What is the time and procedure on UL's appeal

[Sawnee Cat]

I don't expect sympathy here. My point was that the "benefits" are things that most guys' crazy uncle gave them on their 16th birthday. I don't condone it, but I did have very similar things offered to me when I came of age. The righteous indignation is laughable.

Are you serious, "righteous indignation" do you actually believe the words you type? What do they teach you in Cardinal World? This is sad and if it represents the mindset of UL you need the death penalty to cool your heels for a few years. Your program is a disgrace.

 

[Sawnee Cat]

Your uncle tried to have an escort screw you at 16? What tf kind of family do you come from?

Cardinal fans just doing their thing. The lack of morals and ethics is not only pervasive in the UL administration and team's players, it also involves the fans. What a joke of an institution.

 

[Shawn (uk7spd)]

Even though the NCAA and everyone else knows which games that UL played ineligible players in and how many games,Final Fours,and a Championship should be vacated,I wouldn't trust those slimeballs to be honest in making an accurate,true list ever.They are stupid enough to leave off games in the tourney and such,forget about players that were violaters,etc

I get the skepticism, but Louisville has already admitted on several occasions that the banners would come down if the NCAA ruled that ineligibility and vacation of games was the punishment. In their briefing all along, Louisville had to address that potential punishment and argue against it. Then again at the recent press conference they admitted that the ruling would cause the banner to come down. Finally, their appeal is literally focused on arguing that it is unfair to vacate the games and title, so they wouldn't be arguing that on appeal if they weren't already admitting that the games and title would be vacated under the NCAA's ruling.

 

[KeepingItReal74]

I get the skepticism, but Louisville has already admitted on several occasions that the banners would come down if the NCAA ruled that ineligibility and vacation of games was the punishment. In their briefing all along, Louisville had to address that potential punishment and argue against it. Then again at the recent press conference they admitted that the ruling would cause the banner to come down. Finally, their appeal is literally focused on arguing that it is unfair to vacate the games and title, so they wouldn't be arguing that on appeal if they weren't already admitting that the games and title would be vacated under the NCAA's ruling.

If the 'ho got thru the dorm gate, you must vacate!

 

[KeepingItReal74]

Btw, a prominent lawyer always told me the law comes down to intent. Sure they are claiming no real benefits from use of ho's with underage sex involved, but geez, there was intent.

 

[lkc1234]

I don't expect sympathy here. My point was that the "benefits" are things that most guys' crazy uncle gave them on their 16th birthday. I don't condone it, but I did have very similar things offered to me when I came of age. The righteous indignation is laughable.

Are you serious. How would you feel if you sent your 16 year old son to Louisville on a recruiting visit and he lost his virginity to a prostitute? What if it was your 16 year old daughter? Would you feel the same. You must be proud of yourself. You are a fan of a school that has an Athletic Director that has been sued for sexual harassment and lost. You have a basketball coach committing adultery and aborting a child and a football coach that hired an administrative assistant so he could have an affair with her. Your athletic director rehired the football coach after he was fired at Arkansas for his escapades and did nothing to Pitino but extend his contract. You had a basketball coach running a brothel for four years to help to recruit basketball players. Plus you have the foundation providing the athletic director, his son and the President large bonus amounts. What a cesspool. That school has no morals. I am sure you are proud to be a fan.

 

[the stat man]

Are you serious. How would you feel if you sent your 16 year old son to Louisville on a recruiting visit and he lost his virginity to a prostitute? What if it was your 16 year old daughter? Would you feel the same. You must be proud of yourself. You are a fan of a school that has an Athletic Director that has been sued for sexual harassment and lost. You have a basketball coach committing adultery and aborting a child and a football coach that hired an administrative assistant so he could have an affair with her. Your athletic director rehired the football coach after he was fired at Arkansas for his escapades and did nothing to Pitino but extend his contract. You had a basketball coach running a brothel for four years to help to recruit basketball players. Plus you have the foundation providing the athletic director, his son and the President large bonus amounts. What a cesspool. That school has no morals. I am sure you are proud to be a fan.

