ADVERTISEMENT

Will the NCAA still take down the 2013 Championship banner???

jalovell23

2000+
Jul 8, 2007
2,111
728
26
Boone County
Since the University of Louisville has now fired the AD Tom Jurich, Head Coach Rick Pitino, assistant coach Jordan Fair, self-imposed post season ban for 2015-16 season(ACC tournament and NCAA tournament), reduced scholarships and recruiting restrictions................will the NCAA still take down the championship banner and vacate wins?
 
Hopefully they will let us keep the two final fours and 2013 championship. The necessary corrective action has been taken.

This has nothing to do with the ho deal. There separate issues. Those banners are coming down. This BOT could careless.
 
The NCAA put that response on the table when they responded to UofLs initial response to them. We all know that other then the 7 counties that support UofL...the rest of the State supports the Slappies in Lexington. The title and banner and 2012 appearance will be removed after the appeals process is complete. Frankfort knows where the money comes from and its not down 64 East.
 
Are they going to use an out side firm to search for a new coach and AD and have they mentioned that yet?
 
HEY EVERYBODY....LISTEN TO BONEHEADBLUE (WITH THE OPERATIVE WORD BEING BONEHEAD). HE KNOWS EVERYTHING!!!
It's almost as good as the slappy who goes by "I am stupid". Presumably some have to remind themselves why they are where they are...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deeva
After North Carolina I actually wouldn't guess of what the NCAA will rule.
The Pitino.suspension is obviously moot.
Involved parties are no longer with the University.
I could see accepting the appeal about the banners.
I.could also see the NCAA sticking with the original decision.

I DO believe relieving both the head coach and AD will keep the death penalty or at least a harsher penalty away if the Adidas situation comes around.

Then again, just the opinion of a slapd!ck that's been through this more than once.
 
People need to stop with this death penalty crap! They are not going to get it plain and simple Certain media keep trying to play that narrative.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smithereen
After North Carolina I actually wouldn't guess of what the NCAA will rule.
The Pitino.suspension is obviously moot.
Involved parties are no longer with the University.
I could see accepting the appeal about the banners.
I.could also see the NCAA sticking with the original decision.

I DO believe relieving both the head coach and AD will keep the death penalty or at least a harsher penalty away if the Adidas situation comes around.

Then again, just the opinion of a slapd!ck that's been through this more than once.

Not quite.

The NCAA didn't vacate uofks 1948 Title, nor strike the wins from that team after using players that point-shaved.
SuCkS did get the 1st death penalty but kept the Title and wins.
The NCAA is inconsistent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deeva
Not quite.

The NCAA didn't vacate uofks 1948 Title, nor strike the wins from that team after using players that point-shaved.
SuCkS did get the 1st death penalty but kept the Title and wins.
The NCAA is inconsistent.
True.
The vacating records thing seems to be a relatively new program. I think the NCAA was getting swamped with complaints about kids not getting to go to post season when the offending coaches/students had left.
 
I hope they leave the banners up. Players worked hard to earn it. The FBI needs to talk to McGee. He wired $ for underage hookers across state lines. Why would he do that once he was in KC? They could squeeze him hard and get some truth to the matter.
I don't think RP knew about it. He's smart enough to know kids talk. I hate seeing a great career torn apart. Even if he didn't know about Adidas, they apparently think he did or have evidence. I hope not. The NCAA used that "strict liability" once before on Cal in Memphis. It was never proven Rose didn't take the test. Didn't matter that he had been cleared 3x. Many think had they won, Kansas would have been the one they went after. Played a guard who the courts worked with the team to schedule a sexual assault till after the season. I don't think RP or Cal would play a guy who was charged with that at all. KU also played Darrel Arthur who had grades changed and never graduated high school. His HS had to vacate their seasons on account of him. But not KU.
Why can't UL get the KU, Duke, and UNC kid glove treatment?
 
