F the NCAA

[Deleted User 310]

that's true.

Nike has a LOT more presence compared to Adidas too.

What's the hardest the NCAA's ever come down on a Nike school? could there be some back alley relationship there too?

We've been punished as a nike school.

This isn't some conspiracy to get Kansas and adidas and save Duke and Nike....it was simply unlucky for Kansas how it all went down. Could have easily been anyone else from any brand who got snitched on.

I think the truth is somewhere in the middle - there's more than enough smoke around Zion to support opening an investigation. And yet, crickets.

Do they always announce investigations to the media beforehand?

I'm more surprised duke hasn't announced they investigated and found no wrong doing.

Although it'll make no difference, because unless the FBI helps the NCAA is almost totally unable to catch anyone doing anything.

[NDballer13]

There was an investigation, remember? Duke conducted an internal investigation for about 12 minutes.

[NDballer13]

I'm more surprised duke hasn't announced they investigated and found no wrong doing.

This is exactly what they did.

[NDballer13]

https://www.cbssports.com/college-baske ... -paid-him/

[Sparko]

Duke clears Duke. Every time. The danger is they are guilty and are simply hiding it badly. The crux of the nub is Zion himself. We know he was for sale. The only question is how much Nike and Duke paid for him. He was constantly pimped by ESPN too. Non-stop.

[Deleted User 310]

Espn now saying the lawsuit says that nike AND adidas gave him money...

Maybe we don't really want this dug into too much? LOL (kidding, because what else can they really do to us)

[ousdahl]

Think that was Lance Thomas.

I can’t believe that one was shrugged off so quickly.

Dude crapped out on a $70,000 line of credit at a jewelry store, yet the NCAA saw no “threat to the collegiate model”

well, its a little different. There was no indication duke was involved in convincing the jewelry store to give him a LOC....and iirc he paid them back and they basically said it didn't happen by the time the NCAA looked into it, right?

Former Duke Basketball player, Lance Thomas, is being sued by a New York company based on Thomas’ alleged purchase of five pieces of jewelry at a cost of $97,800 while he was enrolled at Duke University. The New York company, Rafaello & Co., claims that it extended Thomas a line of credit for $67,800 so that Thomas would have the funds to purchase the five pieces of jewelry. Thomas was required to, and did, deliver a $30,000 down payment. The company is claiming that Thomas has failed to pay the remaining balance owed.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/darrenheit ... 2010-ring/

How many college kids get that kind of credit? Or have that much cash to put down?

[Deleted User 310]

I can’t believe that one was shrugged off so quickly.

Dude crapped out on a $70,000 line of credit at a jewelry store, yet the NCAA saw no “threat to the collegiate model”

well, its a little different. There was no indication duke was involved in convincing the jewelry store to give him a LOC....and iirc he paid them back and they basically said it didn't happen by the time the NCAA looked into it, right?

Former Duke Basketball player, Lance Thomas, is being sued by a New York company based on Thomas’ alleged purchase of five pieces of jewelry at a cost of $97,800 while he was enrolled at Duke University. The New York company, Rafaello & Co., claims that it extended Thomas a line of credit for $67,800 so that Thomas would have the funds to purchase the five pieces of jewelry. Thomas was required to, and did, deliver a $30,000 down payment. The company is claiming that Thomas has failed to pay the remaining balance owed.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/darrenheit ... 2010-ring/

How many college kids get that kind of credit? Or have that much cash to put down?

I think NDballer said this was right before the draft... I haven't tried to confirm that...but he was the 42nd pick in the draft and has made over 24mil in the NBA...so even if he busted it was a pretty safe extension of credit by the jeweler (hell even Cliff Alexander could get a loan)...not sure why he didnt initially pay it back, but he did pay it back, and they dropped the suit and said it was a misunderstanding or something iirc.

I'm not saying its not against the rules... i guess I just don't understand the point of the exercise of deflecting blame to Duke....im sure we've also had plenty of infractions go unpunished too.. that duke is better at avoiding punishment than us or better at avoiding there being discoverable "proof" is probably more a result of them being better at breaking the rules and less a result of some secret conspiracy by the NCAA not to punish Duke....money wise, I wouldn't be shocked if Kansas is much more valuable to the NCAA than Duke. Especially considering Duke has only been relevant for 35ish years or so.

If it makes people feel better about our issues to focus on others issues (or lack of issues) then that's fine....but i don't think Duke cheats more or less than us. We're all playing the same game going after the same guys. They've just been better at not getting caught....and part of that is because we've had our fair share of questionable characters (not that others haven't too)...and part of that is the FBI didn't have a bunch of wiretaps on Nike "consultants".

[Deleted User 310]

Since we've talked about UNC not getting punished for their academic scandal and compared it to other cases... bilas has a good explanation of why they didn't get punished and also highlights some of the reasons it is different than other situations (although mizzou isn't mentioned because this was written before all that I think)...

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/sport ... 49234.html

[ousdahl]

well, its a little different. There was no indication duke was involved in convincing the jewelry store to give him a LOC....and iirc he paid them back and they basically said it didn't happen by the time the NCAA looked into it, right?

Former Duke Basketball player, Lance Thomas, is being sued by a New York company based on Thomas’ alleged purchase of five pieces of jewelry at a cost of $97,800 while he was enrolled at Duke University. The New York company, Rafaello & Co., claims that it extended Thomas a line of credit for $67,800 so that Thomas would have the funds to purchase the five pieces of jewelry. Thomas was required to, and did, deliver a $30,000 down payment. The company is claiming that Thomas has failed to pay the remaining balance owed.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/darrenheit ... 2010-ring/

How many college kids get that kind of credit? Or have that much cash to put down?

