Elephant in the room. UofL is SuCkS superbowl.......

[Rockfly78]

It's the lie-vs-liar issue. You don't have to prove that Lite has cheated at LPT; all you have to prove is that he's CAPABLE of that. THAT is the baggage LPT fans have to "constantly answer for" while you have him employed. It's the everyday version of an NCAA show-cause...

Every word of what you just typed is wrong. Utter nonsense.

1. Yes you DO have to prove he is cheating at UK. I thought you were the great lover of facts.

2. Anybody is capable of anything. You’re reaching so far that you’re going to tip over. Lol. You can’t prove what a person is capable of. That’s ridiculous. If this were the case then the world would be one giant prison.

Hey I’m capable of dating Kate upton. Everyone come and high five me. Smh

3. We don’t have to answer for crap. I just think it sucks that we are pushed to do so.

 

[KerryRhodes]

It was not hypocrisy go back and read it again. I just used the Hawaii thing as an example. It’s a non issue. We’re on the same page with that

Yes rick did do all that stuff while in Lexington and you guys should not have to answer for any of that.

Gotcha.

 

[zipp]

Every word of what you just typed is wrong. Utter nonsense.

1. Yes you DO have to prove he is cheating at UK. I thought you were the great lover of facts...

Lite is responsible for his past, ALL of it. Not just the LPT portion. And he has been associated with cheating--that is fact. You're not as stupid as you're acting.

...2. Anybody is capable of anything. You’re reaching so far that you’re going to tip over. Lol. You can’t prove what a person is capable of. That’s ridiculous. If this were the case then the world would be one giant prison.

Hey I’m capable of dating Kate upton. Everyone come and high five me. Smh...

You're presenting a ridiculous hypothetical to argue your case, which is not compelling. All that has to be proven is that Lite is prone to be associated with cheating. And we have that proof...twice.

...3. We don’t have to answer for crap. I just think it sucks that we are pushed to do so.

If you're in this space participating in discussions, you've inserted LPT, Lite, and yourself. Excuse us if we don't let you talk about only what you wanna talk about.

"Elite program," my a$$...

 

[Rockfly78]

Lite is responsible for his past, ALL of it. Not just the LPT portion. And he has been associated with cheating--that is fact. You're not as stupid as you're acting.

You're presenting a ridiculous hypothetical to argue your case, which is not compelling. All that has to be proven is that Lite is prone to be associated with cheating. And we have that proof...twice.

If you're in this space participating in discussions, you've inserted LPT, Lite, and yourself. Excuse us if we don't let you talk about only what you wanna talk about.

"Elite program," my a$$...

You can talk in circles all day long. I’m still looking at This :

“You don’t have to prove that Cal has cheated at UK, all you have to prove is that he’s capable of that”

Lol. Good luck with that. As a matter of fact, you can just have a mulligan on this one.

 

[zipp]

You can talk in circles all day long. I’m still looking at This :

“You don’t have to prove that Cal has cheated at UK, all you have to prove is that he’s capable of that”

Lol. Good luck with that. As a matter of fact, you can just have a mulligan on this one.

Who needs a mulligan? The record is his record.

"Elite program," my a$$...

 

[Rockfly78]

Who needs a mulligan? The record is his record.

"Elite program," my a$$...

Just take the mulligan

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Lite is responsible for his past, ALL of it. Not just the LPT portion. And he has been associated with cheating--that is fact. You're not as stupid as you're acting.

You're presenting a ridiculous hypothetical to argue your case, which is not compelling. All that has to be proven is that Lite is prone to be associated with cheating. And we have that proof...twice.

If you're in this space participating in discussions, you've inserted LPT, Lite, and yourself. Excuse us if we don't let you talk about only what you wanna talk about.

"Elite program," my a$$...

Zipp, you do realize the NCAA said Memphis didn't cheat, don't you?

http://www.realclearsports.com/blog/2015/03/why_all_the_hate_for_john_calipari_98167.html

 

[redwaxjester]

A few things -

1. Any suggestion that UofL is UK's "Super Bowl" in basketball is asinine, and I think everyone in this thread knows it. It's a rivalry game, which, by definition, is of elevated importance. This is especially true of UK fans who are Louisville residents. UofL fans tend to extrapolate that to UK fans as a whole, which is incorrect. UK's "Super Bowl" is the NCAA tournament, as is UofL's. I'm sure there are some UK fans out there who would rather beat UofL in the regular season than get to the Final Four, but they are in the extreme minority. Granted, a Pitino-coached UofL team added a lot of drama and emotion, but that was about Pitino, not UofL. Outside of Jefferson County, UofL's significance as an opponent dips substantially without Pitino. Kansas and UCLA were more important. Having said that, any UK fan suggestion that Harvard was as important a win as UofL is delusional.

2. It is not debatable that UofL spends more on football and less on basketball compared to UK. Of course, UofL athletics overspends and is subsidized by academics, whereas UK athletics subsidizes academics, but that aside, as a percent of expenditures, football is #1 at UofL. UK is, has been, and always will be a basketball-first athletics department. None of that is in dispute from what I've seen. What IS incorrect is this idea that UofL cares about ALL sports, whereas UK does not. If you compare spending per sport, the % of total is remarkably comparable, less than 1% difference across the board, with the exception of football and basketball. Still, though, both schools spend 2/3 of their budget on those two sports. The only difference is the allocation between them. So, BOTH athletic departments invest in other sports. The comparable ROI's on those other sports are different, but that's a different conversation.

