Where Things Stand Now

[UConn990411]

My sources are pretty definitive and more importantly they have been right.

You don't have any sources. Stop it.

 

[Chief00]

I do have two excellent sources. Not sure whose NBA Brother the AAU guy is Derrick or Jalen - quite frankly that's not important to my point - that Boatright investigation was about nailing Calhoun ......or else the line of questioning would be very different. As for the Conference thing I did not say what Conference they were going to - my post mentioned contact.....and I stated an opinion that I would prefer the SEC to the ACC.

 

[johnhuskies95]

Chief actually does have a well-placed source. I don't know how accurate the guy is, but Chief does have a real source.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

The screwing with Boatright was entirely because the NCAA believes Reggie Rose is dirty and will bend over backwards at any chance to prove it. That it was a UConn kid they were screwing was merely bonus in their eyes.

 

[DogMania]

I look forward to the day that I no longer see the letters APR on this board. With that said, what are the facts as far as the following:

What are the programs in addition to UConn that have no shot at getting a qualifying 4 year APR?

What is the list, if any, of the programs that have received a waver for the 2013 tournament even though they have a non-qualifying APR?

What I find strange about this whole thing is how the NCAA was willing to give some programs a waver last year as far as the ship reductions were concerned that had an APR score that should have warranted reductions because they showed progress in their most current 2 seasons. I believe Arkansas was one of them. So why wouldn't they do the same for UConn who from what I understand has posted 2 very good APR numbers in 2010-11 and 2011-12?

Now I have no idea if there is any bad blood between specific individuals, but it sure seems like there is no love lost between the NCAA and UConn. I'm sure the addition of Drummond as a non-scholarship player didn't sit very well with them. I'm sure if it wasn't an unusual circumstance where one of the top ranked players from the home state happens to change his mind late, that the program would not have even considered added another scholarship caliber player, but those at the NCAA probably don't care. On the flip side, I'm sure there was a little behind the scenes take that NCAA by JC and other members of the Husky program when they did find a way to add AD.

Maybe I'm wrong about this, but I've felt all along that the NCAA will grant UConn a waver but will do so at the last possible moment after most if not all the 2012 class has been spoken for. By then the damage will be done and UConn will have taken a big hit as far as keeping the cupboards full. Maybe the staff will again surprise us and bring in another talented class even while the 2013 tournament is still in doubt.

I assume once the final ruling on any exemption is rejected, litigation will follow. I have no idea when would be the right time to take legal action. We had hoped the NCAA would rule favorably by now, it's close if not already beyond the point where recruiting damage is irreparable.

 

[upstater]

What are the programs in addition to UConn that have no shot at getting a qualifying 4 year APR?

What is the list, if any, of the programs that have received a waver for the 2013 tournament even though they have a non-qualifying APR?

I was referring to the schools that wouldn't have had an APR score if the rules were applied to this year rather than next.

"University of Connecticut and number one seed Syracuse University, as well as St. Louis, Florida State, Indiana, Southern Mississippi, Colorado State, Colorado, Mississippi Valley State, New Mexico State, Norfolk State, Ohio, and St. Bonaventure."

Those are the schools.

By the way, Kentucky's average is 974. Very impressive. Their GSR is beyond pitiful though. It's atrocious.

 

[willie99]

LOL, time will tell

a great example of why the internet is well, the internet

 

[swami7774]

You have to love when people launch off with the hoary phrase, "When I said . . . " Like when I said I was going to become a comedian, everyone laughed. Well, they're not laughing now.

Always love a post containing "hoary." Someting you don't see every day.

 

[willie99]

I always love the "my sources" reference. You should just stop reading right there

 

[Chief00]

When I said in late August , after Drummond was already at Munson, that my source said he would be going to UConn for the upcoming season - I got the same cynical posts by the usual suspects. Then in a few days he announced he was going to UConn. The conventional wisdom of this same small group of characters has been proven wrong time and again - but give them credit - they keep on posting.

Now where is that six pack I left in the frig for breakfast?????

