good and some bad (AJ Price - only in school seven semesters after a medical withdrawal, Sticks - only in school seven semesters, Nate Miles - only in school seven weeks, Gavin - thought he was a pro and didn't finish his last 8-12 credits, Mandeldove - train wreck, Darius Smith - couldn't hack it in the classroom, clear recruiting mistake). The bad APR years basically stem from the recruiting class in 2007, sprinkled with a couple other mistakes afterward (Miles, Smith). We had to replenish our whole roster that year after the '06 exodus - so it was a unique recruiting year in terms of needing a lot of numbers fo fill our roster, and we missed some of our top targets early on (Ellington, Henderson, Durant). The group we did finally bring in pretty much didn't get it done across the board APR-wise - with only Dyson making it through all four years and graduating (and Thabeet leaving early). It clearly was a bad couple of years for academic progress.

By the time we got around to winning a national title, though, we had revamped our roster and were led by a guy who virtually graduated in 3 years, a big man (now at Missouri) who had above a 3.0 GPA, a JuCo big man who graduated, a four-year reserve guard who graduated, and a batch of freshmen who took care of business in the classroom from day one. Hence a 979 APR, with only Jamal Coombs-McDaniel costing us some points by transferring with less than the minimum GPA.

Nate Miles, sure - that's a legitimate blight on Calhoun's resume, but plenty of head coaches have stayed on board after secondary recruiting violations - even ones who haven't won multiple national titles.

None of this made one whit of difference for conference expansion. Expansion is about the future, television markets, and football, and Louisville had the worst football APR in the entire country last year.

 

[Gurleyman]

Louisville is on APR probation. It really hurt them. Hard to do for football, since in bball, 2 kids leaving ding your school. In football, it takes multiples. What a mess Louisville is in.

It's also harder to do in football, since most incoming recruits redshirt their first year - meaning that they get at least nine semesters for their schoolwork (if not 10), plus four or five summer sessions. Basketball is typically only eight, and if you get kids thinking about the NBA or European contracts their senior spring, they might not finish the eighth.

 

[freescooter]

The APR problems were already corrected by the time we were punished for it. We had a specific group of players who didn't perform up to snuff academically, with various excuses for some of them, some good and some bad (AJ Price - only in school seven semesters after a medical withdrawal, Sticks - only in school seven semesters, Nate Miles - only in school seven weeks, Gavin - thought he was a pro and didn't finish his last 8-12 credits, Mandeldove - train wreck, Darius Smith - couldn't hack it in the classroom, clear recruiting mistake). The bad APR years basically stem from the recruiting class in 2007, sprinkled with a couple other mistakes afterward (Miles, Smith). We had to replenish our whole roster that year after the '06 exodus - so it was a unique recruiting year in terms of needing a lot of numbers fo fill our roster, and we missed some of our top targets early on (Ellington, Henderson, Durant). The group we did finally bring in pretty much didn't get it done across the board APR-wise - with only Dyson making it through all four years and graduating (and Thabeet leaving early). It clearly was a bad couple of years for academic progress.

By the time we got around to winning a national title, though, we had revamped our roster and were led by a guy who virtually graduated in 3 years, a big man (now at Missouri) who had above a 3.0 GPA, a JuCo big man who graduated, a four-year reserve guard who graduated, and a batch of freshmen who took care of business in the classroom from day one. Hence a 979 APR, with only Jamal Coombs-McDaniel costing us some points by transferring with less than the minimum GPA.

Nate Miles, sure - that's a legitimate blight on Calhoun's resume, but plenty of head coaches have stayed on board after secondary recruiting violations - even ones who haven't won multiple national titles.

None of this made one whit of difference for conference expansion. Expansion is about the future, television markets, and football, and Louisville had the worst football APR in the entire country last year.

