Considering what he's paid, Steelers is doing a fine job... 
Per Dakich
- Thread starter Knucklehank1
- Start date
Can't make this stuff up...
At the end of Valvano's 2nd hour podcast yesterday, Mark Ennis and Jason Anderson compared the NCAA to a homeowners association. I should have called and told them how much slapd!cks disagree.
LINK
This is what I'm trying to understand - what legal recourse does UofL have against the NCAA? What would UofL argue in court? Being inconsistent, hypocritical, and biased? That's fine, and easily proven, but why would the court care? I'm not an attorney, so I apologize if I'm missing something obvious.
You may Google Tarkanian vs NCAA.
The US Supreme Court that the NCAA could NOT force a member to terminate the employment of a Coach. However, the NCAA could enforce any fine or penalty on a member school it determined had violated the rules that it had had member schools agree to.
The Supreme Court decision that a member school was not required by any law to join or remain affiliated with the NCAA. The member schools had the ability to leave the organization if they wished in lieu of accepting the penalties.
Tarkanian won his suit as an individual against the NCAA in that they did not have the authority to directly fire him.
Simultaneously, UNLV was informed by this rule that the NCAA was not an arm of the state and could apply whatever penalty to the University that they decided was appropriate.
The US Supreme Court that the NCAA could NOT force a member to terminate the employment of a Coach. However, the NCAA could enforce any fine or penalty on a member school it determined had violated the rules that it had had member schools agree to.
The Supreme Court decision that a member school was not required by any law to join or remain affiliated with the NCAA. The member schools had the ability to leave the organization if they wished in lieu of accepting the penalties.
Tarkanian won his suit as an individual against the NCAA in that they did not have the authority to directly fire him.
Simultaneously, UNLV was informed by this rule that the NCAA was not an arm of the state and could apply whatever penalty to the University that they decided was appropriate.
Right, that's what I don't understand. Considering the US Supreme Court said the NCAA could do whatever they want with respect to member schools, why are people talking about UofL suing the NCAA? Wouldn't the NCAA attorney just point to the Tarkanian decision?
Because of that inconsistency and that UofL did not "gain" an advantage with the stripper parties...that their violation is now down to impressible benefits. Because "sex" was involved, they are showing overkill on the penalties, when they did not do that with UNC, UCONN, Syracuse...Now that the MSU scandal has hit the news...I believe UofL would win in a neutral court because of this.
The attorney could, but its a different Supreme Court and may not find that or take the case.
It could be deemed similar to Tarkanian... But there's a difference between authority and competency/fitness.
Tarkanian was based on the former. U of L's argument NOW is that the NCAA is unfit to execute on its responsibilities, esp. if they relate to sex-related offenses. Not if their role in Michigan State's mess is as reported...
Tarkanian was based on the former. U of L's argument NOW is that the NCAA is unfit to execute on its responsibilities, esp. if they relate to sex-related offenses. Not if their role in Michigan State's mess is as reported...
And getting to the Supreme Court is a long arduous journey.
Just conversation:
I could see UofL filing suit that the punishment is excessive (trying to separate the underage and sex part will be a struggle)
The argument will be that in prior cases players have been able to make financial restitution and have a minimal sit out.
The trouble with this is that a long time has passed, none of these players are currently enrolled, and who are you going to pay?
Previous cases involved players paying back money to institutions and individuals
For the money or goods received. I don't know who would be paid back in the case of strippers.
The major issue should it go to court would be the different penalties. Financial is something that can be argued in clear terms.
The bigger problem would be the argument about the voiding of record (titles). The NCAA has definitely done this before successfully, just not the NCAA tourney title.
Just IMO....the best hope is that the committees accept the UofL appeal and reduce the original penalty.
Good point, and I agree this NCAA has been maddening.
In reality, the book by Powell was the trigger to all this. Without that, there would have been no investigation.
Baylor, Vanderbilt, Penn State, now reports that MSU had been reported ten years ago...
