KU/Adidas paid players; FBI files more charges
- Thread starter JFCats22
- Start date
Yeah, I don't see the powerful KU, Dook, or UK getting busted. It just wouldn't be beneficial for the NCAA to do it. Heck, it took a three-year investigation, cash falling out of an envelope, and players admitting to the LHL that they had gotten paid for the NCAA to do anything to UK in '89.
![[laughing]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/laugh.r191677.gif "Laughing [laughing]")
Atleast their Bull**** streak is over & the Final Four is dust in the wind cause obviously ever game that DeSouza played in will be forfeited.
This bullshit about KU not knowing is hilarious. Seriously? Here, I want to give you a shit ton of cash to go to this school but they don’t know anything about it at all. I just really, really, really like them and want to see them get the best players....
Every response to the thread on the KU board is, “yeah, but it says we are the victim. We knew nothing about it...”
Every response to the thread on the KU board is, “yeah, but it says we are the victim. We knew nothing about it...”
They also look forward to being victimized again by having Adidas golden boy Langford choose KU.
Coaches knew at several schools, you'd have to be naive to think that KU coaches didn't know. Proving it is a different matter though.
It looks like Marcus Garrett is the other, along with Silvio De Sousa. Garrett's already been recruited over, but De Sousa getting ruled ineligible would be a big blow to next year's team.
I don't think much will happen as far as vacating games, but there's no way those guys can play next season.
I don't think much will happen as far as vacating games, but there's no way those guys can play next season.
Why doesn't the FBI investigate congressional misdeeds instead of basketball games?
Garrett didn’t get cash....it is Preston and De Sousa I think. Preston’s mom ran an AAU team and his signing fits the timeline.
you're looking at it the wrong way. the goal of the investigation is to indict the shoe companies for defrauding universities. their view, except when a coach is proven to be involved, is that the universities are victims. this means that the ncaa more than likely probably won't really do much with the basic shoe company and aau shenanigans when the investigation wraps up.
![[roll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/roll.r191677.gif "roll [roll]")
Lol.....sorry, no. The FBI looks at Gatto as running a wire fraud and possible tax evasion scam.....which would be turned over to the IRS.
The NCAA looks at a player paid to go to a specific school. That means ineligible and forfeited games.
RC was banned for having a different opinion than a typical Rupp poster. Most fans of other teams get banned faster on Rupp than any other team fan board for not cheering the Wildcats. He won’t be able to comment.
I will say that Kansas won’t have any games forfeited. Sorry Schwaggy.
Word is it's Preston and DeSousa. Allegation also says KU was a victim...defrauded. So in English, that means KU had no involvement. Preston was held out when the car incident raised questions. That's called institutional control.
Makes sense that it's DeSousa. He was a Maryland target and that's the flagship Under Armour school. Seems this whole thing was about Adidas outbidding UA for certain players after UA started making inroads into the top recruits.
Yeah, KU was defrauded by Self and the athletic dept.
Not necessarily. The charges against U6 say the same thing even though an assistant supposedly knew and was on tape discussing it. It can be honest services fraud against the university as a whole if a member of the staff knew, but also a serious NCAA violation.
I am finding this thread entertaining. Is the popular opinion that this is NOT a widespread issue which has NOT been going on as long as there has been AAU basketball and handlers?
That inherently means that U6 had involvement. Arizona also had involvement through their assistant coach Book Richardson. They don't release incomplete allegations.
Absolutely false. Tarheel board banned posters for what they said about UNC on this board even though they didn't post on the Tarheel board.
I didn't read the whole thread so pardon. Question: If Gatto, Addidas et al only are being charged with paying the parents, is it an NCAA violation regarding the kids eligibility?
Like UL, if the players got paid, they are no longer amateur athletes. Regardless if Kansas knew, they were ineligible and would have to at least forfeit the games they played in.
Yes, unless they hide it well enough as something like an AAU team sponsorship.
Yep. UNC Board and Duke Board check your posting history before they approve your request to post.
An ineligible player is an ineligible player. The NCAA has the authority to punish Kansas no matter their involvement. If you accept an improper benefit from anyone to attend a sports program you are ineligible. The NCAA won't have to work hard on this one. The FBI is doing all the work for them. Would be wise for the NCAA to just keep quiet until the FBI is done.
JPScott was actually banned over there and so was I. Neither of us had posted on that site in ages. I had never even said a bad word over there at all.
The legal theory of the charges is that the University was defrauded of honest services of players, and in some cases coaches, by taking money or doing something else that was inconsistent with their obligations to the university.
So for criminal purposes the university is a victim, for NCAA purposes it may be complicit because of what the coaches did.
If Kansas knew, then that would be right. The FBI says that Kansas did not know. The NCAA does whatever they want. So who knows what they do. They've done nothing with Arizona, even though their assistant coach was indicted, yet they hammered Louisville. They haven't done anything regarding Bagley to Duke. Did Auburn or Alabama get any sanctions? How about USC?
UNC and Kentucky boards - both not very tolerant, okay. I read what RC posted. He was banned because he said Cal’s NCAA tournament record should include 0-1 for UMass and 0-1 for Memphis for the seasons that were vacated by the NCAA. Your board does not allow criticism of any type of your coach from fans of other schools.
But in this case the University, or its coaches, did not take money or do anything which is inconsistent with their obligations. The coaches at Louisville and Arizona did. I must be missing a connection you are trying to make?
No board should allow that. If you want to criticize Cal on KU board, okay. If you want to do it here, I hope you are banned. I don't go to KU board and rip on Self. If I did, I should be banned.
Na, heard RC was sent to San Quentin after hammering some chickens while shrooming.
