Calipari's Bruiser Flint Voicemail

[Joneslab]

But the entire issue of what Pitino knew is such a meaningless red herring in the Katina Powell case.

Some fans talk about that, but for the most part it's gone so far beyond that with the McGee stuff, the "Coach Mike" stuff, and the players who've come forward to acknowledge that it happened that most people--fans, experts, pundits--are into the realm now not of "Did he know," but "He should have known."

It would certainly be way worse if a line could be drawn directly to Pitino, but what you're talking about at UofL is a textbook case of lack of institutional control. There's not been a more egregious example of that in recent history that I can think of. Syracuse is close but even that doesn't touch it. The closest analog would have to be Penn State football.

When the evidence is this present and this obvious, who the hell cares if he knew or not?

The Memphis/UMASS stuff was almost completely predicated on whether or not Cal knew because it was an issue of playing an eligible player.

[surveyor]

I'm pointing out how fanbases throw darts at other programs unless it involves their own.

That's why this back and forth garbage is.........well, garbage. There's a history of it hereon and at WCF.

I recall a time hereon when quite a few of our fans ridiculed tattoos and headbands wearers as thugs - particularly those at Memphis and UT. I get the UT stuff moreso than Memphis.

The first guy I recall having many tattoos here at UK was Bradley and it sort of calmed down after that - after all, he's OUR player.

Some hereon didn't want Cal - that he was slimey and hell, even his hair was slimey. Now that we have him, those folks fell in line and love the hell out of him.

I like Cal a helluva lot. I also liked Pitino a helluva lot while he was here and had nor have no animosity towards him leaving.

I think they're both a lot alike in the way they sell their wares, so to speak. Alot more than people care to admit. It's not a slight on Cal, just an observation.

[Joneslab]

BS Will. You're (or was) better than that.

I'm pointing out how fanbases throw darts at other programs unless it involves their own.

That's why this back and forth garbage is.........well, garbage. There's a history of it hereon and at WCF.

I recall a time hereon when quite a few of our fans ridiculed tattoos and headbands wearers as thugs - particularly those at Memphis and UT. I get the UT stuff moreso than Memphis.

The first guy I recall having many tattoos here at UK was Bradley and it sort of calmed down after that - after all, he's OUR player.

Some hereon didn't want Cal - that he was slimey and hell, even his hair was slimey. Now that we have him, those folks fell in line and love the hell out of him.

I like Cal a helluva lot. I also liked Pitino a helluva lot while he was here and had nor have no animosity towards him leaving.

I think they're both a lot alike in the way they sell their wares, so to speak. Alot more than people care to admit. It's not a slight on Cal, just an observation.

I don't understand how this has to do with anything.

As I said: completely different situations.

Fans being hypocrites is obvious. The UofL stuff is so astronomically beyond players being involved with agents that whether the head coach knew or not is almost beside the point.

Which is why they took the postseason ban already. It's not even an issue that the NCAA concerns itself with.

And as I said, I don't think most fans concern themselves with it at this point. The facts of the case are so much bigger than Rick Pitino's knowledge or lack of.

[surveyor]

But the entire issue of what Pitino knew is such a meaningless red herring in the Katina Powell case.

Some fans talk about that, but for the most part it's gone so far beyond that with the McGee stuff, the "Coach Mike" stuff, and the players who've come forward to acknowledge that it happened that most people--fans, experts, pundits--are into the realm now not of "Did he know," but "He should have known."

It would certainly be way worse if a line could be drawn directly to Pitino, but what you're talking about at UofL is a textbook case of lack of institutional control. There's not been a more egregious example of that in recent history that I can think of. Syracuse is close but even that doesn't touch it. The closest analog would have to be Penn State football.

When the evidence is this present and this obvious, who the hell cares if he knew or not?

The Memphis/UMASS stuff was almost completely predicated on whether or not Cal knew because it was an issue of playing an eligible player.

That's certainly more substantive than the initial post you replaced.........................

[surveyor]

I don't understand how this has to do with anything.

It goes to what fans are willing to accept or dismiss based on those biases as fans. I think most of us acknowledge what's egregious and what's trivial. Doesn't dismiss the significant numbers who say, "Yeah, but".

I think the UMass stuff was trivial. No way he could have known about that. The Memphis thing with Derek Rose - I can see how it can be said he could have, or should have known. The NCAA absolved him, for sure, but even they talked out of both sides of their mouth when the found "the program" guilty. It becomes semantics with regard to who runs the program.

