And that^^ is why. When the NCAA ignores it and doesn't investigate, despite the obvious facts, well, he can't be ruled ineligible. It's really kinda humorous.
Everyone wants to Blame Cal for Umass and Memphis but no one wants to Blame...
- Thread starter blueblood65
- Start date
someone may have hinted on this since I didn't read every post, but I think its pretty telling that even in the 30:30 one of the people interviewed stated that if the Rose situation had happened at a blue blood program it would have been swept under the rug. Im very surprised they included that bit in there, although we all know it to be 100% true. Funny how Rose can be cleared by the NCAA Clearing House, play an entire season, NCAA has no proof he didn't take the SAT himself, and then they vacate everything...You guys cleared him to play in the first place, youre basically admitting youre inept at your job and claiming guilt until proven innocent (which was impossible to prove, its not like he took a picture at the testing site giving a thumbs up to the NCAA)
Guilt until proven innocent is EXACTLY how the NCAA operates. If player x is accused of cheating on the SAT, the NCAA expects the school to hold him out until the matter is settled. If the school opts not to do that, they risk losing the season.
Last year, UNLV had a player have his SAT invalidated. UNLV immediately took the player out of the lineup and we haven't heard another word since. The NCAA doesn't care apparently that he was ineligible. Had they played him anyway and appealed, it might have ended differently.
I am not sure I have a point. It is what it is.
Big difference is those 2 schools have been found guilty and punished.
As for Louisville, it will end up similar with them and Pitino once it's all said and done.
You also have to just consider that when comparing national hate for Kentucky/Cal and Louisville/Pitino, Kentucky's is going to be more and and constant because they are so much more relevant. Outside of this state, UL basketball isn't really anything but another program.
As for Louisville, it will end up similar with them and Pitino once it's all said and done.
You also have to just consider that when comparing national hate for Kentucky/Cal and Louisville/Pitino, Kentucky's is going to be more and and constant because they are so much more relevant. Outside of this state, UL basketball isn't really anything but another program.
![[laughing]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/laugh.r191677.gif "Laughing [laughing]")
Rick Pitino was charged by the NCAA of not having control. What makes you think "no one" wants to blame him?Rick and Roy for the Scandals at UL and UNC....Yea%Bull
.......
I thought of that Ryan quote, too - but I don't think that's exactly what he said (if you're talking about what he said in the 30 for 30). He said something like "it would have been really interesting to see what the NCAA does if Mario Chalmers misses that shot and Memphis wins the title. Would they have taken the title away? We all think no way they take a title away from Kentucky or North Carolina. But would they take it from Memphis and Calipari?" And the way he left it made me think he's suggesting because it's Memphis and Cal, they probably would....
Whichever...the point is all the subjectivity and "it depends" just means the NCAA has no credibility. If you make a final four and later get in trouble they'll take your banner - but not if you go on to win the title, because they don't want to do that. If you're Memphis and get in trouble you get slammed, but not if you do the same thing and you're Carolina or Duke. I can't believe the members don't police themselves (and the NCAA staff) any better....
Maybe but 1990 UNLV didn't have to forfeit anything and the NCAA hated Tark.
The NCAA has shown they won't take titles away but will sure as hell take runner-up banners and Final Fours away.
Kind of funny how when the NCAA made UCLA part ways with Sam Gilbert, the only banner they took away was the 1980 runner-up banner despite the same guy being there for all but one of Wooden's titles
Oh there are plenty of people(including media) who don't want to put the blame on either one of them but Cal? That's a different story....It's called Hate and Jealousy....
What does this mean? Haters will hate on Roy, on Pitino, or it's in relation to cal?
Could simply type people gonna eat,eat, eat... We would be at the same point in understanding.
Pleases don't use Vitale as a source of information or sound reasoning. They don't go together.
It means that regardless of the truth, the haters will never change their opinions of Cal.
They will always use Camby/UMass, Wagner/Memphis, banners removed, victories vacated, World Wide Wes and so on and so forth as proof that Cal is corrupt.
They never let facts get in the way of a good story...
Funny that no one mentions John Wooden....they openly had a "bag man" and nothing ever came of that. Different time I guess.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Lunardi's latest. Still 13 SEC teams, UK a 4 seed
- Latest: electricat2
-
-