I mean if I’m being honest and looking at it unbiased for a second I don’t see how they let us keep it after everything that has happened
 
I mean if I’m being honest and looking at it unbiased for a second I don’t see how they let us keep it after everything that has happened

They let UNC keep 2 and KU 1 when obvious cheating had went on. UNC 18 yrs of cheating. The NCAA has punished others for academic fraud. Hell, Jim Harrick got a 7 year Show cause over a class his son taught. KU played a player who should have been ineligible. Kansas fans were sweating it for the statute of limitations made it as far as punishment. I don't think they like to take championships. They may do something weird and take the 2012 FF and 14,15 seasons vacated.
It is the selective punishment that is unfair. Duke had Lance Thomas who got $130,000 in jewelry in December of a year they won it. Thomas was going to the NBA, the NCAA said they couldn't make him talk at that point. Boom, championship saved. Same didn't work for Memphis FF or UMass for Calipari as far as that excuse went.Rose refused to talk,left for the NBA, yet they took the FF. Marcus Camby made the mistake of admitting everything. They had to vacate 4 games from the tournament. Took the FF trophy, and made them return cash for wins. Camby repaid the school $151,000. He took money from an agent right before the tournament.

My hope is they leave it alone at UL. Would you all rather lose the banners and vacate all the games the NCAA wanted and not be penalized going forward so UL can rebuild quicker and recruit?
 
Not quite.

The NCAA didn't vacate uofks 1948 Title, nor strike the wins from that team after using players that point-shaved.
SuCkS did get the 1st death penalty but kept the Title and wins.
The NCAA is inconsistent.
They point shaved and Pitino allegedly tried to help a kid and his family with money. Unreal.
 
He says he didn't. His termination is based on a second infraction by his staff
While under probation for a different infraction. He claims he knew about none of it. That opens the door for that institutional control violation.

It boiled down to how could this happen again so soon with people who already knew there were problems. If the assistant coach had been on tape saying 'get away from me with that kind of talk' both Pitino and Jurich would still be employed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: awf
They point shaved and Pitino allegedly tried to help a kid and his family with money. Unreal.
Why do you consider point shaving worse? That has always seemed silly to me. Sure, it shouldn't be allowed. But it isn't cheating. Paying someone 100K to come to your school is as egregious of cheating as you can get, next to what UNC did. Giving up some points to ensure that your team wins by fewer than the spread doesn't hurt anyone other than bettors. It certainly doesn't hurt the opposing team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ukfan03
Why do you consider point shaving worse? That has always seemed silly to me. Sure, it shouldn't be allowed. But it isn't cheating. Paying someone 100K to come to your school is as egregious of cheating as you can get, next to what UNC did. Giving up some points to ensure that your team wins by fewer than the spread doesn't hurt anyone other than bettors. It certainly doesn't hurt the opposing team.

Ask the Feds.

Point shaving is illegal.
The NBA even banned two uofks players from ever playing in the league.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deeva
Ask the Feds.

Point shaving is illegal.
The NBA even banned two uofks players from ever playing in the league.
Right, and it should be illegal. But it isn't cheating in terms of the NCAA paradigm. It doesn't put the other teams at a disadvantage in any way. In fact, it helps them.

Prostitution is illegal, but I am quite certain you feel that it did not provide much if any advantage to UofL, and that you think UNC's fake classes were not illegal but provided a huge unfair advantage. Paying players to come to your school, although not as bad as what UNC did because of the scope, is cheating at its core. Point shaving isn't cheating at all, in terms of the game (obviously it is cheating bettors).
 
Last edited:
Right, and it should be illegal. But it isn't cheating in terms of the NCAA paradigm. It doesn't put the other teams at a disadvantage in any way. In fact, it helps them.

