Skal eligible

[W2R]

My biggest problem is this. Since first stated easterwood has progressive changed his story

Second, when skal was thought to be a memohis lean, not a peep from easterwood on any of this. Easterwood talked as if Skal was the end all be all. But when it was clear he was going elsewhere he started stirring the pot

 

[TNCatfanforever]

I think we have reason to worry.

 

[BobbyG_tickle_swerv]

I see a lot of posters arguing that the Cam Newton case all but puts Skal in the clear (assuming no money exchanged hands). However, weren't the rules modified after the Cam Newton incident?

 

[Hoskins91]

Absolutely not. Even if he did ask, and someone gave him money, it still wouldn't matter according to the Cam Newton case. If the NCAA is consistent, this will be no issue whatsoever.

They changed the rule, I'm pretty sure. Now it is a violation even if you didn't actually receive anything.

 

[Teachable Moe]

I'm of the opinion that the NCAA will just dick around until sometime in December. So, no Skal until 2nd semester.

 

[ClockCalamity]

Tom Leach was talking with Gary Parrish but I didn't hear what he had to say about Skal? Did anyone hear the conversation? If so, please post. Thanks.

In a nutshell, he said that UK/Kentucky fans should be concerned that this isn't resolved this close to the season starting and we should expect that he will miss games this year, at the very least.

 

[U Go UK]

I think we have reason to worry.

I do too.

 

[W2R]

So caliparis biggest hater Jeff caulkins just was in his show and surprisingly said " why do we want this to happen to Skal". Is it because of Cal, of course it is. It's sour grapes . Nobody was saying anything when thought he was going to Memphis " he also said whatever easterwood is saying is not enough to make Skal ineligible and at the end of the day he knows easterwood is not dumb enough to actually partake in nothing illegal because it would hurt his reputation with AAU and such. Caulkins said its all sour grapes even on his part. Then some punk he had in his show brought up reach your dreams academy and how they don't even have a website anymore. Saying people are saying this is now going to be focal point of investigation because how RYD was made out of thin air and how it was funded.

 

[MWes11]

Cal on Skal: "We'll see on the first game." Wonders why it became such a firestorm.

 

[LineSkiCat14]

No one has mentioned yet, that this could all just be NCAA inquiring one last time, to make sure everything checks out, before they stamp their approval. Sounds like they are making advancements to get some answers, and as far as we know, everything checks out. As of right now, the handler never received money and neither did Skal.

As much as I distrust the NCAA, they could very well be wrapping this all up.

 

[W2R]

No one has mentioned yet, that this could all just be NCAA inquiring one last time, to make sure everything checks out, before they stamp their approval. Sounds like they are making advancements to get some answers, and as far as we know, everything checks out. As of right now, the handler never received money and neither did Skal.

As much as I distrust the NCAA, they could very well be wrapping this all up.

This could absolutely be it. The last thing I think ncaa wants to seem like they are dragging their feet going into the season on the #1 recruit. Look how quick they made a decision on Cam and Johnny football. They decided in a week. They didn't want the bad pub

 

[WitnessGreatness]

Cal said it happens to all of his top players, doesn't see why it has become such a firestrom in the media and expects Skal to play.

 

[BobbyG_tickle_swerv]

I've never read so much commentary about whether or not a person would be found guilty in which no one has yet identified an offense to be guilty of. Something must have happened, but no one can say what it was.

Even if Hamilton were shopping Skal around, he -- never mind Skal -- didn't violate any rules unless someone gave him money for some purpose, or he tried to extort money somehow.

The two objectives Hamilton allegedly had were to secure money for steering Skal to a college or other team or for a "shoe deal."

Is it really plausible that some team paid Hamilton to steer Skal to him and we've heard no suggestion of that from an NCAA leak, or from an investigative journalist determined to make a name by bringing down Skal or Kentucky? Same with the 'shoe deal' angle. Would nothing solid whatsoever have emerged about that?

Whatever has been said so far, I'm convinced the most logical outcome is that if we haven't even heard anyone outline an actual offense at this point -- a place from which money flowed to Hamilton and then Skal -- that's because the NCAA hasn't come up with an actual offense. The very basic questions asked of the AAU coach just a week ago seem to confirm that. If the NCAA had uncovered some improper exchange of money, would they still be asking the only person known to have ever made the allegation that money was sought whether that had even happened? They would KNOW it had happened, or at least have evidence suggesting it happened.

Thanks to Cecil, anyone who uses/tries to use an athlete for their own financial gain is now considered an agent. Hence, Hamilton, IF he did indeed tried to get money for himself off of Skal, is an agent in the eyes of the NCAA. Now, of course any random person could ask for money in exchange for an athlete's services, and I don't see how the NCAA could hold this against a player. But, seeing how Hamilton is Skal's "guardian" I can see how some are starting to question if he'll be able to play at UK or if he'll get his millions one year early.

 

[corypedia]

What concerns me is the NCAA clearing him, a la Rose, then finding out later there was reason to rule him inelegible and then we potentially forfeit a final four or even a title. I just hope Cal and Sandy has this covered.