They weren't secondary violations. they were major. We got long term probation, we lost scholarships. We lost recruiting time, and Calhoun was personally dinged and suspended for 3 games. I believe we are still on probation(through 2014 I think) for those violations and we might even still be down a scholarship I thought we 1 each year for 3 years, though I could be confusing that with the APR) because of them. In any case, some if not all of the difficulties with THIS YEAR'S team can be traced back directly to Calhoun and things that happened on his watch. many coaches would have been fired, most would have been fired when the APR mess followed the recruiting mess. Calhoun might be the only one who would have been allowed to name his successor and leave to as a hero after that.

 

[upstater]

The APR problems were already corrected by the time we were punished for it. We had a specific group of players who didn't perform up to snuff academically, with various excuses for some of them, some good and some bad (AJ Price - only in school seven semesters after a medical withdrawal, Sticks - only in school seven semesters, Nate Miles - only in school seven weeks, Gavin - thought he was a pro and didn't finish his last 8-12 credits, Mandeldove - train wreck, Darius Smith - couldn't hack it in the classroom, clear recruiting mistake). The bad APR years basically stem from the recruiting class in 2007, sprinkled with a couple other mistakes afterward (Miles, Smith). We had to replenish our whole roster that year after the '06 exodus - so it was a unique recruiting year in terms of needing a lot of numbers fo fill our roster, and we missed some of our top targets early on (Ellington, Henderson, Durant). The group we did finally bring in pretty much didn't get it done across the board APR-wise - with only Dyson making it through all four years and graduating (and Thabeet leaving early). It clearly was a bad couple of years for academic progress.

By the time we got around to winning a national title, though, we had revamped our roster and were led by a guy who virtually graduated in 3 years, a big man (now at Missouri) who had above a 3.0 GPA, a JuCo big man who graduated, a four-year reserve guard who graduated, and a batch of freshmen who took care of business in the classroom from day one. Hence a 979 APR, with only Jamal Coombs-McDaniel costing us some points by transferring with less than the minimum GPA.

Nate Miles, sure - that's a legitimate blight on Calhoun's resume, but plenty of head coaches have stayed on board after secondary recruiting violations - even ones who haven't won multiple national titles.

None of this made one whit of difference for conference expansion. Expansion is about the future, television markets, and football, and Louisville had the worst football APR in the entire country last year.

I agree with your general point, but... no sure Miles counted against the APR. It would create a perverse incentive to keep kids if he did count.

If you do the calculations, it takes only 2 players of 13 to bring you below the threshold.

1 point for each semester retention, 1 point for finishing each semester = 4 pts per player each year.
13 x 4 = 52 maximum points
If 2 players screw up, you get dinged for 2 points a piece (assuming they finished their fall semester--Fab Melo didn't!). Divide 48 by 52 and then multiply by 1000 = APR score , NCAA threshold.

So it only takes 2 players leaving without completing classwork to ding you score.

To show you how arbitrary this is, UConn experienced absolutely schizophrenic scores.

951
889
978
981
909
844
826
978

 

[caw]

They weren't secondary violations. they were major. We got long term probation, we lost scholarships. We lost recruiting time, and Calhoun was personally dinged and suspended for 3 games. I believe we are still on probation(through 2014 I think) for those violations and we might even still be down a scholarship I thought we 1 each year for 3 years, though I could be confusing that with the APR) because of them. In any case, some if not all of the difficulties with THIS YEAR'S team can be traced back directly to Calhoun and things that happened on his watch. many coaches would have been fired, most would have been fired when the APR mess followed the recruiting mess. Calhoun might be the only one who would have been allowed to name his successor and leave to as a hero after that.

Ends after this season I believe. Everything resets for UConn starting in April. Scholarship reduction went from 2011, 2012, 2013, also done after this year. UConn has full allotment of scholarships starting next year.