The NCAA has shown no...zero...none...willingness to get involved where violations pertaining to sex are reported. There are players every year that are accused with sex crimes and the NCAA
Doesn't get involved.
You believe a judge is going to decide if a private organization is "competent" to be the arbiter of its own rules?
I don't think the situations are equatable at all. The common theme in the 3 schools you listed was crimes and those crimes are not the purview of the NCAA. I don't think the MSU situation has any impact.
The same way courts determine if a person is competent to do something on his own behalf. Happens everyday.
We don't know the "situation" yet. If there's any truth that the NCAA ignored evidence something was going on at MSU, it's bad news for them...
Are you saying a judge is going to declare the NCAA mentally incompetent? Umm, no.
It has always been about impermissible benefits and since when do you have to prove you got an advantage? So I paid a kid $50,000 to come play for me and he sucked or got injured, I didn’t violate a NCAA rule because I didn’t get an advantage from it. It’s not wait and see if we got an advantage, it’s the intent to gain an advantage.
We often misconstrue the authority of the NCAA. They cannot arrest or act as a legal agent in criminal acts other than giving information to legal authorities. If it is true that there were three dozen complaints of harassment turned in to the NCAA, the people in Michigan may need to investigate their city, county and state police to see why this was not acted on.
The Louisville situation, with everything salacious put aside, boils down to recruiting violation, impermissable benefit over multiple seasons. The multiple season provision and on campus location lend to
Lack of institutional control.
MSU, as a different case, is student athletes being abused by a school official. Over a decade. Not providing safety for student athletes. Failure to monitor. That will definitely be lack of institutional control.
Anything else uncovered by investigators could well lead to a 'death penalty' one or two year ban in all sports.
The Louisville situation, with everything salacious put aside, boils down to recruiting violation, impermissable benefit over multiple seasons. The multiple season provision and on campus location lend to
Lack of institutional control.
MSU, as a different case, is student athletes being abused by a school official. Over a decade. Not providing safety for student athletes. Failure to monitor. That will definitely be lack of institutional control.
Anything else uncovered by investigators could well lead to a 'death penalty' one or two year ban in all sports.
NCAA did not issue a lack of Institutional control on UofL. If that is the logic by your post, then UK should have not got away with what they did in the late eighties/early nineties. More recently, Syracuse and UCONN with recruiting/impermissible benefits. But to even argue that, isn't a recruiting violation trying to gain an advantage over other schools for a player. If you pay a player through money or cars or whatever...you are trying to gain an advantage. No recruits, other than ones that were here or transferred in. So again, despite what the NCAA says, and the Supreme Court has said they could. They have a problem...consistency. UofL "bent the knee"...self imposed, lost scholarships to show the NCAA that we screwed up, but trying to clean up. The NCAA gave us the middle finger and went for the title. UNC, Syracuse, UCONN got to keep their titles, even though the NCAA had the evidence. So, UofL need to give them the middle finger and sue the crap out them. Do you not agree that the NCAA is a joke as a governing body? When is the last time that the NCAA leveled the "death penalty" program......what it SMUs Football Program? Four years after that, UK does their thing and no "death penalty". Really?
UofL was never charged with a lack of institutional control. Here's the link to the report. Just search for 'lack of institutional control'. It is never mentioned.
https://web3.ncaa.org/lsdbi/search/miCaseView/report?id=102620
Oh, I'm gonna expect them to have to present arguments that they're fit to decide sex-related cases. IF they're implicated with MSU. Hell, they may not even be able issue a decision on U of L. We're more than a week overdue...
Totally disagree...President, AD have resigned...State Legislature are passing laws over is. The Penn State situation totally debunks this situation. Everyone agrees that was so evil and repugnant, that something had to be done. UofL is no where near what Penn State or Mich St did. In addition, the stripper parties happen on college campuses whether in Sport Dorms or Frat Houses. Lastly, the Duke Lacrosse case...this will blow up in the NCAA's face if they take the 2013 title. No criminal charges were filed with Stripper parties. Penn State's issues were not under the NCAA preview either...but they got involved. Sue the NCAA...the penalty is excessive.
