UK Not Involved With Selby Since Selby Committed to UT

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 21, 2009 12:27 PM EDT in Basketball Comment 79 comments

Wait --- It wasn't me!

Whew. When I went to bed last night, smug and happy after writing a sarcastic piece mocking The Sweaty One (one of my favorite pastimes), little did I know that Ken was going to rise up and smite my perfectly irreverent commentary with a rather serious one expressing concerns over UK's possible involvement with Josh Selby, who recently decommitted from Tennessee.

Ken calls the timing of Selby's decommitment into question because of a reported conversation between Selby and William Wesley (aka "Worldwide Wes" or "Wes"), the highly secretive but also well-connected friend of many college coaches, including John Calipari. Naturally, the Tennessee media and blogs jumped on that story to connect the dots straight back to Coach Cal, and other purveyors of opinion such as The Big Lead posted more commentary connecting the supposed dots and bemoaning the filthiness of it all.

I think it's time to introduce a little reality into this wonderful fodder for speculation and hand-wringing by those UK fans (and other alleged college basketball "fans") so deeply concerned about this whole Calipari-Wesley connection. It is perfectly understandable for Kentucky fans, particularly ones who have suffered through NCAA sanctions, to see a return to ignomity hiding behind every rock, and whenever William Wesley is mentioned in a way that, however remotely, connects him to UK, some fans run for cover under platitudes of "Woe is us, we knew this would happen." Well, now for the reality. Read on ...

The reality is, UK has stated, according to Matt Jones of Kentucky Sports Radio, that John Calipari has not been in contact with Josh Selby since he committed to Tennessee. That is unsurprising, since it is generally the policy of basketball coaches not to recruit verbally committed athletes, unlike their, "all's fair in love and recruiting," football brethren. There is no reason for anyone to dispute this claim, unless they are predisposed to believe everything negative about Calipari and UK. Marc Maggard has also informed me by email that Selby had been thinking about decommitting for some time, and this is backed up by some commentary on his forums (free membership required). Marc also said that the style of offense Bruce Pearl runs had a lot to do with Selby's decision. I can't verify that independently, I can only say that it makes sense to me.

The second reality is in response to this from Ken's blog:

Honestly, what bothers me the most about [William Wesley] is; if his motives and actions are righteous, then why are he and his "friends" so secretive about their relationship? Why can't a reporter, or anyone for that matter, get a straight answer from Wesley and his cronies about exactly what it is he does, or the nature of his many high-powered relationships? Secrecy = hiding something, and that's never good.

The reality here is that this is a leap of logic that skips over several critical steps. In today's world, there are a lot of people who legitimately do not want the media crawling all over their lives -- God knows I wouldn't if I were in demand. William Wesley may well be one of them. We know from previous discussions that Wesley has not been found to be involved in any wrongdoing, and while that is not automatically vindicating, I believe that it is unreasonable to impute nefarious motives to Wesley just because he doesn't grant media interviews. Show me what he has done wrong, and I will revise this opinion. But a presumption of innocence, even if it is only a legal standard and not really applicable to public opinion, is deeply seated in the American way of life. I think denying that to Wesley is unfair and hypercritical.

So in the end, we are left with a scatter-plot of dots and a way too obvious, facile, connection. But in spite of that, the reality is that Selby is most likely to have decommitted from Tennessee purely for his own reasons, not because of any illegal recruiting or back-channel, gray-area elbow-rubbing. I think we should all recognize that as the high probability, and not consign Calipari and Wesley to the gutter so many others seem to be happy to toss them into without any credible evidence.

In the final analysis, seeing a snake under every rock just paralyzes you with fear. I think we should release that fear, and plunge boldly ahead without all the hand-wringing and worry-worting.

0 recs | Comment 79 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Oh boy

Marc Maggard has also informed me by email that Selby had been thinking about decommitting for some time

Was he 50% sure that he was 100% right?

If peeing your pants is cool, consider me Miles Davis.

by btcoop71 on Jul 21, 2009 12:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Well ...

… if so, he had been right for a while. Your mileage may vary.

