What’s your point? What are you trying to accomplish? What do you wish happens to UofL? You’re a rival so I really treasure your input...
UofL receives NCAA's verbal Notice of Inquiry
- Thread starter Steelers2012
- Start date
What’s your point? What are you trying to accomplish? What do you wish happens to UofL? You’re a rival so I really treasure your input...
My understanding is that the only thing that would be impacted by a determination that UofL was on probation at the time of another major violation would be the possibility of the so-called death penalty. I really doubt that penalty is in play regardless. Unlike SMU UofL took significant steps to fix its program by firing everyone. And that only matters if there’s a finding of another major violation.
UofL does have a defense on all 3 potential major violations:
As far as I know Adidas never paid the recruit Fair is on tape discussing paying. In criminal law discusing a crime is not a crime. There has to be an overt act. That’s likely why Fair wasn’t charged by the feds. I don’t know if NCAA rules can be violated simply by a discussion but Fair himself has claimed he’s been cleared of any NCAA violations. Also the recruit didn’t come to UofL.
The only evidence I’m aware of that Johnson paid Bowen’s father is Bowen’s testimony in the federal trial. That alone could justify an NCAA finding that the event occurred. Especially if no one denies it. I don’t think Johnson will talk to the NCAA but he might and if he denies it the NCAA will have to decide who to believe. Johnson has more credibility than Bowen Sr but why would Bowen Sr lie about the payment? But if Bowen Sr doesn’t talk to the NCAA and Johnson denies the payment the NCAA will be hard pressed to find a violation.
The toughest matter is the significant Adidas payment to Bowen’s father. UofL has already been found guilty in the court of public opinion but the facts against the school as far as I’m aware aren’t that clear cut. Who has said anyone at UofL participated? The feds called UofL a victim in the matter. Do you punish the victim? Absent someone telling the NCAA someone at UofL participated how does the NCAA find a violation here? Let’s hope everyone clams up.
Unless there’s something else out there if UofL just keeps its head low and is willing to fight any unsubstantiated finding in court they might come out unscathed.
UofL does have a defense on all 3 potential major violations:
As far as I know Adidas never paid the recruit Fair is on tape discussing paying. In criminal law discusing a crime is not a crime. There has to be an overt act. That’s likely why Fair wasn’t charged by the feds. I don’t know if NCAA rules can be violated simply by a discussion but Fair himself has claimed he’s been cleared of any NCAA violations. Also the recruit didn’t come to UofL.
The only evidence I’m aware of that Johnson paid Bowen’s father is Bowen’s testimony in the federal trial. That alone could justify an NCAA finding that the event occurred. Especially if no one denies it. I don’t think Johnson will talk to the NCAA but he might and if he denies it the NCAA will have to decide who to believe. Johnson has more credibility than Bowen Sr but why would Bowen Sr lie about the payment? But if Bowen Sr doesn’t talk to the NCAA and Johnson denies the payment the NCAA will be hard pressed to find a violation.
The toughest matter is the significant Adidas payment to Bowen’s father. UofL has already been found guilty in the court of public opinion but the facts against the school as far as I’m aware aren’t that clear cut. Who has said anyone at UofL participated? The feds called UofL a victim in the matter. Do you punish the victim? Absent someone telling the NCAA someone at UofL participated how does the NCAA find a violation here? Let’s hope everyone clams up.
Unless there’s something else out there if UofL just keeps its head low and is willing to fight any unsubstantiated finding in court they might come out unscathed.
I'm trying to understand everything with clarity. What do I hope happens? I addressed that in another post already but I'm not fond of severe penalties when all the accused parties have moved on.
Didn't Bowen’s dad say initially that he received nothing from anyone at UofL and then change his story later that he did receive that money from Johnson? If that's indeed the way it happened it casts more doubt on Bowen Sr.
So the penalties were "assessed" on different dates? Banners, fines, and probation??
As I remind my U of L friends, you have to connect ALL of the dots--not just the ones you want to connect. That's esp. true for slapd!cks...
Last edited:
Good point. Google "NCAA repeat violator". The vast majority of the hits are related to the so-called "death penalty".
Another reference to what defines the 5-year period:
"...For this provision to apply, at least one major violation must have occurred within five years after the starting date of the penalties in the previous case."
LINK
When banners came down and financial penalties came due is the "starting date of the penalties." Otherwise, those penalties would have been borne by U of L several months prior...
Johnson will be compelled to talk to the NCAA due to the fact he is still a employee of the NCAA. one of the key mitigating factors for U of L in his situation is what he says did or did not happen then it's just a matter of credibility. However i don't see any scenario that will be positive for U of L regardless we have already been trialed in public court of opinion.
And we still do not know what this video of Jordan is. But he strikes me as a person whom would not cooperate but then again he also comes off as one that will throw Rick,U of L or anybody else under the bus . Plain and simple we get screwed big time again mark it down!
Grad xfer is a different animal. He had his collegiate run and wants to showcase his talent in the best conference in the land. But our freshman recruits know that if something happens, they can transfer without penalty. So basically they are doing the whole Jim Carey "so your telling me there's a chance" thing hoping we skirt any further penalties.
But if do get hit with a postseason ban, you can bet most of them will transfer. I am hoping since we took drastic steps to clean up our program, that might be enough to appease the NCAA.