 

[Huskymaniac]

I always find it fascinating that some people are so adverse to the ugly side of reality that they label stuff like this as a conspiracy theory when they have no idea how true it is. It is like they fear being called crazy for even being open to a possible conspiracy. It reminds me of how people are afraid of saying anything bad about Israel because they are afraid of being called an anti-semite. I will admit that people with their head in the sand tend to be happier. I suppose that is reason enough to just believe all is peachy in the world. But, really, if you merely accepted what is, you wouldn't feel compelled to trash people for their beliefs, crazy or not. I hope chief is wrong but I also realize he may not be. There is evidence that says it is at least possible.

 

[upstater]

I always find it fascinating that some people are so adverse to the ugly side of reality that they label stuff like this as a conspiracy theory when they have no idea how true it is. It is like they fear being called crazy for even being open to a possible conspiracy. It reminds me of how people are afraid of saying anything bad about Israel because they are afraid of being called an anti-semite. I will admit that people with their head in the sand tend to be happier. I suppose that is reason enough to just believe all is peachy in the world. But, really, if you merely accepted what is, you wouldn't feel compelled to trash people for their beliefs, crazy or not. I hope chief is wrong but I also realize he may not be. There is evidence that says it is at least possible.

How would they get it by everyone else in the room? That's what I want to know. There are reps from other universities on all those committees. How does one guy's vendetta make unfair punishment possible?

 

[hoopsknowitall]

I am not a big conspiracy guy but Chief has been right on before and there is a whole lot of things that connected together are either the once in a lifetime perfect storm or what he says it is. Its not like the NCAA hasn't already been nailed with doing this before in the Tarkanian case.

I tend to think there is something to his NCAA vendetta thing-how much I am not sure but it sure seems that they are screwing with Calhoun big time.

 

[gars44]

I always find it fascinating that some people are so adverse to the ugly side of reality that they label stuff like this as a conspiracy theory when they have no idea how true it is. It is like they fear being called crazy for even being open to a possible conspiracy. It reminds me of how people are afraid of saying anything bad about Israel because they are afraid of being called an anti-semite. I will admit that people with their head in the sand tend to be happier. I suppose that is reason enough to just believe all is peachy in the world. But, really, if you merely accepted what is, you wouldn't feel compelled to trash people for their beliefs, crazy or not. I hope chief is wrong but I also realize he may not be. There is evidence that says it is at least possible.

HM - this is a great post. Great insights! I'm not kidding. We all need to live within certain comfort norms. One of them is, as I believe it was Robert Browning who wrote, "God's in his heaven, and all's right with the world." Very Victorian, but we all need to believe in some level of goodness, however defined. Conspiracies, corruption, the death of Officer Friendly - none of that fits the script, and it becomes very hard to believe, without becoming a little crazy. Never mind merely being called crazy, but actually becoming crazy. Because that's what happens to these people. And just because you're paranoid doesn't mean people aren't following you around. I think they are targeting Calhoun. Not officially, but I do sense some animus in this, like it's personal. JC gets censured, he wins the NC. We take his scholarships, he gets Drummond. We investigate Boatright, twice, and immediately implement the APR ban. It's like fighting City Hall, except City Hall has to abide by the due process clause and they're so short on funds that they can't afford to hire any lawyers to fight the case. But this looks personal to me. Chief my be a little crazy, but that doesn't mean they're not targeting JC.

 

[RS9999X]

The top teams get targeted.

Kentucky's getting beaten up over the "One and Dones" in this Final Four.

http://espn.go.com/espn/commentary/...k-emmert-david-stern-exchange-one-done-salvos

David Stern isn't completely wrong: the NCAA could pass some rules of their own that would force the "One and Done" crowd to either Europe or to Court for leaving after the first year: minimum two year scholarships.

 

[RS9999X]

And Stern's right about the crocodile tears of the NCAA complaining about Calipari 's "One and Done" abuse given the moolah they rake down on March Madness. Telling the NBA its their fault is somewhat ludicrous when the NCAA sets the rules for Div I.

http://espn.go.com/espn/commentary/...k-emmert-david-stern-exchange-one-done-salvos

 

[Chief00]

It's not a conspiracy - just pettiness and revenge by Emmert - and a staff that sucks up to him.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

The NCAA is every bit as culpable in this as the NBA.

