The Banner is gone.

[HRTheCard]

It's coming down. The fact that the punishment was extremely harsh today leaves me no reason to believe that the appeal is no more than a pause button.

However, the future is bright as our future teams aren't effected with 0 post season ban from here on, only 1 scholly reduction per year for 4 years, and Pitino only suspended for 5 games. That's not good, but could have definitely been worse.

The only way I see the banner staying is if Louisville goes to court, but I dont see how the different Appeals Committee will see eye to eye with the school OVER their own Organization.

 

[anon_0astpxev9h4gk]

"It's kinda like I fear death, but also long for it".

 

[JohnCard28]

No offense, but you need to grow a pair and stop listening to stupid cayat fans. UofL needs to fight this and fight it hard, especially if it goes to court. Their problem was cooperating with the NCAA in the first place. Hopefully, UofL isn't as soft as some of our fans.

 

[anon_0astpxev9h4gk]

My comment was facetious btw.

 

[JohnCard28]

I wasn't talking about you .

 

[HRTheCard]

No offense, but you need to grow a pair and stop listening to stupid cayat fans. UofL needs to fight this and fight it hard, especially if it goes to court. Their problem was cooperating with the NCAA in the first place. Hopefully, UofL isn't as soft as some of our fans.

Im not listening to the cat fans but when you have everyone else including the UofL board during the press conference in fear that the wins will be vacated, you can only join them.

 

[zipp]

Im not listening to the cat fans but when you have everyone else including the UofL board during the press conference in fear that the wins will be vacated, you can only join them.

I don't know what you heard, but I didn't hear fear. I did hear defiance and resolve, and I was glad to...

 

[Wall2Boogie]

I think it should stay up, you guys won it all that yr, it can't nor should it be taken down. You still won it outright regardless of what others say

 

[HRTheCard]

I don't know what you heard, but I didn't hear fear. I did hear defiance and resolve, and I was glad to...

With the way Smrt was saying, he basically just said everything he could without being blatantly obvious that if the wins are vacated, the title is gone. Im all up for the appeal, but I mean, what will be the conclusion?

These will stand solid IMO: Schollys reduced, 5 game suspension, and 4 year probation

I find that hard to believe. Whether the title is vacated or not, I still think at least some wins will be vacated.

I feel as if the appeal is to come up with a deal they can make between each other. Not to get us out of everything completely.

I do believe if the appeal is denied fully and everything stands, then it will be taken to court.

 

[d4cards1]

it's not coming down.

 

[CardVille]

it all depends on who was ineligible. also the appeals committee has overturned rulings before, not saying it will happen in our case but i think some of our penalties will be lessened but you cant get around the ineligible players. that is always a vacated win.

 

[nookam]

I'd rather move on, accept it and get it off the news. Go forward. People will know the game was played. It can't be vacated from memory.
I see so many Michigan fans claiming victory, but if they bothered to look, it doesn't work that way. There simply is Louisville listed as champ with asterisk (vacated).
The ones wanting court, I don't know if that is a good idea. McGee under oath and severe pressure due to underage kids being involved and talking, could lead to a lot worse. Especially the media circus and potential protesters over women's and poor blacks rights. Sometimes, moving on and winning is best.

 

[GOCARDS6]

Let em take the banner and us keep the $$, lets not pretend that college athletics arent really about the money. We offer the banner in exchange for tens of millions of dollars use it to build the program and move on. I agree appeals committee will likely reduce some of the penalties just hard to say which ones and to what degree.

 

[REDFISTFURY3]

You don't let anybody take anything from you. Especially the players who earned it that had nothing to do with it whatsoever. what i hate about the NCAA the innocent players always are the ones screwed. So thats who you fight to keep those banners for. Plain and simple!

 

[MDCardsFan]

Here's my question about all of this, (besides the banner of course) does the 4 year probation mean we aren't eligible to play in the ACC and NCAA tourney?

 

[Majestic Red]

You don't let anybody take anything from you. Especially the players who earned it that had nothing to do with it whatsoever. what i hate about the NCAA the innocent players always are the ones screwed. So thats who you fight to keep those banners for. Plain and simple!