Prostitution is illegal, but I am quite certain you feel that it did not provide much if any advantage to UofL, and that you think. Whereas UNC's fake classes were not illegal, but provided a huge unfair advantage. Paying players to come to your school, although not as bad as what UNC did because of the scope, is cheating at its core. Point shaving isn't cheating at all, in terms of the game (obviously it is cheating bettors).
You are hugely mistaken if you don't think point shaving isn't cheating in terms of the NCAA or "the game". The NCAA has levied heavy penalties for schools participating in the act, including disbanding the Tulane team for 4 years. Why do you think players are shaving the points, to "help out the other team"? They shave points as part of a bribe or payment (sound familiar) to the "corrupt" players from gamblers. In other words, they are being PAID to shave points.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_shaving
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smithereen
You are hugely mistaken if you don't think point shaving isn't cheating in terms of the NCAA or "the game". The NCAA has levied heavy penalties for schools participating in the act, including disbanding the Tulane team for 4 years. Why do you think players are shaving the points, to "help out the other team"? They shave points as part of a bribe or payment (sound familiar) to the "corrupt" players from gamblers. In other words, they are being PAID to shave points.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_shaving
Of course, but that is far different from a school cheating to actually get a player or to keep a player eligible. A player getting money while playing, such as Camby taking money from his agent, doesn't benefit the school. It is not cheating by the school. It is a violation by the player in terms of his amateurism. It does not disadvantage the other teams/schools, unless there was a situation where a player came to a program because he knew players at the school were getting money from point shaving. Doubt that has happened.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sburke1150
Of course, but that is far different from a school cheating to actually get a player or to keep a player eligible. A player getting money while playing, such as Camby taking money from his agent, doesn't benefit the school. It is not cheating by the school. It is a violation by the player in terms of his amateurism. It does not disadvantage the other teams/schools, unless there was a situation where a player came to a program because he knew players at the school were getting money from point shaving. Doubt that has happened.
A player PAID as part of a bribe to shave point is an ineligible player. No different than a player paid to go to a school. If the point shaving had occurred in the modern era, those games would just as surely have been vacated as any earned with players ruled to have taken impermissible benefits today. UK cheated with players who accepted impermissible and illegal benefits back then no differently than is happening currently. It's pure spin to try to claim your cheating was somehow different. Your players were being paid with illegal gambling funds while they were still college players.
 
A player PAID as part of a bribe to shave point is an ineligible player. No different than a player paid to go to a school. If the point shaving had occurred in the modern era, those games would just as surely have been vacated as any earned with players ruled to have taken impermissible benefits today. UK cheated with players who accepted impermissible and illegal benefits back then no differently than is happening currently. It's pure spin to try to claim your cheating was somehow different. Your players were being paid with illegal gambling funds while they were still college players.
I am not sure why you can't see the clear difference, but agree to disagree. There are different types of NCAA violations. Both may result in ineligible players. In one type, a player took money while already in school. In the other type, the actual program paid a player to come to that program, meaning he wouldn't have even played otherwise. I was merely commenting on the fact that the poster seemed to suggest that point shaving was somehow a worse NCAA violation, when I think it is quite the opposite.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nickhorvathsuxazz
I am not sure why you can't see the clear difference, but agree to disagree.
Tell you what, how about you try to sell your "point shaving isn't cheating" theory on the main board? Or anywhere else, other than RRs. That would be funny to read. ;)
 
Right, and it should be illegal. But it isn't cheating in terms of the NCAA paradigm. It doesn't put the other teams at a disadvantage in any way. In fact, it helps them.

Prostitution is illegal, but I am quite certain you feel that it did not provide much if any advantage to UofL, and that you think UNC's fake classes were not illegal but provided a huge unfair advantage. Paying players to come to your school, although not as bad as what UNC did because of the scope, is cheating at its core. Point shaving isn't cheating at all, in terms of the game (obviously it is cheating bettors).

What prostitution ?

The whoor and her whoors said no such acts took place.

You big blew fans should NEVER throw stones at ANY program after all the cheating
SuCkS has done and been punished for in the 50s,60,70s,80s, 90s, 00s.

Yet ya'll do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deeva
Why do you consider point shaving worse? That has always seemed silly to me...
Of course it seems silly to a slapd!ck.

Point shaving means you were paid to play. That's called "professionalizing" like signing an agent and taking money under the table. It's at the pinnacle of NCAA violations.

Your banners are illegitimate, but then you knew that.

"Elite program," my a$$...
 
I didn't think point shaving is a minor violation, it maybe a different kind of violation but it isn't minor. Back then that was the biggest scandal. I think it is safe to say if that happened today any players involved would be ineligible and any games they participated in would be vacated. Gambling in sports that players participate in is taboo always been and always will be.
 
I don’t know why you guys are arguing when we are in the middle of all this. Not a good look. Cheating is cheating and getting caught makes it worse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: awf
ADVERTISEMENT