16 is a long time to keep your virginity if your a UofSmell fan actually lol !! I totally agree with the rest of your post as well, but you know that's just UofSmell being UofSmell !! They are who we think they are !

 

[BigBlueDiehard]

One caveat to think about, normally in these issues, players are not in the middle of their playing careers. Most player issues, academic or otherwise, are brought to light before they play games. The regaining of eligibility is usually dependent on some "correcting of the wrong", ie paying money back and such.The correcting of the wrong has either taken place, or a plan is set forth for doing this before the player actually regains his/her eligibility. So long story short, if this happened during the season, they would regain eligibility upon completion of "correcting the wrong", which is something they cannot proactively do.

John Wall had issues due to some monetary benefit (as others have), and his regaining of his eligibility was contingent on sitting out 2 games and repaying the monetary value. Repaying the value corrected the wrong, and sitting out was the punishment. He corrected the wrong before he played games, and then did his "time". Without repaying the value, he is sitting longer than 2 games. In fact, he is probably sitting until he repays it, or has a plan to do so (as was the case with the Kansas guard).

So for the UL players, correcting the wrong today would allow them to become eligible (though most would be ineligible now for other reasons) now, but would not make them retroactively eligible.

Marcus Camby is an example of an athlete who did correct his wrong and paid the money back after the fact, but he had no eligibility left so that didn't matter in the eyes of the NCAA - they still took the Final Four banner from UMass. The results here will not be any different... there's just no way to make restitution and regain eligibility 4 years after their eligibility had expired (and it doesn't appear that Smith, Behanan, or Harrell plan to make restitution for the prostitution anyway).

 

[FrankUnderwood]

haha, steelers shuts down "The Banner is Gone" thread. thin skinned bunch.


End thread/

This has turned into a thread attracting too much passive aggressive trolling...based on posts that are no longer showing, FTR.
Steelers2012, Wednesday at 1:50 PM

Hahaha - he mad

 

[morgousky]

Really,I'm considered a Senior Citizen,been with plenty of women in my lifetime,but never once paid for a prostitute for me or any family member.Maybe that explains the typical UL Fans mentality,STD's can cause both physical and mental damage.

Full disclosure.

My cousins husband owns condo chains in Florida and the gulf of Alabama. When I turned 18, he game me and some friends a few weeks to stay in orange beach. One of my buddies ordered an escort. We laughed, "we don't have to pay for it yada yada"........

So we left to go to a place called the hangout, nothing but dads and their 15 year olds. One of my friends was at the Coca Cola bar talking baseball with some little dude. I had enough.

So we head back to the condo and holy hell, a college student escort was chilling there in panties with a tube top on......

I blame the rest of the night on teenage testosterone and a blue sac.

Now, my uncle and baseball coach didn't provide it, and the check wasn't cleared by my university.

She was so beautiful there was no way. I went second though, which was better than 4th.

 

[FrankUnderwood]

Full disclosure.

My cousins husband owns condo chains in Florida and the gulf of Alabama. When I turned 18, he game me and some friends a few weeks to stay in orange beach. One of my buddies ordered an escort. We laughed, "we don't have to pay for it yada yada"........

So we left to go to a place called the hangout, nothing but dads and their 15 year olds. One of my friends was at the Coca Cola bar talking baseball with some little dude. I had enough.

So we head back to the condo and holy hell, a college student escort was chilling there in panties with a tube top on......

I blame the rest of the night on teenage testosterone and a blue sac.

Now, my uncle and baseball coach didn't provide it, and the check wasn't cleared by my university.

She was so beautiful there was no way. I went second though, which was better than 4th.

Man, lucky- 18 and a few weeks on the beach in a nice condo?? That sounds hella fun (honestly )


Butttttt.... Did she allow Cleveland steamers ? Felching ?
How sloppy were the seconds ? lol

 

[gossie21]

Marcus Camby is an example of an athlete who did correct his wrong and paid the money back after the fact, but he had no eligibility left so that didn't matter in the eyes of the NCAA - they still took the Final Four banner from UMass. The results here will not be any different... there's just no way to make restitution and regain eligibility 4 years after their eligibility had expired (and it doesn't appear that Smith, Behanan, or Harrell plan to make restitution for the prostitution anyway).