This x1000. I don't think they'd strip a title, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if we didn't win it all that they find a way to vacate something. Funny how the NCAA talks out of both sides of their mouth on these issues.

 

[anon_9qtxg60vqzy0y]

 

[W2R]

So Parrish said yesterday on radio that NCAA got copies of emails from Memphis that pastner sent out last year to all staff. It was an email stating that in no way are you to engage with Hamilton and say we can help in any way with his foundation and reach your dreams foundation. We can't steer him in any direction, help with fundraisers, or be a part of it. Parrish went on to say that every lead recruiter he talked to that involved Skal backed his assumptions that Hamilton wanted money for his foundation.

At the end of the day none of this was ever brought up when Memphis thought Skal was a lock and they were going to have this team built with Skal and Lawson brothers. It's just pissy Memphis fans trying to ruin a great kids opportunity because it's UK and Calipari. If he would have went to Memphis or anywhere else none of this would be spoken of

 

[jarms24]

Thanks to Cecil, anyone who uses/tries to use an athlete for their own financial gain is now considered an agent. Hence, Hamilton, IF he did indeed tried to get money for himself off of Skal, is an agent in the eyes of the NCAA. Now, of course any random person could ask for money in exchange for an athlete's services, and I don't see how the NCAA could hold this against a player. But, seeing how Hamilton is Skal's "guardian" I can see how some are starting to question if he'll be able to play at UK or if he'll get his millions one year early.

What about Fats Thomas? Was he an agent? How many games did UNC vacate for playing PJ Hairston? What about Leslie McDonald? GTFOH man.

 

[BobbyG_tickle_swerv]

What about Fats Thomas? Was he an agent? How many games did UNC vacate for playing PJ Hairston? What about Leslie McDonald? GTFOH man.

None. Because they didn't risk playing them after the NCAA said there might be some improprieties. UNC waited to get the official NCAA ruling before choosing to let them play as they didn't want to have to vacate games later on. In McDonald's case it was several games, Hairston wasn't allowed to play again in college.

What does this have to do with Skal?

 

[Clive Gollings]

No, he was just laughing at UNC since you're here.

BTW. it's fitting you show back up in October being you are a pumpkin eater.

 

[ulismyman]

Yes i heard Parrish on Leach today. HE said the NCAA rarely makes a player permaently inelgible...the reason Kanter was is thst NCAa viewed him as a pro. Parrish said the reason this may drag out longer is because NCAA is still asking questions. As long as the questions linger so will the ruling. Bottom line...Parrish believes he will play but when that happens he isn,t sure yet.

 

[jarms24]

None. Because they didn't risk playing them after the NCAA said there might be some improprieties. UNC waited to get the official NCAA ruling before choosing to let them play as they didn't want to have to vacate games later on. In McDonald's case it was several games, Hairston wasn't allowed to play again in college.

What does this have to do with Skal?

What about the games they played in prior to sitting? Don't say they didn't, because I remember it well. Leslie wore the mouthgaurds in games.

 

[BobbyG_tickle_swerv]

Your answer boils down to IF -- IF he did this, or IF he did that. My point was precisely that no one had taken it beyond IF and that, after all these months, is a strong indication that there is nothing to take further. Some vague claim by a disgruntled AAU coach that he was asked how the guardian could make money off Skal doesn't qualify as an allegation.

Yes, it is an "IF" to me. However, it doesn't have to be an "IF he got money", it (once again thanks to Cecil) can simply be an "IF he asked for money". The latter makes him an agent and thus ties Skal to an agent. This is why the NCAA is asking these questions and why so many in the media have mentioned the conversations. That is what I pointed out in your last comment. You said he had to get money for it to be a violation, and that is simply not true.

 

[BobbyG_tickle_swerv]

What about the games they played in prior to sitting? Don't say they didn't, because I remember it well. Leslie wore the mouthgaurds in games.

From what I remember, UNC was made aware of possible impermissible benefits. UNC/NCAA investigated. While the investigation was taking place they held them both out. They didn't want to press their luck, I guess. The NCAA determined that McDonald could return after several games and that Hairston would not be allowed to play. Neither was ruled ineligible during any games, so not sure what you expect them to do.

 

[jarms24]

From what I remember, UNC was made aware of possible impermissible benefits. UNC/NCAA investigated. While the investigation was taking place they held them both out. They didn't want to press their luck, I guess. The NCAA determined that McDonald could return after several games and that Hairston would not be allowed to play. Neither was ruled ineligible during any games, so not sure what you expect them to do.

Just stop. I was only pointing out the typical UNC hypocrisy. You seem awfully worried about UK/Skal while your program is currently sitting on death row. I'm going to dedicate a thread to you when the hammer drops.