That's even more curious. I don't think I've ever heard of a judge ruling a party to be incompetent in a particular area. Yeah, it's odd that the appeal decision is taking this long.
There was no school/player/recruit violations at Penn St. It has no relevance in your case. Duke didn't provide the "talent" for that party and no recruits were involved. Huge difference.
Better yet, just remove yourself from our site. Please! You add nothing and we really do not give a damn about your opinion. I realize it might be very difficult for you to focus on U ah K more than Louisville. Seems like you Cat fans are obsessed with our every move we make these days, hoping like hell that the Governor and blue necks in Frankfort can bring us down to your level because you sure as hell had no chance of doing it on a level playing field.
Everything about a precedent doesn't have to apply for it to be useful in case law. If that were true, there would never be any precedents because no two situations are exactly alike from beginning to end. You do understand that?
As I said earlier, courts rule on competency matters everyday. The NCAA in that regard may be precedent setting, but so what? When before has the NCAA ever been implicated in covering up sex-related crimes? That in itself sets a precedent...
This coming from a fan whose school perfected the art old cheating...go back to your board and converse over there. Your opinion is not wanted nor asked for. God help your school if they ever get caught, which everybody knows you guys have gotten away with a lot. The facts have been laid out and you refuse to look at them objectively. The NCAA is week overdue on their timeline to announce...why? Is it due to the MSU thing. Has the rumor mill tainted the penalty like with Miami. At the end of the day, when this stuff hapoens...no one wins. Luves are ruined and it hurts the school that is involved. And just like UK and their point shaving scandal,..you have three banners hanging that should have been taken down a long time ago...which your fan base proudly boasts about.
Or a slapd!ck just lost another debate. I don't think you have a clue what constitutes a "precedent"...
Eric Crawford reported that he was hearing and told that the reason for the delay is that the NCAA is trying to cover their asses because some one did release it too Dakich. They just want to wait it out a couple of weeks to give the appearance that wasn't the issue. Sad but i could see that happening just as.
Yea because if they delay it, we all forget what Jockitch said
.....it doesn't matter how long they delay it. If what he said is true, then it was a leak and they look like jack asses, no matter if they released it on the 18th or two months from now.I have heard something totally different and its good, but I am not sharing that. We will all find out soon enough.
This is your 2nd warning to stop with the constant arguing each point or opinion of our posters. You're simply being a contrarian. Please stop it. TIA.
Maybin said a little bit ago that "big news" is coming between the 5pm hour today and 5pm hour tomorrow. We can all infer what that "big news" most likely is. Given that it's right before the weekend and SUPER BOWL weekend, my guess is that it isn't good news for Louisville. The sports media is not going to care about the Louisville story over this Super Bowl weekend nor the day after. So, slipping in under the radar = probably not good news.
Also makes the Dakich tweet "from inside the room" make more sense. It was probably really from someone inside that room, and all parties decided to sit on it until the Friday before the Super Bowl.
Also makes the Dakich tweet "from inside the room" make more sense. It was probably really from someone inside that room, and all parties decided to sit on it until the Friday before the Super Bowl.
Never understood this logic from posters. As if nobody Friday and Saturday will be talking about this or the week after super bowl. The verdict may not be good for UofL but it has nothing to do with them releasing it this weekend when the super bowl is Sunday . just nonsense.
It was Marcus's stated opinion, not some dude on a message board although I do agree with it. You always release bad news on a Friday, just like you always fire somebody on a Friday.
Bigger news makes people forget about lesser news. Remember how quickly people forgot about Nevin Shapiro and The U after the Penn State stuff broke?
Doesn't matter if Ghandi himself told me that or Marcus Maybin. People will still be talking about it before and after. .
The firing thing is so people don't shoot up the place
I was let go on a Monday. I thought that was way worse than being let go on a Friday. At least on Friday I could go get drunk. On Monday, I had to worry about what I was going to do till Friday.