The Marcus Camby case is an excellent comparison. With Camby you had one player going rogue and taking benefits that in no way benefited anyone other than himself (he received clothes, rental cars, hookers, and sometimes cash), and that occurred off campus, and sometimes far away from any conceivable oversight by the university.

Compare that with Andre McGee's parties. They were planned during recruiting visits so they clearly were an effort to help with recruiting and were aimed at recruits and sometimes family members. I think this is the biggest concern for the NCAA. The fact that this was done in such an apparent way to help with recruiting. Then you also consider that these parties occurred in the dorms, so the strippers/hookers had to pass through security, or bypass security (except that the music was so loud that everyone in the dorms knew what was going on) so McGee had help keeping this a secret. The security cameras being turned off I'm sure raised some eyebrows with the COI. You also had about 6 players on the roster that were named as receiving a benefit, and from the sounds of it at least 2 recruits that went elsewhere confirming they were offered benefits. This is just so far beyond and above what happened with Camby in terms of impermissible benefits and competitive advantage. UofL got of lucky that they weren't banned from future tournaments.

 

[catlanta33]

The main point of the UL appeal is the implied "value" of the impermissible benefits. Ms. Powells "madam" logbook implies around $5600 worth of "parties", and the book is handwritten, which is why there has been no grand jury indictment in a criminal court-there is essentially no evidence. Thus the focus of the appeal will be that millions in penalties are being assigned over essentially worthless benefits.

Kinda makes you wonder why UL funded prostitutes for no reason whatsoever other than to simply buy hookers.

Or, much like the UNC fan base, you guys put way too much stock into what your mouth-breathing fanboys tell you to think until you actually start believing it. All and all, this really couldn't be happening to a more deserving fan base. And remember, no matter how much you or any UL fan tries to downplay the hooker scandal, you will be reminded of it for the rest of your lives. Enjoy!

 

[catlanta33]

I don't expect sympathy here. My point was that the "benefits" are things that most guys' crazy uncle gave them on their 16th birthday. I don't condone it, but I did have very similar things offered to me when I came of age. The righteous indignation is laughable.

It's called you reap what you sow. Everything you and your UL buddies were saying about corruption and cheating for UK was true for your program. It burns your ass up that you guys can no longer deflect your way out of this and will have to hear about this for the rest of your lives. I don't even think that's hit home with most UL fans yet. You will literally be reminded every time you try to deflect or attempt to make your indiscretions about some other program that UL is the first and only thus far to have to fight for a banner because they hired hookers.

But yeah, you should keep trying to assume this just happens everywhere because you guys got caught.

As I said, you reap what you sow. Couldn't happen to a more deserving fan base.

 

[ColonelCat]

Hookerville.Where old banners go and die.....A new name for the Cheats...

 

[awf]

The NCAA has twice stated that the monetary value does not matter in this case. I see no way the appeal will change that.

Exactly........The NCAA doesn't put any stock into The Vile's argument that they were cheap whores.

 

[awf]

The main point of the UL appeal is the implied "value" of the impermissible benefits. Ms. Powells "madam" logbook implies around $5600 worth of "parties", and the book is handwritten, which is why there has been no grand jury indictment in a criminal court-there is essentially no evidence. Thus the focus of the appeal will be that millions in penalties are being assigned over essentially worthless benefits.

How many times have you had to repeat this to yourself to be able to believe it? There was evidence. Maybe not enough to indict Ms Powell and her cohorts over at UL. But there was enough evidence to collaborate her story for the NCAA to jerk that banner down from the ceiling and to please return that nice crystal trophy....PRONTO!

 

[catlanta33]

Exactly........The NCAA doesn't put any stock into The Vile's argument that they were cheap whores.

No one is going to give them the benefit of the doubt on that play. Since this has exploded on them, it's been deflection to UK's past, claiming every program hires whores for recruits and of course, they were cheap whores and they didn't gain anything from them.