This is why I thought Penn State's bowl ban was simply unjustified.

 

[PACardsfan]

You are right, St Penn should have been given the death penalty for lack of institutional control and systematically covering up a crime.

This is why I thought Penn State's bowl ban was simply unjustified.

 

[HRTheCard]

Here's my question about all of this, (besides the banner of course) does the 4 year probation mean we aren't eligible to play in the ACC and NCAA tourney?

No. Just "if you do something in this time, big issues"

 

[CardVille]

Here's my question about all of this, (besides the banner of course) does the 4 year probation mean we aren't eligible to play in the ACC and NCAA tourney?

No, we can play in the tourneys. Probation just means if we mess up during that time, it will be worse than normal. As far as the current team is concerned, its all clear and good to go. Any penalties will be in the past.

 

[Majestic Red]

You are right, St Penn should have been given the death penalty for lack of institutional control and systematically covering up a crime.

My point was that the current players were being punished for something they had no involvement in.

 

[Franktowncard]

Louisville has fought the NCAA and won twice before.
Remember the post season ban in 1999?
And the Lesaige(can't remember how to spell) ruling

 

[REDFISTFURY3]

My point was that the current players were being punished for something they had no involvement in.

Ncaa doesn't care most of the time the players who had nothing to do with always suffer from prevous players misdeeds. as is what is happening presently with U of L. At first i felt we would win the appeal now i'm not so hopeful.

 

[Louis_Skunt]

I'm not sure how UL could win an appeal. Derrick Rose cheated on his SAT 800 miles away and Memphis' season was erased. UL's situation is worse, and it includes multiple players...and its ON campus.
Sorry to see it, but I don't know what they could appeal..

 

[zipp]

The NCAA appeal is a formality. This ends up in court and takes years to litigate. That banner's not going anywhere soon, if ever.

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

 

[Rockfly78]

The NCAA appeal is a formality. This ends up in court and takes years to litigate. That banner's not going anywhere soon, if ever.

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

I've asked this before and I don't think I've gotten an answer unless I overlooked it. Has any school ever taken the NCAA to court to get a punishment reduced? Penn st got theirs reduced but I thought that was through the appeals process.

 

[nccardfan]

I've asked this before and I don't think I've gotten an answer unless I overlooked it. Has any school ever taken the NCAA to court to get a punishment reduced? Penn st got theirs reduced but I thought that was through the appeals process.

Don't think there has been a precedent for an individual school. That's why I believe it will be settled through appeals process and won't go to litigation through the court system. Compared to the Ed O Bannon play to pay, our case is based on selfish motives and desired outcomes.

 

[zipp]

I've asked this before and I don't think I've gotten an answer unless I overlooked it. Has any school ever taken the NCAA to court to get a punishment reduced? Penn st got theirs reduced but I thought that was through the appeals process.

Once it became obvious that the NCAA had overreached, they settled with Penn State. Most suits don't end up getting fully litigated.

The same thing probably happens with U of L. And that banner will be the first chip U of L wants to bargain for.

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

 

[OneEarWonder]

I've asked this before and I don't think I've gotten an answer unless I overlooked it. Has any school ever taken the NCAA to court to get a punishment reduced? Penn st got theirs reduced but I thought that was through the appeals process.

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/488/179.html

This is NCAA v. TARKANIAN (1988). Not exactly the same thing, can be used as precedent. They key part is that the NCAA and their Infraction Committee is within their rights to levy punishment. Generally speaking, courts won't intervene in the affairs of a voluntary association, like the NCAA, unless it refuses to follow its own rules or violates established statutory law.

Probably the only play UL has is that the NCAA is not following it's own rules... unfortunately similar penalties have been handed down before.

The question yet to be answered... which players are deemed ineligible. Even after that, is there any negotiating room for the Cards. I'd love to see them reach a settlement and keep the banner, but I'm not sure that will happen. Mainly because I think this ruling will be a precursor to the eventual UNC rulings...

But right now, it's all conjecture... all we can do it wait.

 

[zipp]

I don't think there is a case where a penalty for impermissible benefits has been levied by the NCAA that wasn't proportional to the value of that benefit, and allowed to stand. That will be one of U of L's claims as plaintiff.