I think NDballer said this was right before the draft... I haven't tried to confirm that...but he was the 42nd pick in the draft and has made over 24mil in the NBA...so even if he busted it was a pretty safe extension of credit by the jeweler (hell even Cliff Alexander could get a loan)...not sure why he didnt initially pay it back, but he did pay it back, and they dropped the suit and said it was a misunderstanding or something iirc.

I'm not saying its not against the rules... i guess I just don't understand the point of the exercise of deflecting blame to Duke....im sure we've also had plenty of infractions go unpunished too.. that duke is better at avoiding punishment than us or better at avoiding there being discoverable "proof" is probably more a result of them being better at breaking the rules and less a result of some secret conspiracy by the NCAA not to punish Duke....money wise, I wouldn't be shocked if Kansas is much more valuable to the NCAA than Duke. Especially considering Duke has only been relevant for 35ish years or so.

If it makes people feel better about our issues to focus on others issues (or lack of issues) then that's fine....but i don't think Duke cheats more or less than us. We're all playing the same game going after the same guys. They've just been better at not getting caught....and part of that is because we've had our fair share of questionable characters (not that others haven't too)...and part of that is the FBI didn't have a bunch of wiretaps on Nike "consultants".

This transaction occurred on December 21, 2009. Therefore, if the NCAA determines that Lance violated this Bylaw, then every game Duke won after December 21, 2009 would most likely be vacated, including the National Championship. Of course, this assumes the NCAA will follow its own case precedent.

[Deleted User 310]

My guess, is by the time this came to light, all Lance had to say was his mom/dad gave him the money for the down payment and then its not a violation according to your article. Without FBI help its awfully hard to discover this stuff...

"While it is not a per se violation for a student-athlete to receive a gift from another, there is a test to determine whether a violation has occurred. NCAA Bylaw 16.11.1.1 states that receipt of a benefit (including otherwise prohibited extra benefits per Bylaw 16.11.2) by student-athletes, their relatives or friends is not a violation of NCAA rules if it is demonstrated that the same benefits are generally available to the institution’s students and their relatives or friends."

-look I'm not saying he didn't get an improper benefit. My guess is he did. And my guess is he wasn't the only 1 on that team....all I'm saying is that doesn't prove some decades long conspiracy by the NCAA to protect Duke. That's so far fetched and unrealistic. The NCAA isn't 1 person. Its a bunch of people. The chances they're all on the same page and coordinating a conspiracy to protect Duke is ridiculous in my opinion.

[ousdahl]

I’m just glad that it wasn’t a KU player caught up in that shit.

Meanwhile, the hammer hovers over us for players who got less money, and never played a minute unless explicitly cleared by the NCAA

[Deleted User 310]

I’m just glad that it wasn’t a KU player caught up in that shit.

Meanwhile, the hammer hovers over us for players who got less money, and never played a minute unless explicitly cleared by the NCAA

Well, just to be clear, not playing a minute is irrelevant if they think KU knew or should have known about the infractions.

The hammer isn't hovering over us because of anything Duke did. It is hovering over us because of the FBI, adidas, our players, and maybe our staff...and i am only saying "maybe" because I know the attorney talk/defense will start...i think our coaches knew much/most/all of what was going on even if they didn't know the exact details.

[Cascadia]

Espn now saying the lawsuit says that nike AND adidas gave him money...

Maybe we don't really want this dug into too much? LOL (kidding, because what else can they really do to us)

What ‘else’? What have they done to ‘us’?

[pdub]

If Tyshawn Taylor had taken out a 97k loan in 2012, the NCAA would have looked into it more than they did for Duke.

[TDub]

I’m just glad that it wasn’t a KU player caught up in that shit.

Meanwhile, the hammer hovers over us for players who got less money, and never played a minute unless explicitly cleared by the NCAA

Well, just to be clear, not playing a minute is irrelevant if they think KU knew or should have known about the infractions.

No. Not playing a minute is VERY relevant. Particularly if Kansas knew about infractions.

[pdub]

If the NCAA was a consistent and just ruling body, of course not playing a minute would be relevant.
Who knows if it means anything to them.
I think they'll be more upset how we are responding to them and try to over punish.

[Deleted User 310]

Unfortunately the way I understand the rule....if KU knows (or should have known) the benefit is offered and is even indirectly involved in that benefit being offered so that the player will attend KU, then the infraction already occurred regardless if the player plays a minute at KU or not.

Basically if a player is offered 50k to attend kansas, and kansas staff knows or should have known that improper benefit is/was offered, then there was an infraction. Granted, if they never play then vacating wins won't be a punishment, but a punishment may still occur....that's why the Bill Preston situation matters. The ncaa claims we knew or should have known that he was enticed to come to KU with an improper benefit, therefor even though he didnt play we may still be on the hook for punishment.

[Deleted User 310]

If Tyshawn Taylor had taken out a 97k loan in 2012, the NCAA would have looked into it more than they did for Duke.

There's really no way to know that. Its just an opinion. Which you're entitled to have. I simply don't understand the victim mentality that this is a conspiracy for duke and against Kansas. Way too far fetched for me. And is really based on nothing except sour grapes that we keep getting "caught" with our hand in the cookie jar and other schools don't as often (or it just feels like that)...i think other schools get "caught" more than we might think because we don't follow them as much and/or we are a high profile program 2nd on the all time wins list so we get attention from national media more than most places.


Remember in the .com days when "we" thought only Calipari was cheating to get recruits? Ahhh the good old day. Ignorance truly is bliss. We'd all be so much happier without the FBI wasting tax dollars to enforce NCAA rules.

[punkrockhawk]

Another article about Zion getting paid. Doubt the NCAA cares about this though, since they're focusing all of their energy on coming after us...

https://247sports.com/college/kansas/Ar ... w68r1onuj8