Not many from the UL faithful are willing to admit it's a giant black eye for their program and it was 100% self-inflicted.

Not long ago, I talked to a UL fan and his brother who is a UK fan. They mentioned about a story years ago where they were hanging out with one of Pitino's guys during his UK days. I don't remember the person's name but it's irrelevant. They told me he had two phones, one for personal and the other was if Rick called he answered. That UL fan, unlike most others, wasn't buying that Pitino didn't know. We all know that he knew.

Having said that, I think part of why the NCAA is going in so hard and deep is because there's no smoking gun proving Pitino knew. As a result, they're burning down his house around him.

 

[Sawnee Cat]

Unfortunately UL is a state institution and the only people who can correct this sewer in Jefferson County are the politicians. I imagine some are working on that right now.

 

[KeepingItReal74]

Unfortunately UL is a state institution and the only people who can correct this sewer in Jefferson County are the politicians. I imagine some are working on that right now.

Scum helping to fix scum. Wow!

 

[crestcat]

I get the skepticism, but Louisville has already admitted on several occasions that the banners would come down if the NCAA ruled that ineligibility and vacation of games was the punishment. In their briefing all along, Louisville had to address that potential punishment and argue against it. Then again at the recent press conference they admitted that the ruling would cause the banner to come down. Finally, their appeal is literally focused on arguing that it is unfair to vacate the games and title, so they wouldn't be arguing that on appeal if they weren't already admitting that the games and title would be vacated under the NCAA's ruling.

They can call it penalty, punishment or whatever, ineligible player = forfeited games. IMO the punishment is the scholarships, probation and suspension, they are actually getting off light

 

[gossie21]

NCAA Bylaw 32.10 covers the appeals procedure (p. 396 of the manual)

Then there is a handy flow chart in Figure 32-2..... which confirms Crawford's timeline is correct. I'll provide the timelines and actual dates below (all timeframes start running from the day the penalties were announce, which was June 15th). This is assuming neither side requests or is granted an extension of time.

Notice to Appeal ... not later than 15 days - June 30th
Response in support of Appeal ... 30 days - July 30th
NCAA Response to UofL .... 30 days - August 29th
UofL Rebuttal .... 14 days - September 13th
NCAA response to rebuttal ..... 10 days - September 23rd
Appeals Committee reviews the appeal and either rules or schedules a hearing. There is no time frame for the hearing, or a ruling. Just guessing*, but it could take 60 days to schedule the hearing, then 60 days to announce the final decision. So we could be looking at mid-January before the appeal is resolved.

I did a word search on the manual, and could find no provision allowing for a stay pending appeal. So if the banner is coming down, they will have to pull it down at least until the appeal is over


*In the original case the COI's final response was submitted in March, then the hearing was held on April 20th, after which they stated it could take 60 days for a written decision, then the penalties were announced on June 15th.

We should be seeing the NCAAs response soon. Just as soon as UofL can redact all the private info and all the laughing gifs.

 

[ColonelCat]

Easy to say that now, but there was no solid precedent in place. The NCAA could have just as easily gone the other way on the question of retroactive ineligibility, because we know the NCAA is somewhat arbitrary. Yes, they cited the Memphis case, but that was academic ineligibility. They also cited Syracuse, but that was also somewhat apples and oranges. The bottom line is that UofL has a legitimate argument, and one they will undoubtedly make on appeal, that even though this looks really bad, it just doesn't make sense to punish to this extent for a few players that became "ineligible" for extra benefits. It is a parade of horribles argument. The NCAA ruling, to the extent it stands, is basically setting a precedent that any extra benefit makes a player retroactively ineligible forever if caught after the games have been played, which is pretty damn harsh. That means if a player got $100 gift card from a booster in his sophomore year, even though he could have paid that back and sat some games if it was caught during his playing time, that now means that all games he ever played in are vacated.