And neither the NCAA nor any other "voluntary organization" will ever be allowed to govern arbitrarily.

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

 

[Rockfly78]

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/488/179.html

This is NCAA v. TARKANIAN (1988). Not exactly the same thing, can be used as precedent. They key part is that the NCAA and their Infraction Committee is within their rights to levy punishment. Generally speaking, courts won't intervene in the affairs of a voluntary association, like the NCAA, unless it refuses to follow its own rules or violates established statutory law.

Probably the only play UL has is that the NCAA is not following it's own rules... unfortunately similar penalties have been handed down before.

The question yet to be answered... which players are deemed ineligible. Even after that, is there any negotiating room for the Cards. I'd love to see them reach a settlement and keep the banner, but I'm not sure that will happen. Mainly because I think this ruling will be a precursor to the eventual UNC rulings...

But right now, it's all conjecture... all we can do it wait.

Interesting. Thanks

 

[nccardfan]

Interesting. Thanks

Don't know if the championship banner was in question or if it was more about Tarks reputation.

 

[Rockfly78]

Don't know if the championship banner was in question or if it was more about Tarks reputation.

Yeah I vaguely remembered that. I thought that it was Tark himself who sued and not the school but it's the same principle I suppose.

 

[tluck28]

I've said it from day one of all of these shennagins. Thay banner will come down and wuite honestly if it was any other program that did the same thing, id agree that it should. We need to clean house at UofL from the AD to the head basketball coach.

 

[nccardfan]

Yeah I vaguely remembered that. I thought that it was Tark himself who sued and not the school but it's the same principle I suppose.

No, in this case CRP could sue but it would be for the 5 game suspension and not the banner. It's not his, it's the university's.

 

[zipp]

I've said it from day one of all of these shennagins. Thay banner will come down and wuite honestly if it was any other program that did the same thing, id agree that it should. We need to clean house at UofL from the AD to the head basketball coach.

Dream on.

BTW, Penn State kept both of their national championship trophies while Sandusky was committing his crimes. And if you're trying to legislate morality on the run and it's not about the "value" of anything, how does that reconcile??

 

[Cue Card]

Dream on.

BTW, Penn State kept both of their national championship trophies while Sandusky was committing his crimes. And if you're trying to legislate morality on the run and it's not about the "value" of anything, how does that reconcile??

There is no way in hell UofL should accept this unjust punishment from the NCAA without fighting it to the point all options have been exhausted. You're 100% spot on accurate about how this will go IMO zipp.

The university isn't going to cut their losses and accept anything that supports removing championship banners. They might accept a monetary penalty without fighting it but I even doubt that to be true. This issue while immoral and outrageous is being overblown by the over the top severity of the penalties handed down by an organization which fails to be fair and balanced with its own members. They drew the line in the sand; now it's time for the Cardinals to stand up and fight them for crossing it.

 

[zipp]

A classic example of someone in authority overplaying their hand. That usually backfires...

 

[kyjeff1]

Dream on.

BTW, Penn State kept both of their national championship trophies while Sandusky was committing his crimes. And if you're trying to legislate morality on the run and it's not about the "value" of anything, how does that reconcile??

Sandusky wasn't a player and he wasn't deemed ineligible. Big difference.

 

[zipp]

Sandusky wasn't a player and he wasn't deemed ineligible. Big difference.

Eligibility is supposed to be about the the value of impermissible benefits, and this is much more than that according to the NCAA. You're in the Sandusky realm with that reasoning regardless of what a slappy wants to admit. THAT'S where the similarities start.

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

 

[kyjeff1]

Eligibility is supposed to be about the the value of impermissible benefits, and this is much more than that according to the NCAA. You're in the Sandusky realm with that reasoning regardless of what a slappy wants to admit. THAT'S where the similarities start.

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

But we know better, or at least we should. The NCAA doesn't operate like that.
As awful as the Sandusky crime was, it had nothing to do with eligibility. It had everything to do with a disgusting criminal act and he has been punished accordingly.
The two cases are nothing alike.