Kansas men's basketball charged with multiple Level 1 allegations, including lack of institutional c

[isufbcurt]

What's a miss? The ncaa is actively attempting this tactic in their efforts to fit punishment of school's involvement with shoe companies into their existing process. It is their best shot at their futile goal of removing shoe company influencing. Have you not been reading the details of what's going on?

Shoe/Apparel companies giving benefits to athletes has nothing to do with those companies being "Boosters" of the school. Those companies giving benefits to the athlete creates an "endorsement" for those products which is against NCAA rules.

But please keep contorting things because you aren't quite twisted into a pretzel yet.

Btw, there is nothing wrong with admitting your school did something wrong, it doesn't make you less of a fan.

 

[randomfan44]

Shoe/Apparel companies giving benefits to athletes has nothing to do with those companies being "Boosters" of the school. Those companies giving benefits to the athlete creates an "endorsement" for those products which is against NCAA rules.

But please keep contorting things because you aren't quite twisted into a pretzel yet.

Btw, there is nothing wrong with admitting your school did something wrong, it doesn't make you less of a fan.

Jeez, man. Do a google search, read an article, something. The ncaa views anyone who steers a recruit to a particular school as a booster of that school and formally REQUIRED Kansas to name Adidas as a booster of the program in the DeSousa case before they would pass on their final ruling. It was clearly done for this reason. This isnt rocket science.

 

[Halincandenza]

I agree with Bilas that this along with other cases could end up in Federal court.

 

[isufbcurt]

Jeez, man. Do a google search, read an article, something. The ncaa views anyone who steers a recruit to a particular school as a booster of that school and formally REQUIRED Kansas to name Adidas as a booster of the program in the DeSousa case before they would pass on their final ruling. It was clearly done for this reason. This isnt rocket science.

I'll do you one better - I'll give you first hand knowledge. When I went to ISU to play football, just by common sense and having a clue, I knew I wasn't allowed to get compensation from a booster, a apparel company, etc. It's not the fing hard and like I said it's common sense.

 

[Halincandenza]

Shoe/Apparel companies giving benefits to athletes has nothing to do with those companies being "Boosters" of the school. Those companies giving benefits to the athlete creates an "endorsement" for those products which is against NCAA rules.

But please keep contorting things because you aren't quite twisted into a pretzel yet.

Btw, there is nothing wrong with admitting your school did something wrong, it doesn't make you less of a fan.

Actually it has a ton to do with being labeled as a booster.

 

[Rabbuk]

If the money comes in a shoebox and you're not paying taxes on it that's usually a good clue something isn't on the up and up

 

[Mr Janny]

Jeez, man. Do a google search, read an article, something. The ncaa views anyone who steers a recruit to a particular school as a booster of that school and formally REQUIRED Kansas to name Adidas as a booster of the program in the DeSousa case before they would pass on their final ruling. It was clearly done for this reason. This isnt rocket science.

Here's something else that isn't rocket science:
Gassnola-
In my mind it’s KU bill self. Everyone else fall into line , to f---ing bad , that’s what’s right for adidas Basketball

And I know Iam RIGHT. The more you win, have lottery pics. And you happy

That’s how it should work in my mind

Bill Self: That’s how ur works. At unc and Duke

Gassnola, 3:14 p.m.: Kentucky as well

Gassnola, 3:14 p.m.: I promise you. I got this , I have never let you down Except ( Dyondre) lol. We will get it right


There's a significant difference between that and a standard shoe deal with a school. We all know it. The ncaa's definition of a booster includes “representatives of the institution's athletic interests". Pretty clear that Gassnola was acting in that capacity. You can try to hide behind semantics, but your boy 100% broke the rules.

 

[randomfan44]

I'll do you one better - I'll give you first hand knowledge. When I went to ISU to play football, just by common sense and having a clue, I knew I wasn't allowed to get compensation from a booster, a apparel company, etc. It's not the fing hard and like I said it's common sense.

How many boosters or shoe company reps offered you money only to see you decline it? Probably zero.

It's not hard to do the right thing when the wrong thing isnt an option.

 

[randomfan44]

Here's something else that isn't rocket science:
Gassnola-
In my mind it’s KU bill self. Everyone else fall into line , to f---ing bad , that’s what’s right for adidas Basketball

And I know Iam RIGHT. The more you win, have lottery pics. And you happy

That’s how it should work in my mind

Bill Self: That’s how ur works. At unc and Duke

Gassnola, 3:14 p.m.: Kentucky as well

Gassnola, 3:14 p.m.: I promise you. I got this , I have never let you down Except ( Dyondre) lol. We will get it right


There's a significant difference between that and a standard shoe deal with a school. We all know it. The ncaa's definition of a booster includes “representatives of the institution's athletic interests". Pretty clear that Gassnola was acting in that capacity. You can try to hide behind semantics, but your boy 100% broke the rules.

It's not against the rules to have a conversation with your shoe company rep. What statement in that text constitutes a violation? You are ASSuming (as is the ncaa) that the next step after that conversation was for the Adidas rwp to pay a player but that text exchange does not refer to anything that is specifically against the rules.

 

[Mr Janny]

It's not against the rules to have a conversation with your shoe company rep. What statement in that text constitutes a violation? You are ASSuming (as is the ncaa) that the next step after that conversation was for the Adidas rwp to pay a player but that text exchange does not refer to anything that is specifically against the rules.

Lol. There you go with semantics. What is the innocent reason for this conversation between an admitted bagman and the coach of a college basketball team? What perfectly reasonable explanation are we jumping right over in order to assume the worst?