Same with Pitino. I can easily see how he could have or should have known, if the program is going to be found at fault.

However, the article in the CJ regarding recruiting and college recruiters that we discussed weeks ago indicates that programs often set it up to where the HC is purposely insulated. Recruiters or assistants were (30, 40, 50 years ago) sent out to do whatever it takes to get someone signed and then they're thrown under the bus.

But many of us are going to be more vociferous if it's not our ox.

[surveyor]

It would certainly be way worse if a line could be drawn directly to Pitino, but what you're talking about at UofL is a textbook case of lack of institutional control. There's not been a more egregious example of that in recent history that I can think of. Syracuse is close but even that doesn't touch it. The closest analog would have to be Penn State football.

North Carolina? That's by far the most egregious. Makes your references look like jay walking. THAT'S a total lack of institutional control - or perhaps an example OF institutional control. I mean, hell, they apparently controlled it well enough that they orchestrated an educational scam of sorts going back to Dean Smith.

I think the Syracuse and UofL stuff was much more contained and isolated, and less a matter of lack of control rather than lack of knowledge at some level.

What's transpired at UNC is worthy of the death penalty - certainly much moreso than what occurred under Sutton's watch.

[Joneslab]

The North Carolina stuff is definitely worse.

It looks to have been ingrained in the entire culture of the institution. It goes on through different coaches and sports. I think Williams (and others) definitely knew how those athletes were getting credits, but that "insulation" Tim Sullivan talks about seems to've been going on with the people in the African-American Studies program and the academic tutors.

There are so many people involved in that one, both current and former employees. It's going to take so much unpacking, but I'm confident that they'll get hit by something at the end. Not sure it will be death penalty because Carolina is such a cash cow for the NCAA, but I do think there will be significant punishment.

The Louisville scandal is not more egregious but probably more shocking simply because I think academic shenanigans happen everywhere. Some of the stuff that's come out about UofL is .

[Matt Dillon]

In my opinion, there's so much hanky panky that goes on within college athletics, most of which we don't know about, that I don't concern my self with any of it whether it be UK, U of L, UNC or whomever.

[justafan]

Well, back to the fan bias/hypocrisy, it's always going to be prevalent, it's the nature of fanaticism.

I see posters on here complain about uofl fans (or family) and having to listen to them and then in the same posting state they're going to love rubbing it in when uk wins. etc. I grew up in Louisville and have friends and family there and have zero issues. I understand wanting to enjoy a victory, but don't complain on the other side if you rub it in - this isn't directed at anyone in particular, it happens everywhere.

[Joneslab]

Well, back to the fan bias/hypocrisy, it's always going to be prevalent, it's the nature of fanaticism.

I see posters on here complain about uofl fans (or family) and having to listen to them and then in the same posting state they're going to love rubbing it in when uk wins. etc. I grew up in Louisville and have friends and family there and have zero issues. I understand wanting to enjoy a victory, but don't complain on the other side if you rub it in - this isn't directed at anyone in particular, it happens everywhere.

Kentucky fans are the worst I've ever seen at some of this stuff. Worst fan I ever saw was a UK fan at the SEC Tournament a few years back. Unfortunately, that's not uncommon. The more of us there are the more you get into this kind of insanity.

But I don't think chalking it up to fan bias is really fair when we're talking about the UofL scandal at this point. Maybe it started there, but at this point it's so far beyond that. I think it's almost gone full circle with a bunch of people where UK fans are actually starting to feel a little sorry for UofL. I know I am.

But just in the technical details of both cases, I definitely can see where UK fans would argue that Cal knew nothing about the Camby thing. The Rose thing is much more difficult to argue because they got that letter informing them that there was a problem. Still: neither is close to what's happened at UofL.

[justafan]

Oh I agree with you Will. The uofl situation vs. Cals two incidents are vastly different.

I know nothing about either of Cals situations, but my only issue with the Rose situation is that cal and every other coach in div 1 knows the exact status of every recruit. Cal had to pause when he failed to qualify the first exam and then went to a different location and did so much better. Now, do I blame him for playing him anyway, since the NCAA cleared him? Well, yes, because the NCAA cleared him on the assumption that he took the exam. Cal should know better, and he definitely better now. I said when cal was hired, he has to run an extra clean program at UK, and I guess he is since there haven't been any issues.

Don't get me started on some uk fans, it's embarrassing sometimes wearing uk gear.....