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 21, 2009 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

LOL

DEEETROIT BASKETBALLL!!!

by davw83 on Jul 21, 2009 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Just have one question Tru

If Selby commits to UK, will your opinion change?

I too, have concerns, but nothing exasperating, but I do see something here….I do not know what it is yet, but there is something. If it turns out to be nothing more than another way Coach Calipari is making us even better, then I am fine with it…..just want to be sure….but I have a feeling this will be around for a long time to debate.

Remember, we're having fun now!!!

by ALLBLUCAT on Jul 21, 2009 1:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Not at all.

Why would it?

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 21, 2009 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Furthermore ...

… I do think UK should go after him — hard. He reopened his commitment, as far as I can see, in a perfectly legitimate way. Why are we trying to blame Calipari or even Wesley for that? I don’t get it.

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 21, 2009 1:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I am not blaming them,

call it blaming the system if you like…..but not them…..but that does not mean I am blind to the fact that there is a cause and effect here. If NIKE…..and I know this is a long way around the subject here, but if NIKE controls where recruits go, then what is next?…

I am not crucifying any one particular person here, but the NCAA wont let a kid have a car…..and they let NIKE have the keys to the kingdom??? ( Or at least the rulebook) And this isnt about Wes either…because if it wasnt him it would be someone else. They hypocracy here is unbelievable. To me THAT is what stinks. I know I say this all the time, but its about the $$$. Cal has to work within the guidelines they give him. But when those guidelines are subject to interpretation that is being influenced by corporate sponsors, It gives me pause. The fact that Nike spends more $$$ than all of the others (Adidas, Converse,Reebok,etc.) combined is the determining factor that worries me the most.

I have no love for the Vols, you know that….and I want us to take advantage of every loophole in the system. What I dont want is our getting something just because of the corporate sponsor we have…..and not being able to give our kids a meal without the NCAA whining about something inappropriate.

Remember, we're having fun now!!!

by ALLBLUCAT on Jul 21, 2009 1:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hmmm.

Nike has a business interest in where the recruits go, at least some of them. That’s unfortunate, but it is a fact of life. Now, there are a few things the NCAA could do to mitigate that, like outlawing shoe contracts. Unfortunately, actions taken interfering with interstate commerce run afoul of antitrust laws.

So can the NCAA forbid Nike from telling recruits they should attend the schools where there are Nike shoe contracts? Not unless they repeal the First Amendment. Could the NCAA make student athletes talking to Nike or their representatives ineligible for NCAA competition? Possibly – it could be couched as an amateurism issue, and I think I could make a compelling case for that.

But the bottom line is, there is nothing illegal or violative of NCAA rules (at least not yet, as far as I am aware) about a company looking after its business interests by talking to prospective student athletes about the possible future advantages of attending a school it sponsors, assuming they don’t favor one school over the other. It is offensive to the integrity of the game, I agree, and an unfair advantage for Nike schools. But let’s not lose sight of the fact that the NCAA is operating essentially as a business, earning millions of dollars in return for scholarships provided by member institutions. I think the moral case that Nike is doing something the NCAA isn’t would be a tough one to make.

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 21, 2009 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

See....now that I can agree with when one point is added

or should I say modified…..The NCAA operates as a business…….the Universities are forced to operate as schools to participate….the student-athletes are relegated to the position of being a pawn of the system. If the NCAA can look out for its own business interests it whould not be able to relegate the schools and the athletes to not being able to look after their own. The system disguises itself as “amateur athletics”….bull…..its big business and they want to keep the $$$ rolling in and their employees quiet and subserviant….it just smacks of the plot of Norma Rae if you ask me…..I am waiting for one of these kids to stand up on national TV with a handwritten sign over their head that says “Will play for $$$”

Remember, we're having fun now!!!

by ALLBLUCAT on Jul 21, 2009 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well ...

… I don’t agree with your characterization of the student athletes as “pawns of the system.” I think that’s just not true. They have options, they don’t have to go to college, and they do it with eyes wide open. The NCAA does not force student athletes to come to school, they could go to the D-league or to Europe or whatever. So that argument fails prima facia. Nobody makes them come to college. Nobody.