Early in my college days there were a few cases (three that I know about, Larry Bird, Kye Macy, Reggie Carter) of players who entered the draft, played the following season for their schools and signed with the team that drafted them shortly before the following draft (at that time the player would go back into the draft pool on the day of the draft if he did not sign).

For reasons beyond anything I can think of the NCAA altered their rules, making a player ineligible if he does enter the draft. This rule change benefited the NBA (as Larry Bird held out for an enormous contract knowing the Celtics had little leverage) while doing little to benefit college teams (beyond knowing if a player was or was not coming back) and absolutely nothing to benefit the players.

The NCAA also should have some mechanism to limit the frequency in which a school can bring in one and dones. Bobby Knight's suggestion of a scholarship being tied to a player for four years, regardless of whether he turns pro or remains is a bit excessive, two years however would not be unreasonable (unless of course you are a Kentucky fan).

 

[upstater]

I honestly don't understand what Stern was recommending, or Howard's take on the whole thing. She's easily one of the worst writers around.

"A college could always not have players who are one and done -- they could do that,"

The question again: how do you force a player to stay in school? Stern's ideas about repaying scholarships are ridiculous non-starters.

I think Knight's idea also wouldn't work. With 13 scholarships to give, you can easily make do with 11 or 12 if a player leaves after one year.

The only answer: raise admission standards.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Knight's idea is quite excessive but this is coming from someone who refuses to accepts many things that are reality. If however a scholarship needs to be utilized for two years, regardless of whether the recruit remains, it will cause many schools to limit the number of slam dunk one and dones they recruit in any one year.

Allowing a kid to enter the draft, not sign with an agent and then return to school for another year would not be beneficial to most NBA teams (who normally would want the services of a draft pick immediately) and would cause some difficulty for the head coach of a top program, capable of always replacing top recruits by not giving definition as to whether a roster spot will or will not be available but this would be a tremendous advantage for 'student athletes' who aren't fully convinced as to which direction to go.

 

[upstater]

Knight's idea is quite excessive but this is coming from someone who refuses to accepts many things that are reality. If however a scholarship needs to be utilized for two years, regardless of whether the recruit remains, it will cause many schools to limit the number of slam dunk one and dones they recruit in any one year.

Allowing a kid to enter the draft, not sign with an agent and then return to school for another year would not be beneficial to most NBA teams (who normally would want the services of a draft pick immediately) and would cause some difficulty for the head coach of a top program, capable of always replacing top recruits by not giving definition as to whether a roster spot will or will not be available but this would be a tremendous advantage for 'student athletes' who aren't fully convinced as to which direction to go.

I asked this earlier. NCAA hockey players are allowed to be drafted, why not basketball players?

 

[tzznandrew]

I asked this earlier. NCAA hockey players are allowed to be drafted, why not basketball players?

Is this an NBA thing, rather than an NCAA thing? Auerbach drafted Bird and he stayed in college the next year. I think the deal is you can draft them, but you don't own the rights to them, so they can go back to college and then come out again a year later and get redrafted.

 

[upstater]

Is this an NBA thing, rather than an NCAA thing? Auerbach drafted Bird and he stayed in college the next year. I think the deal is you can draft them, but you don't own the rights to them, so they can go back to college and then come out again a year later and get redrafted.

It's a college thing. The players have to announce their intentions, right? They have April deadlines for doing so. Why bother with deadlines? If they're drafted, let them continue to play in college.

 

[tzznandrew]

It's a college thing. The players have to announce their intentions, right? They have April deadlines for doing so. Why bother with deadlines? If they're drafted, let them continue to play in college.

But what would stop a team from drafting a player who did not declare? Like I said, it has been done before (with Bird) and a player kept playing. They could draft them and then tell them to stay in college another year or two.

 

[Tenspro2002]

I'm pretty sure after Bird they changed the rule so that you couldn't do that.