LaSalle's AD is living under a rock if he doesn't know about the alleged payment by their assistant coach to Bowen. I would be surprised if they didn't ask Johnson did the payment happen since he is still coach they believed him when he said no. I doubt they keep him if the answer was yes especially since he was fully vetted before they hired him. Did you commit a NCAA violation? No, a month later comes the Bowen Johnson paid me $1,300. Oh I forgot about that yeah I paid him, let's keep Johnson.
Johnson maybe compelled to talk, but he is going to stick to his story, tell the NCAA to prove it.
The side story here is the Pitinio lawsuit. Louisville is going to have to fight every claim NCAA violation happened or admit to minor violations while previous violations were being processed. Slippery slope here,
Not to beat a dead horse but that is the old version of the rule. The terminology changed from "starting date" to "date assessed". If you're correct, I'm not sure why they would bother changing it.
If Tyra and Mack didn't do the due diligence to determine the truth to this "implication" and if there's any truth to it, then shame on them and I can't support that.
But, let's also not forget who was in charge when King signed (Pitino and Jurich) and what happened just before he signed (strippergate came to light). So, that would be at least a fifth "data point" against the prior regime (McGee and Powell, "Coach Mike" Balado, Jordan Fair, Johnson payment to Bowen's father), and just more proof that something was completely awry back then in terms of compliance to NCAA rules.
Well, maybe we're not talking about the same thing and have no disagreement here, but please allow me to clarify my point...
You specifically said: “You don’t understand the FBI’s strategy. It is potentially illegal if playing VJ King made UofL ineligible. Anyone involved in that type of activity has culpability.”
My point is that there is not one single situation where anyone has been prosecuted for the act of playing a player who was later ruled ineligible. Obviously, there have been criminal prosecutions of coaches for other actions, but not simply for playing a player. And anyway, if you are saying that anyone on the current staff might possibly face criminal prosecution for having played VJ King, then those in charge back when VJ was a Freshman would also be similarly liable and probably more liable because they were in charge at the time of any supposed activity that would have made VJ ineligible.
Why is a certain person continuing to try and deflect this NCAA issue on the new admin and VJ King? Everyone with sense knows who's watch this all occurred on!
Some people just want to be controversial i guess!
Some people just want to be controversial i guess!
In my eyes, not knowing doesn't quite rise to the level of suspecting-and-playing-anyway.
Under normal circumstances, you don't get indicted for a crime because you had something material to do with an ineligible guy playing. That's because it's not criminal. In THIS investigation, it is or those are the verdicts so far. That's how people connected with or causing a player's ineligibility are being prosecuted.
If you're saying that prosecution hasn't happened so far, how many times--if any--has that situation come up? How many kids are playing who have been implicated in pay for play? And in how many of those situations have the Feds said that their coaches and administration are in the clear to do so?
You're trying to call the game's results in the 2nd inning. You may be right, but you have no idea at this point...
Last edited:
You still haven't addressed the question of how U of L's penalties would have been "assessed" on different dates. Banners came down in February 2019. Why/how would probation have started several months earlier?
Connect all of the dots...
When they were imposed, after the appeal, and when they were assessed, June 15th, are two different things. You may be right but I think thats why they made the wording change they made. As an example, my property taxes are assessed in April but are not due for payment until November. Assessed is the terribly important term. For your programs sake, I hope I'm wrong.
Bad example. Your "tax assessment" is in essence a valuation, not imposition of a tax which you're equating to an NCAA penalty.
That's because the assessor's office "assesses" (values) PROPERTY, not the amount of tax. Tax computation is typically the job of the auditor's office.
You're wrong and you're struggling, inaccurately by example, to find a parallel. When something financial is levied--penalty, charge, tax, whatever--the clock starts ticking on that obligation. A financial penalty was one of several obligations imposed on U of L when its appeal was exhausted in February 2019. Among the other obligations was the NCAA probation...
I don’t understand the whole VJ king thing. Is there any evidence he got paid anything? I thought they investigated and cleared him.
I don't recall who exactly said it. But in what was more or less a throwaway comment during the adidas trials, Gatto or Dawkins or one of the defendants remarked that they "had to get over/down to Louisville to see VJ." And that's as close as I recall the actual quote.
There's not a chance in hell those guys worked their player relationships without some kinda quid pro quo, past, present, or future. I don't know why anyone would have been promising VJ something once he got here. He barely played well enough at U of L to continue earning his scholarship.
Overlay that with the fact the guy committed and remained committed to U of L throughout the McGee saga. One reason may have been financial. Certainly justified to NOW be suspicious of that.
Did U of L investigate?...Sure. The same institution that admitted Brian Bowen who was probably deeper into pay for play. So that shouldn't offer you a great deal of comfort. And why did we even risk playing VJ? Were we any better team with him on the roster?
At least it doesn't look like it's an issue going forward, although I continue to question how well you know that some of these other guys are clean...
I think that is impossible to tell even for coaches that keep it clean. The reality is they have no clue which player is getting paid because the payment is all in the eye of the beholder. Just because a coach doesn't see the potential doesn't someone else doesn't. Mack had a player at Xavier take money while at school. Impossible for coaches to know if the 50-100 the range kids have any black market value.
Top 25 kids pretty safe to say they were getting something. VJ getting money hard to say 50/50 at this point,
I don't blame all of the coaches for the very reasons you say...how do you know? Some like Wade obviously know.
The problem is when you win with these kids, you don't know if you get to keep the trophy. And you don't find out until you can't do anything about it...
Even Greg Marshall at Wichita State had a player named as taking some kind of money. You just never know.
That would be the best case scenario, that regardless of what happens, they stay committed.
Similar threads