 

[brianpoe]

Yes, Craft was the guy. However, are you saying he would have been ruled ineligible if he'd played for the Vols? Also, was he alleged to have been given impermissible benefits? Pearl/UT basketball was charge with several impermissible contact violations (texts, calls, bbq, etc.) and Pearl really dug himself into a hole when he denied knowing Craft was at his house for a bbq (even after being shown a picture of Craft at his house during the bbq), but I've yet to read that anyone was alleged to have given Craft any impermissible benefits, nor have I read that Craft was given any impermissible benefits. If so, then this is not a valid comparison: in one case we're talking about ruling players at one school ineligible because of accepting impermissible benefits from someone associated with their school but not others because they didn't attend said school, in the other we're not even talking about a player getting impermissible benefits.

I think a better comparison would be Myron Piggie and the players he paid in high school. Barring technicalities, those players would've/were all been ruled ineligible for taking cash. Piggie had no affiliation with the schools those players went, and they went to different universities. If, as you say, it would only matter that the giver of the benefits was associated to the school that the player attended then none of the players would have anything to worry about. If, as you say, it's possible to remain eligible after accepting benefits which would be impermissible but are not solely because they came from someone not associated to your school then we'd see a lot more cases of players getting money from agents and remaining eligible.

No, I'm pretty sure that it doesn't matter where to the gifts come from, it only matters in value etc. Now, having boosters/people associated with your school giving them out makes the penalties for the school much more severe. A player getting gifts from an agent punishes the player (if the school played him, then it will also cost them games), a player getting gifts from boosters punishes the player AND the school. In both cases though, if a player accepts impermissible gifts then they're done (ignoring technicalities).

Yes, it is an "IF" to me. However, it doesn't have to be an "IF he got money", it (once again thanks to Cecil) can simply be an "IF he asked for money". The latter makes him an agent and thus ties Skal to an agent. This is why the NCAA is asking these questions and why so many in the media have mentioned the conversations. That is what I pointed out in your last comment. You said he had to get money for it to be a violation, and that is simply not true.

From what I remember, UNC was made aware of possible impermissible benefits. UNC/NCAA investigated. While the investigation was taking place they held them both out. They didn't want to press their luck, I guess. The NCAA determined that McDonald could return after several games and that Hairston would not be allowed to play. Neither was ruled ineligible during any games, so not sure what you expect them to do.

Bobby, I for one appreciate your input.

On topics such as Cam Newton and Louisville your insight is more credible than most here.


Accepting, protecting, and justifying the biggest cheats in NCAA history for the last few years sets you apart from those of us on the outside of scandalous institutions mocking not only athletic rules and regulations but those of higher education as well.

Please continue to enlighten us with your unscrupulous opinions and insight.

 

[Joneslab]

Yes, it is an "IF" to me. However, it doesn't have to be an "IF he got money", it (once again thanks to Cecil) can simply be an "IF he asked for money". The latter makes him an agent and thus ties Skal to an agent.

I don't know what the bylaws look like, but the NCAA has in the past not really conducted its business with this being the case.

A lot of these guys ask for things. Family members, AAU coaches, hangers-on. That's been documented. What the NCAA has done in the past has been to track down the money trail; if they feel like simply asking is impermissible, then I've certainly never heard of anybody being ruled ineligible for it.

Renardo Sidney is a good case study on this. The NCAA searched for months, even after the Sidneys lawyered up, in an attempt to find out exactly how much was gifted.

 

[BobbyG_tickle_swerv]

I don't know what the bylaws look like, but the NCAA has in the past not really conducted its business with this being the case.

A lot of these guys ask for things. Family members, AAU coaches, hangers-on. That's been documented. What the NCAA has done in the past has been to track down the money trail; if they feel like simply asking is impermissible, then I've certainly never heard of anybody being ruled ineligible for it.

Renardo Sidney is a good case study on this. The NCAA searched for months, even after the Sidneys lawyered up, in an attempt to find out exactly how much was gifted.

Yeah, who really knows with the NCAA. The bylaws were modified in 2013, mostly because of the Newton case. So, IF Hamilton is shown to have asked for benefits then the NCAA technically can label him as an agent, and yada yada yada and so on. Now, will the NCAA do this? Who knows, but they can (once again if they can show he indeed asked for benefits based off of Skal) according to the current bylaws.

 

[EvilMD]

According to yahoo sources. Tyler Thompson just tweeted it.

 

[UK Cats1]

Just heard it on Bleacher report also

 

[Smashcat]

According to yahoo sources. Tyler Thompson just tweeted it.

Never doubted it. All based on lies from a shady fellow in Memphis.

 

[EvilMD]

YES! YES! YES!

 

[anon_9qtxg60vqzy0y]

 

[preacherfan]

YES! YES! YES!

 

[pappy52]

with skal no eligible and the ul fiasco.....this is truly a good time to be a cat.

 

[reddickulis81]

Yesssssssss!

 

[Catmyers]

NCAA has ways of coming back at end of season and saying "He was not eligible " lol Derrick Rose knows this to be true lol GREAT NEWS!!!!!

 

[FlCATFan]

I thought that would be the end result but very glad to get confirmation.

 

[buckkiller]

Sweet deal! We are the best team in nation for sure no doubt now!

 

[kyjeff1]

Who's going to break this news to Boston?
Just kidding Boston.

 

[BostonCat2001]

its on now.