So, I guess my next question would be, if the NCAA has no problem with it... who, really, gives a shiny shit how it is perceived?
Bilas tries to explain the inexplicable
- Thread starter JRowland
- Start date
Historically judges are sulpposed to recuse if theres even an appearance of impropriety. But this isnt court.
Where Bilas really gies wrong is presuming that each conference head has an inherent interest in punishing a school in another conference.
Bilas has two conflicts of interest. The head of ESPN is a UNC alumnus. And a partner at his law firm, Jeff Brown, is on the UNC Board of Trustees.
http://bot.unc.edu
http://bot.unc.edu
My point exactly. Please know that in my earlier posts, "COI" was referring to "Committee On Infractions."
That's true. If anything history has shown that having peers/colleagues sit in judgement, they tend to go easier because they face many of the same issues and can better appreciate the impact of overly harsh penalties etc.
And I believe this is exactly why the NCAA chooses to staff the Committee of Infractions the way they do.
For UNC and their henchmen and shills to claim this is a liability or inherent conflict of interest reeks of desperation.
True. By Bilas' own logic he should give up his job of commenting on major college basketball teams because he went to Duke. Ergo he has an inherent conflict of interest and should recuse himself from his position.
Bilas was pretty vocal saying that the NCAA didn't have jurisdiction to rule on the Penn State case. BTW, That's an argument I completely agree with. (and reinforced after I spent time browsing the entire NCAA manual one time as this issue was being discussed on this board).
Bilas also has tried to argue that there's no specific bylaw that UNC broke and thus they have no right to punish UNC.
That's an argument I find laughable. UNC broke many of the very core principles that the NCAA is based on. There's plenty of areas that UNC could be justly booted from the organization just for how they've flaunted their non-compliance, much less plenty of specific rules and by-laws they broke via fraud.
I also find it hypocritical of Bilas to make thus argument, given that in the past he's complained about the NCAA manual being too long. Now he wants to pore over it with a fine toothed comb and claim to not find a specific infraction which perfectly aligns with what his client (ahem his object of irrational defense) did.
To me that's like having a lawyer claim that while the Boy Scouts of America have an honor code which includes agreeing to be "trustworthy and loyal" that a boy who is found to steal another Scout's belongings shouldn't be kicked out of the organization or reprimanded because there's no specific rule against it in the code.
No one on here likes Bilas but the dude owned Matt--Bring Cal in!The best thing that could've possibly happened would to have had Coach Cal interview Bilas. Cal would talk and bullshit circles around Jay and make him look like an idiot. Someone get in Matt Jones' ear and have him try to do this. Talk about epic.
Really? I thought Matt missed a few opportunities but his arguments were sound. Bilas was a complete mess of inconsistencies and weak arguments.
The only area where Bilas made sense was his condemnation of Mark Emmertt interfering with the Enes Kanter investigation. But that's something they both agreed on.
Glad you brought that up. I fundamentally disagree with Bilas' take but did think at the time that extending his own logic, it's clear that he should be against having an NCAA selection committee. (I've never seen him argue in favor of this BTW, but I could be wrong.)
I've personally been in favor of abolishing the NCAA selection committee for a long time. My argument is mainly around the idea that the committee members are generally unqualified to accurately gauge team strength and their work could be done much better and significantly faster (and thus is not artificially hampered by their slowness in being able to assess ALL games) with a well designed computer model (one that has clearly defined criteria in place, uses multiple sources of data, includes advanced metrics etc.)
But if Bilas wants to argue that anyone with any kind of stake in the process (even if it's tangential) has an inherent conflict of interest and should recuse himself, then that's reason enough to abolish the committee and use something else that's independent of the schools.
I think he has expressed agreement that they could just use a computer model for the selections. Could be wrong about that though. I've tried to listen to him as little as possible lately.
I didn't listen to it personally, so I really can't say. I just read what has been posted. The point I'm making is that Cal wouldn't hold back on Bilas. He would've went right at him. No doubt in my mind. He wouldn't be all PC about it. JMO.
poking fun at Jay about support Duke in the tourney is one thing.
Going after Jay as a proxy for UNC cheating is another level altogether. Cal might take a shot in passing, but I doubt any coach is going to comment until after the smoke clears.
Going after Jay as a proxy for UNC cheating is another level altogether. Cal might take a shot in passing, but I doubt any coach is going to comment until after the smoke clears.
Similar threads