 

[Gurleyman]

They weren't secondary violations. they were major. We got long term probation, we lost scholarships. We lost recruiting time, and Calhoun was personally dinged and suspended for 3 games. I believe we are still on probation(through 2014 I think) for those violations and we might even still be down a scholarship I thought we 1 each year for 3 years, though I could be confusing that with the APR) because of them. In any case, some if not all of the difficulties with THIS YEAR'S team can be traced back directly to Calhoun and things that happened on his watch. many coaches would have been fired, most would have been fired when the APR mess followed the recruiting mess. Calhoun might be the only one who would have been allowed to name his successor and leave to as a hero after that.

I used secondary too loosely - he was suspended three games as the head of the staff that had violations (which I had no problems with), but they only personally dinged him for too many texts/calls. I think the head guy should bear responsibility for violations on his watch, even if he's clever to avoid much of a paper trail to his desk, so I do consider that whole escapade a blight on his resume. I consider playing Marcus Williams again to be his other blight, but that's more my opinion.

The recruiting mess and the APR mess are in many ways inter-twined to the same time frame (I believe that if you could just take away the Miles 0-for-2, we avoid the ban). In between the messes, we won a national title with players who didn't have anything to do with either mess. If you think he should have been fired, you haven't been following college sports very long. It would be different if we continued to show no improvement in our academic progress after 2009-10 and won a title with more academic train wrecks. Then we would have evidence of a sysetmic problem that needed drastic measures to correct. Reality shows we had a temporary problem with one small group of people, and the problem was solved in one year (and really, how much does one APR number tell you if it can go up 150 points in one year?).

The difficulties of this year's team are simply that Lamb, Drummond, Roscoe, Oriakhi and Bradley all left. Recruiting-wise, we were prepared for Lamb (signing Omar), but the mass frontcourt exodus has left us bare. We'll never know for sure - but I think AO was sulking his way out of town even before the penalties came up, AD was always going to be a one and done, and Bradley really did leave for family reasons (ample PT was available if he stayed). Only Roscoe really was salvage-able without the recent problems, and he by himself wouldn't be the answer (although he would have helped).

 

[Gurleyman]

I agree with your general point, but... no sure Miles counted against the APR. It would create a perverse incentive to keep kids if he did count.

I'm pretty sure he did count - as a scholarship guy who left with no credits through his own mis-deeds - but I won't stake my Boneyard reputation on it. I could be mis-remembering.

There are a lot of perverse incentives in the rules these days - a lot of schools are denying transfer waivers to student-athletes who don't have a 2.6 to avoid the APR ding. In theory, some of those student-athletes could be struggling academically and looking for a less-difficult college, and find themselves forced to stay at a school they are struggling at.

 

[upstater]

They weren't secondary violations. they were major. We got long term probation, we lost scholarships. We lost recruiting time, and Calhoun was personally dinged and suspended for 3 games. I believe we are still on probation(through 2014 I think) for those violations and we might even still be down a scholarship I thought we 1 each year for 3 years, though I could be confusing that with the APR) because of them. In any case, some if not all of the difficulties with THIS YEAR'S team can be traced back directly to Calhoun and things that happened on his watch. many coaches would have been fired, most would have been fired when the APR mess followed the recruiting mess. Calhoun might be the only one who would have been allowed to name his successor and leave to as a hero after that.

What a bunch of bunk. Many coaches would have been fired? Was Boeheim fired? Was Coach K. fired for doing exactly what Calhoun did? Do you know what the NCAA decided? Do you know that Calhoun said he didn't agree with the NCAA's findings? Let's do this again, since we shouldn't try to be nCAA stooges here:

NCAA:

This program devotes significant resources to its men's basketball program and recruits student-athletes of the highest talent levels. One such recruit was the prospect, one of the top high school prospects in the class ofv2008 and a prospective student-athlete coveted by the institution. Of the prospect's recruitment, the director of athletics stated "it was the most intense I've ever seen [the head coach] about the recruitment of any particular student-athlete." In his zeal to get the prospect admitted to the institution and eligible to compete, the head coach acquiesced in the representative's involvement in the process and overlooked indications that the representative might be involved in NCAA rules violations. In doing so, he failed to set the proper atmosphere for rules compliance in the men's basketball program. The head coach also failed to monitor the men's basketball staff.