I do agree with your characterization of the NCAA as “big business.” It is. But the kids can play for $$ anytime they want to. Just not for a college team.

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 21, 2009 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree with ALLBLUE completely

The hypocrisy is staggering. As much as I love college athletics, the closer I get to the sausage factory, the more unsavory it becomes. Everyone gets rich but the kids, they just get exploited.

by Ontherocks on Jul 21, 2009 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

"the closer I get to the sausage factory, the more unsavory it becomes"

Sounds like a party at Hoze’s house……..

If peeing your pants is cool, consider me Miles Davis.

by btcoop71 on Jul 21, 2009 2:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Some of the kids get rich.....

problem is that it is only some……most never see anything from it unless they are smart enough to parlay the scholarship into something…..and that is what they need to be taught to do….use the scholarship to make their contacts and get ahead that way

Remember, we're having fun now!!!

by ALLBLUCAT on Jul 21, 2009 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Again ...

… nobody is born with a right to play basketball for money, or even for a scholarship. Any kid that wants to earn a living right out of high school can do so if they are good enough. I can’t see what your complaint is.

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 21, 2009 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

My only complaint is that the

Universities, The NCAA, The Shoe Companies, The coaches, the advertisers….ALL get rich…..the athletes do not participate in the financial rewards of their labors.

I will give you a for instance Tru….let’s say there is another blogger out there who is reproducing your articles on their site, their PAY site. They give you credit for your work, they name you as the writer, and they praise you for your contribution. They just dont let you participate in the profits of the site…..now you do this for love of the program, not $$$, or you would already be charging for it….but if someone else gets rich off of your work…..is that right….is it right that someone can charge for your hard work, and you do not get a dime from your efforts The scholarship may be considered compensation for the athletes, but it isnt much in comparison ….it may not be the best comparison, but how do you view the time and effort you put into your site?

Remember, we're having fun now!!!

by ALLBLUCAT on Jul 21, 2009 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well ...

… First of all, your example is a poor one. My work is copyrighted, and therefore it is illegal for anyone to do that without my express permission.

But to your real and larger point:

Universities, The NCAA, The Shoe Companies, The coaches, the advertisers….ALL get rich…..the athletes do not participate in the financial rewards of their labors.

That’s all correct, and the athletes agree to do this of their own free will. They have options, they simply choose for whatever reason not to exercise them. They could go to Europe, or Canada, or to the D-league, or even to China like Latavious Williams.

Here is a really good analogy – I decided to go into the Navy. Now, we all know the armed forces don’t pay well, have long, ridiculous hours under sometimes barely livable conditions. But the benefits come after the service. So it is a conscious sacrifice eschewing higher rewards now for even greater rewards down the road.

For that matter, what about college in general? Most students pay their way through college, not only enriching the institution with their tuition, but also with any research or other breakthroughs they achieve while using their facilities. Nobody complains about the benefits gleaned by schools on the backs of graduate students, but it is there. The students do it for what comes after school, not for what comes during school. So do the athletes, and it is a worthy investment of their time.

There is nothing at all wrong with this arrangement, and there is no rational argument otherwise.

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 21, 2009 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

My only detraction from your argument

would be this…..No one told you while you were in the Navy that the local guy down at the corner pub couldnt buy you a beer as appreciation for the job you were doing in serving your country…..no one could tell you that while you were in the Navy that you couldnt go out and do a commercial for your local restaurant and tell everyone how much you enjoyed their food, if they wished for you to do that. No one was standing there with their rulebook in hand if you were a Navy mechanic who worked on someone else’s boat and they paid you for your time. I just think the system is warped is all…..call me irrational if you like…..

Remember, we're having fun now!!!

by ALLBLUCAT on Jul 21, 2009 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oh yes they did.

I had to abide by all sorts of arbitrary rules that you don’t as a private citizen. The Navy told me I had to do a lot of things that were extra work, but that I received no compensation for. That was the bargain I struck, and it was perfectly fair.