 

[fsanford]

Kansas does not "have an FBI case built against them." They were mentioned during questioning of an FBI case against others. Understand the difference.

The FBI has built the NCAA's case understand that is what happening. Normally the NCAA does not have this kind of access.

They could never get Adidas to cooperate in an NCAA investigation since they don't have jurisdiction over them.

NCAA would never have come after KU without the FBI info.

The funny thing is KU plays the victim card in all of this and re-up's with the company that "victimized" them. Freaking hilarious. Cannot have it both ways. Scream that Adidas took advantage of us, and then sign big new contract with the abuser.

 

[randomfan44]

Lol. There you go with semantics. What is the innocent reason for this conversation between an admitted bagman and the coach of a college basketball team? What perfectly reasonable explanation are we jumping right over in order to assume the worst?

Following rules and laws is an exercise is semantics.

It's not a violation for the Adidas guy to talk to the recruit or to encourage him to pick an Adidas school. There is nothing in that exchange that says that a rule was violated or that Self was asking him to violate a rule. Nothing. You are simply assuming that it went from that exchange to a payment. Would that be a safe assumption to make? Sure but it is still an assumption.

The ncaa cannot punish someone because they assume they broke the rules. You have to have actual proof.

 

[Mr Janny]

Following rules and laws is an exercise is semantics.

It's not a violation for the Adidas guy to talk to the recruit or to encourage him to pick an Adidas school. There is nothing in that exchange that says that a rule was violated or that Self was asking him to violate a rule. Nothing. You are simply assuming that it went from that exchange to a payment. Would that be a safe assumption to make? Sure but it is still an assumption.

The ncaa cannot punish someone because they assume they broke the rules. You have to have actual proof.

You mean like the bagman admitting that he paid money to the player?

Additionally, the NCAA isn't held to the same standard as the law.

 

[khardbored]

I predict Self will be "allowed to resign" and it will be couched as "I'm sacrificing myself and taking away the controversy around me for the good of the school, and because of my love for Kansas."

He will go to the NBA or some other pro league for a while, then charges will come, then he will be banned from the NCAA for a couple years ... in other words, he'll jump ship before it sinks.

 

[randomfan44]

I predict Self will be "allowed to resign" and it will be couched as "I'm sacrificing myself and taking away the controversy around me for the good of the school, and because of my love for Kansas."

He will go to the NBA or some other pro league for a while, then charges will come, then he will be banned from the NCAA for a couple years ... in other words, he'll jump ship before it sinks.

And I predict that none of those things will happen. Did you read Bill Self's statement? He isnt sliding out quietly, he is going right after them. He flat out called the ncaa liars and drama queens.

 

[isu_ce]

Looks like nothing will happen this season or at all. ESPN had a good article on the timeline. Kansas has 90 days to respond to allegations. That puts us late December. The NCAA has another 60 days to respond back, and you know that they will use all that time. That's late February. Then another 45 days to schedule a hearing and suddenly the season is over. Self retires or resigns to spend more time with family. Kansas gets a new coach and cleans house. The NCAA says good enough and it's over, move along, nothing to see here.

 

[randomfan44]

Never go full tuco kids.

Sit back and think about the implications of what happens if the ncaa moves forward with the notion that shoe companies are boosters. The NCAA defines a booster as "a representative of an constitution's athletic interests". If they push to have these Adidas guys labeled as boosters (as they are clearly trying to do) then how does the ncaa handle regulation and enforcement of that?

Virtually every recruit is playing for an AAU team sponsored by either Nike, Adidas or UnderArmour. Can those circuits even exist if the companies are formally labeled as boosters? Will schools have to cancel their apparel contracts if the goal is to remove shoe company influence over recruits and programs?

Do you not see what looks over the horizon if the ncaa pursues that?

 

[fsanford]

And I predict that none of those things will happen. Did you read Bill Self's statement? He isnt sliding out quietly, he is going right after them. He flat out called the ncaa liars and drama queens.

Sound familiar

.
Pitino,athletic director Tom Jurich andacting university president Dr. Neville Pinto said they planned to dispute the charges against the coach.

"The NOA does contain a narrow allegation, which we will dispute, that Coach Pitino failed to monitor Andre McGee," Jurich said. "If he would have caught a whiff of what was going on, he would have hit the roof."

Didn't end well for Rick.

Now when Long signed his AD deal he already knew there were going to be some fall guys, thus the immunity clause in his contract. Smart move.

 

[HFCS]

Sit back and think about the implications of what happens if the ncaa moves forward with the notion that shoe companies are boosters. The NCAA defines a booster as "a representative of an constitution's athletic interests". If they push to have these Adidas guys labeled as boosters (as they are clearly trying to do) then how does the ncaa handle regulation and enforcement of that?

Virtually every recruit is playing for an AAU team sponsored by either Nike, Adidas or UnderArmour. Can those circuits even exist if the companies are formally labeled as boosters? Will schools have to cancel their apparel contracts if the goal is to remove shoe company influence over recruits and programs?

Do you not see what looks over the horizon if the ncaa pursues that?

We had a player get suspended for a season because he and ten others were paid $0.00 on their European youth team and two of his teammates were paid $500.00 that he didn't know about. NCAA admitted he was never paid a dime and didn't know a teammate was paid $500.

Iowa State fans already live in a world of crippling NCAA punishments while we watch the blue bloods bathe in gobs of illegal activity with no punishment.

Please bring on the crippling NCAA punishments if they are applied to Duke/KU/MSU/UK/etc, it can only help the ISU's of the world who already get a completely different set of rules than you could ever imagine.

 

[Cat Stevens]

Seriously, how pathetic is this making tuco look?