3. The NCAA has NEVER accused Calipari, or any of his assistants, of cheating. Never. Forget proving, he hasn't even been accused, except by opposing fans trying to confirm a preconceived narrative to the contrary. And stop with the association = guilt nonsense. If that's the assumption you want to use, then your list of major college coaches who *haven't* cheated will be very short indeed.

 

[zipp]

Zipp, you do realize the NCAA said Memphis didn't cheat, don't you?

http://www.realclearsports.com/blog/2015/03/why_all_the_hate_for_john_calipari_98167.html

First of all, your link is an editorial and not purely evidence. It's slanted like your POV.

Secondly, I never said Lite or his former institutions cheated. I said they were associated with cheating. It's like the Pitino defense of "not knowing". And had Camby and Rose occurred within a short time frame at the same institution, Lite probably would have been fired like Pitino was.

"Elite program," my a$$...

 

[zipp]

A few things -

1. Any suggestion that UofL is UK's "Super Bowl" in basketball is asinine, and I think everyone in this thread knows it. It's a rivalry game, which, by definition, is of elevated importance. This is especially true of UK fans who are Louisville residents. UofL fans tend to extrapolate that to UK fans as a whole, which is incorrect. UK's "Super Bowl" is the NCAA tournament, as is UofL's. I'm sure there are some UK fans out there who would rather beat UofL in the regular season than get to the Final Four, but they are in the extreme minority. Granted, a Pitino-coached UofL team added a lot of drama and emotion, but that was about Pitino, not UofL. Outside of Jefferson County, UofL's significance as an opponent dips substantially without Pitino. Kansas and UCLA were more important. Having said that, any UK fan suggestion that Harvard was as important a win as UofL is delusional.

2. It is not debatable that UofL spends more on football and less on basketball compared to UK. Of course, UofL athletics overspends and is subsidized by academics, whereas UK athletics subsidizes academics, but that aside, as a percent of expenditures, football is #1 at UofL. UK is, has been, and always will be a basketball-first athletics department. None of that is in dispute from what I've seen. What IS incorrect is this idea that UofL cares about ALL sports, whereas UK does not. If you compare spending per sport, the % of total is remarkably comparable, less than 1% difference across the board, with the exception of football and basketball. Still, though, both schools spend 2/3 of their budget on those two sports. The only difference is the allocation between them. So, BOTH athletic departments invest in other sports. The comparable ROI's on those other sports are different, but that's a different conversation.

3. The NCAA has NEVER accused Calipari, or any of his assistants, of cheating. Never. Forget proving, he hasn't even been accused, except by opposing fans trying to confirm a preconceived narrative to the contrary. And stop with the association = guilt nonsense. If that's the assumption you want to use, then your list of major college coaches who *haven't* cheated will be very short indeed.

Addressing each of your points...

1. Your coach identified the context of a "Super Bowl" and how your team plays in many of them each year from the other team's perspective. U of L fits those same credentials for LPT. In most years, we're one of a few of the marquee teams on your schedule.

2. U of L athletics has NOT been subsidized by academics. U of L athletics pays the university or is responsible for about $30 million annually for scholarships, money that would not be in U of L coffers if not for athletics. Your info is flawed.

3. Lite has been associated with cheating at two different institutions for which severe NCAA penalties were invoked. Pitino has never been accused of cheating either, and he no longer has a D1 job.

"Elite program," my a$$...

 

[zipp]

Just take the mulligan

Deflecting...again.

"Elite program," my a$$...

 

[Rockfly78]

Deflecting...again.

"Elite program," my a$$...

To debate your “proof of capability” nonsense is maddening. Not interested

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

First of all, your link is an editorial and not purely evidence. It's slanted like your POV.

Secondly, I never said Lite or his former institutions cheated. I said they were associated with cheating. It's like the Pitino defense of "not knowing". And had Camby and Rose occurred within a short time frame at the same institution, Lite probably would have been fired like Pitino was.

"Elite program," my a$$...

First, your inference was clear. Second, the important part was a quote from the infractions committee. You sure like to move the goalposts. All you've accomplished to this point is putting distance between Cal and cheating.

 

[zipp]

To debate your “proof of capability” nonsense is maddening. Not interested

You mean not capable.

Again, no one invited slapd!cks here. Stop whining.

"Elite program," my a$$...

 

[zipp]

First, your inference was clear. Second, the important part was a quote from the infractions committee. You sure like to move the goalposts. All you've accomplished to this point is putting distance between Cal and cheating.

The "important part" is that Lite has been associated with cheating. The historical record and his lost banners are all the proof that anyone but slappies need.

This is reminiscent of your 1950s banners as well. You guys like arguing against facts.

"Elite program," my a$$...

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

The "important part" is that Lite has been associated with cheating. The historical record and his lost banners are all the proof that anyone but slappies need.