The institution's coaches did not question the representative's relationship with the prospect or report it to the institution's athletics administration until November 2007, over a year after the institution's recruitment of the prospect had begun.

Let's go through the problems here. The NCAA found over 1,000 messages from Nochimson and the coaches between 2005-2008. The NCAA however states that UConn's recruitment of Miles began in the middle of that period. Nochimson wasn't even an agent at the start of that period. So the timeline here is questionable in that they found UConn to have illegally sent thousands of messages and texts to Nochimson from a period prior to Miles and prior to Nochimson becoming an agent.

Now, the NCAA explicitly states in this document that UConn's coaches worked Nochimson to recruit Miles for UConn. This statement contradicts Tom Moore's claim that he introduced Miles to Nochimson AFTER Miles had already committed to UConn. Whatever UConn's involvement with Nochimson, it would seem that Moore's claim does not mesh with the idea that UConn procured Miles through Nochimson, yet this is the claim the NCAA makes.

Furthermore, that introduction between Nochimson and Miles was made during a November 2006 tournament. Calhoun reported that he found out about Nochimson's relationship in 2007 (which the NCAA acknoweldges). Indeed, Calhoun sent a letter to Nochimson telling him to end all contact with Miles. This letter was sent to the NCAA in 2007. UConn informed the NCAA of this relationship months after Nochimson began a relationship with Miles. The NCAA began investigating this a full 2 years after they had been informed by Calhoun and UConn of the relationship.

The curious thing about this is that someone in the NCAA offices knew about Miles and Nochimson. A year after the NCAA was informed, we had the freedom of information request from Wetzel to the athletic offices.

Beyond this, what was UConn guilty of? 150 calls too many and 190 texts to many. Over how long a period? More than 2 years. This is less than 10 calls/texts every month. And they made these on university public land lines no less. It's not even illegal now. In other words, .

UConn contested the findings about these calls. They argued these were secondary violations. The NCAA deemed them major. MAJOR?? How can they be major violations when a year later the NCAA determines that they are no longer even violations?

Now, read about some of the NCAA's problems with the phone calls to Miles:

On May 5, 2008, the former operations director e-mailed the compliance director, asking if she had sent a Buckley Amendment form regarding the prospect's records. Fifteen minutes after receiving the e-mail, the compliance director responded that the former operations director should "[d]ownload the application and just have [the prospect] fill out the Buckley page and fax it back." While this directive necessitated that the former operations director contact the prospect directly, it did not tell him to make a telephone call to the young man. A letter to the prospect with directions to fill out the form and fax it back would have easily taken care of the task. It was not necessary for the former operations director to phone the young man to get the paperwork signed.

Think about this. The NCAA dings UConn for calling Miles to advise him he needs to fill out a form. The NCAA instead suggests that a letter be sent to his address instead. Think about this in the context of the life Miles was leading at the time (itinerant). The NCAA is once again tone-deaf to the impoverished lives these kids lead. The NCAA's problem here is a phone call rather than a letter. Think about that.

The tickets to coaches, by the way, were secondary violations.

The former associate head coach specifically told the head coach that the representative kept in contact with the prospect, and the head coach later spoke to the young man about the representative, telling him "be careful who you hang around with." At the hearing, the head coach stated he called the prospect "to warn him about [the representative]. I told him the Connecticut staff is the only one who has his best interest at heart." Yet, in spite of feeling the need to warn the prospect, neither the head coach nor any member of his staff discussed the matter with the athletics administration or inquired into the relationship between the representative and the prospect.