The fact that the NCAA felt the need to justify the punishment in this case on grounds that the violations were unique and "repugnant" just shows that this was always about the "type" of violations rather than the "value" of violations, which is why I think if UofL would have been contrite from the outset and not attempted to stand firm on the "these sex parties weren't worth much" argument, they may have been able to convince the NCAA to not go down the "everyone is forever ineligible" road.

>question for you or anyone else....If you were on a jury and this was a criminal trial, what evidence would you say is 'overstated'? Value? the acts? The intent? The results? I would say none of the above. They are guilty of trying to influence a recruit's decisions by using a monetary valued product-in this case women. Just b/c several of the existing players participated doesn't change the "impermissible benefits" ruling to me.. Judgement day is coming soon to the guilty parties..RP IMO is getting off light, just b/c he says "he had no knowledge" of these parties and activities--he lies..

 

[JoeBeeHall]

I love that UL is sticking to their guns on the dollar amount and saying its a "worthless benefit." Even after the NCAA said the dollar amount had nothing to do with it.

If it is a worthless benefit why do the cheaters have to repay millions ?

 

[FrankUnderwood]

@Steelers2012 ??

 

[Wildcat-in-STL]

Are you serious. How would you feel if you sent your 16 year old son to Louisville on a recruiting visit and he lost his virginity to a prostitute? What if it was your 16 year old daughter? Would you feel the same. You must be proud of yourself. You are a fan of a school that has an Athletic Director that has been sued for sexual harassment and lost. You have a basketball coach committing adultery and aborting a child and a football coach that hired an administrative assistant so he could have an affair with her. Your athletic director rehired the football coach after he was fired at Arkansas for his escapades and did nothing to Pitino but extend his contract. You had a basketball coach running a brothel for four years to help to recruit basketball players. Plus you have the foundation providing the athletic director, his son and the President large bonus amounts. What a cesspool. That school has no morals. I am sure you are proud to be a fan.

He's a UL fan... so it doesnt compute as a bad thing. .....and the recruits didnt grow up UL fans so the better question is how would he feel if he sent his son on an official visit to UCLA and that happened. a school he wouldnt feel the need to automatically defend out of fandom.

 

[JC CATS]

I don't expect sympathy here. My point was that the "benefits" are things that most guys' crazy uncle gave them on their 16th birthday. I don't condone it, but I did have very similar things offered to me when I came of age. The righteous indignation is laughable.

I have some crazy uncles, but hell, ain't none of them that crazy!

 

[mrdavisanddd]

I don't expect sympathy here. My point was that the "benefits" are things that most guys' crazy uncle gave them on their 16th birthday. I don't condone it, but I did have very similar things offered to me when I came of age. The righteous indignation is laughable.

Is your uncle named Rick by any chance ?

 

[420grover]

Is your uncle named Rick by any chance ?

Lives in Gatlinburg?

 

[Poetax]

The main point of the UL appeal is the implied "value" of the impermissible benefits. Ms. Powells "madam" logbook implies around $5600 worth of "parties", and the book is handwritten, which is why there has been no grand jury indictment in a criminal court-there is essentially no evidence. Thus the focus of the appeal will be that millions in penalties are being assigned over essentially worthless benefits.

I hope you are not a Kentuckian, I hate to think that anyone would been that scum stupid.

 

[Fox2monk]

Are you serious. How would you feel if you sent your 16 year old son to Louisville on a recruiting visit and he lost his virginity to a prostitute? What if it was your 16 year old daughter? Would you feel the same. You must be proud of yourself. You are a fan of a school that has an Athletic Director that has been sued for sexual harassment and lost. You have a basketball coach committing adultery and aborting a child and a football coach that hired an administrative assistant so he could have an affair with her. Your athletic director rehired the football coach after he was fired at Arkansas for his escapades and did nothing to Pitino but extend his contract. You had a basketball coach running a brothel for four years to help to recruit basketball players. Plus you have the foundation providing the athletic director, his son and the President large bonus amounts. What a cesspool. That school has no morals. I am sure you are proud to be a fan.

I sure the hell wouldn't try to get my 16 year old daughter laid because shes of age.