This is reminiscent of your 1950s banners as well. You guys like arguing against facts.

"Elite program," my a$$...

If that's your barometer, every coach and every team and every fan is suspect. Everyone has been associated with cheating.

 

[Rockfly78]

You mean not capable.

Again, no one invited slapd!cks here. Stop whining.

"Elite program," my a$$...

David Padgett is capable of cheating. By your logic he must be dirty. See how stupid that sounds?

 

[billoliver40]

It's the lie-vs-liar issue. You don't have to prove that Lite has cheated at LPT; all you have to prove is that he's CAPABLE of that. THAT is the baggage LPT fans have to "constantly answer for" while you have him employed. It's the everyday version of an NCAA show-cause...

Lol.....ethics/philosophy debate in basketball 102.

All coaches have the capability of cheating, if not the culpability.

UofL retained Hurtt after the NCAA hit him with show cause for his methods at the U. Doesn't mean he cheated at Louisville.

Petrino left Louisville in tough shape after his first gig, but he still got a second run.

Hiring coaches is a gamble.

 

[zipp]

David Padgett is capable of cheating. By your logic he must be dirty. See how stupid that sounds?

You have no evidence that DP is capable of lying or cheating. Flawed analysis.

"Elite program," my a$$...

 

[zipp]

If that's your barometer, every coach and every team and every fan is suspect. Everyone has been associated with cheating.

The LPT go-to move: "everyone does it..."

"Elite program," my a$$...

 

[zipp]

Lol.....ethics/philosophy debate in basketball 102.

All coaches have the capability of cheating, if not the culpability.

UofL retained Hurtt after the NCAA hit him with show cause for his methods at the U. Doesn't mean he cheated at Louisville.

Petrino left Louisville in tough shape after his first gig, but he still got a second run.

Hiring coaches is a gamble.

Petrino's never been implicated with cheating in football. If you know otherwise, link it.

No one has ever denied that Hurtt did anything improper at Miami. OTOH slapd!cks will go to their graves defending Lite.

"Elite program," my a$$...

 

[zipp]

...you’re over here because you’re a miserable dickhead...

Not sure how miserable he is; delusional people are generally in a state of bliss.

"Elite program," my a$$...

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Petrino's never been implicated with cheating in football. If you know otherwise, link it.

No one has ever denied that Hurtt did anything improper at Miami. OTOH slapd!cks will go to their graves defending Lite.

"Elite program," my a$$...

Cal has never been implicated either.

 

[zipp]

Cal has never been implicated either.

I never said that; I said "associated".

The other slappy brought up Hurtt's and Petrino's name in an effort to deflect.

"Elite program," my a$$...

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

I never said that; I said "associated".

The other slappy brought up Hurtt's and Petrino's name in an effort to deflect.

"Elite program," my a$$...

And you said Petrino had never been implicated in cheating. Thats correct and neither has Cal.

 

[zipp]

And you said Petrino had never been implicated in cheating. Thats correct and neither has Cal.

Lite has been associated with cheating. Does a complete and definitive sentence make you happy, slappy?

"Elite program," my a$$...

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Lite has been associated with cheating. Does a complete and definitive sentence make you happy, slappy?

"Elite program," my a$$...

What would make me happy is you explaining exactly what you mean by "associated". You clearly don't mean accused or implicated or sanctioned. Your best shotgun blast is claiming proximity. Good for you.

 

[zipp]

What would make me happy is you explaining exactly what you mean by "associated". You clearly don't mean accused or implicated or sanctioned. Your best shotgun blast is claiming proximity. Good for you.

How about this clarification...

He coached at two programs that had banners taken down for cheating after his departure. Most people not wearing blue would call that "associated with cheating". And to bring it home, I further pointed that was the same indictment of Pitino last year.

"Elite program," my a$$...

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

How about this clarification...

He coached at two programs that had banners taken down for cheating after his departure. Most people not wearing blue would call that "associated with cheating". And to bring it home, I further pointed that was the same indictment of Pitino last year.

"Elite program," my a$$...

I never said anything about Pitino. Cal was unlucky enough to have one player retroactively found to be ineligible even though the NCAA clearinghouse on two occassions said Rose was clear to play. Camby was the other and was taking money from agents behind Cals back. Do you have something to add that directly implicates Cal or are we stopping at the association I described?

 

[Rockfly78]

How about this clarification...

He coached at two programs that had banners taken down for cheating after his departure. Most people not wearing blue would call that "associated with cheating". And to bring it home, I further pointed that was the same indictment of Pitino last year.

"Elite program," my a$$...

Were either of those programs Kentucky? If not then I don’t care. You have to wait until someone breaks the law before you throw them in jail. This is America.

Yes he is “capable” of cheating. He’s also “capable” of going to the moon. Do you think NASA is interested?

 

[BPGhost]

Were either of those programs Kentucky? If not then I don’t care. You have to wait until someone breaks the law before you throw them in jail. This is America.

Yes he is “capable” of cheating. He’s also “capable” of going to the moon. Do you think NASA is interested?

Nope - he’s waaay too fat to be an astronaut. Plus, he chokes under pressure.