This comment by the NCAA not only contradicts the letter to Nochimson sent by the UConn compliance office in 2007 and published in 2010 by the Hartford Courant, but it contradicts the NCAA's claim up above that UConn informed compliance in 2007. I can only assume that this information came to the NCAA late in 2010 (after the Courant published the letter) and in typical NCAA fashion, they released this shoddy report with old information. One wonders whether the final punishments were issued based on this old info. After all, the NCAA accused Patrick Sellers of lying in this same report, issued a show cause against him, and only after his appeal of this finding (while traveling between China and NCAA offices) was he able to clear his name as the NCAA admitted they screwed up this part of the investigation with inaccuracies. Sellers' vindication was huge news all over the college basketball media (actually, it wasn't). This is typical NCAA shoddiness.

Here's the funniest part:

As this committee stated in the case of Indiana University, Bloomington, Case No. M285 (2008), Bylaw 11.1.2.1 places a specific and independent monitoring obligation on head coaches. The head coach in this case did not demonstrate sufficient monitoring of his staff's activities regarding the prospect and the representative. Therefore, the head coach failed to meet his obligation under Bylaw 11.1.2.1.

This refers to the K Sampson case. Calhoun was dinged for failure to monitor. But the timing of his failure to monitor occurred between the period when Nochimson met Miles in November of 2006 and the period when UConn informed the NCAA and the compliance office of the relationship. That period ends in late 2007. But the Sampson rule was made in 2008.

Wait a minute, the NCAA can't punish someone retroactively, can they? For a rule made after the fact? To punish behavior before the fact? That can't happen, can it?

Finally:

ALLEGATION OF MAJOR VIOLATION NOT FOUND BY THE COMMITTEE.
The enforcement staff alleged that the former assistant coach violated the principles of ethical conduct by providing false and misleading information to the staff in interviews held during the investigation. The allegedly false statements were made regarding the former assistant coach's knowledge of how the prospect's learning-disabled evaluation was set up and his involvement in arranging the evaluation. This line of inquiry was significant because it raised the possibility of the prospect receiving an impermissible inducement.

This speaks to Sellers' testimony inducing Miles to commit through Nochimson. When the NCAA charges initially came out, this was the major one. It was about UConn producing a recruit through an agent. A major violation.

The media was in a tizzy. It found that this did not hold water and that Sellers was truthful.

In short, this is what happened in the Miles affair:

1. 100+ phone calls and texts over 2 years, ruled a major violation. Even though there is no such rule anymore.

2. Calhoun was given a "Failure to Monitor" charge for actions dating 11/2006 to 11/2007 (when he informed compliance). Even though the designation didn't exist until 2008.

3. Secondary violations for tickets to coaches.

Unlike freescooter, I can't get exorcised over this. When I was reading the whole Miles story by the NCAA, I did consider that someone like him should not have been considered eligible for a student athletic scholarship, based on his journey through many schools, a few of them sham schools. That should have disqualified him. But then he received a qualifying score on his SATs, a transcript of graduation from some schools, all of which were forwarded to the NCAA, and the NCAA certified him. I still feel this was somewhat questionable, but then I think of the many hundreds if not thousands of student athletes in a similar boat, including at UConn. Not to mention what goes on across the country in this regard.

 

[upstater]

I'm pretty sure he did count - as a scholarship guy who left with no credits through his own mis-deeds - but I won't stake my Boneyard reputation on it. I could be mis-remembering.

There are a lot of perverse incentives in the rules these days - a lot of schools are denying transfer waivers to student-athletes who don't have a 2.6 to avoid the APR ding. In theory, some of those student-athletes could be struggling academically and looking for a less-difficult college, and find themselves forced to stay at a school they are struggling at.

The NCAA issues waivers for cases like that.

 

[Tenspro2002]

NCAA:

Of the prospect's recruitment, the director of athletics stated "it was the most intense I've ever seen [the head coach] about the recruitment of any particular student-athlete."

I know this is tangential, but what an absolute tool Jeff Hathaway was. It doesn't exactly sound like the NCAA had to twist his arm to indict JC like that.