I could not, as a Navy guy, go out and do radcon work for a nuclear power plant, even though I was fully qualified. I would have been drummed out for that. You can only moonlight in the armed services with the permission of your commanding officer, and then only in times when you aren’t in training status, or preparing for deployment, etc. Nukes like me couldn’t because of other considerations.

So that one doesn’t work, either.

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 21, 2009 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I didnt understand your work

could violate nuclear treaties…but I was not referring to necessarily doing your job persay….ball players play ball……you neglected to mention the freebies rule…..I got bought a lot of drinks because I was in places in uniform….most were refused for other reasons….but it wasnt against any rules. Not everyone does a job that is classified Top Secret by the military…..thats kind of going over the top to make your point isnt it??

I know a lot of guys that were mechanics in the service that worked for extra money after hours…..it was the only way they could make ends meet. No rule exists in the military that you cannot do a commercial for someone…..only that you cannot do it in uniform, or as a representative of the branch of service you are in.

You have valid reasons for your points, but your thinking is where there is a lot of room for opposing views…..you see these things as a “cost of doing business”, so to speak. Again…..all of this is about nothing but the money…..just me being irrational again..lol

Remember, we're having fun now!!!

by ALLBLUCAT on Jul 21, 2009 6:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well ...

… the rule is, you can’t work for anyone else while on active duty without the permission of your command. That’s the rule. The reason I couldn’t do radcon work was more because I could exceed exposure limits. It’s complicated. :-)

I accept that there may be others with opposing views, but all I am asking is for someone to show me how players are being taken advantage of. If a person knows what is going on before they sign up for college, but do it anyway without any coercion, how can anyone complain?

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 21, 2009 7:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think you are wrong Tru

there is no rational argument otherwise.

and claiming that your argument is the only rational one is a poor attempt to make an open and shut case of something that isn’t.

The agreement between schools, the NCAA and players becomes exploitative when the NCAA starts marketing on the backs of their free labor. UK grad school isn’t selling jerseys of their star Grad Assistants. Nor are there multi-billion dollar TV contracts to cover university research. Don’t link the two as if they are one and the same. Just because kids have a choice as to whether they join an NCAA member school and choose to be exploited IN NO WAY diminishes the fact that they ARE exploited. Be careful what you wish for in saying they can go to Europe, because that may in fact being a big trend in the coming years. And we’ll have the NCAA to thank for it.

I respect greatly your opinion, but I don’t like seeing someone told that their opinion and position is irrational because you disagree with it.

by Ontherocks on Jul 21, 2009 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I am waiting for that rational argument.

Perhaps I was a bit too abrupt there. Let’s just say I haven’t seen a rational argument otherwise.

First of all, there is no free labor. The kids are being compensated in kind, if not in cash. That is the bargain they strike voluntarily and without coercion.

What you call “exploitation” is nothing more than an agreement between parties. They agree with the school to play for them in return for an education. The schools have a separate deal with the NCAA about where, when, and under what conditions the games are played. The players are not entitled to anything from the NCAA because their agreement is with the school, not the NCAA. Calling that arrangement “exploitation” does not make it so, and it clearly isn’t.

As far as going to Europe or the other leagues, that option has always been open, it just wasn’t as lucrative as it is today. What you are arguing is that the kids should get a piece of the NCAA’s millions, and my question is, why? If they want millions, they have other avenues to earn that money, assuming they are good enough to do so. Would you pay a bench-riding athlete the same money as the superstar? Duke’s more than Mississippi Valley State’s guys? How could that ever work?

These student athletes are not exploited, and if they feel that they are, they can simply take their talent elsewhere. Fair is fair. If going to college were a requirement, your case would be much stronger. Since it is 100% voluntary, in my opinion it is non-existent.

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 21, 2009 5:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good post, Tru.

IMO

These kids are in no way being “exploited.” They receive a free education which is nothing to be taken lightly. They have tutors at their disposal – again something that not everyone has. So many people in the University work with them in many capacities to help ensure their success with their education.

They will never know the stress of student loans or having to work long hours at a job while taking classes to make ends meet.

There are ups and downs to every walk of life, but you wont catch me shedding any tears over the unfair treatment or “exploitation” of college athletes. They have it pretty damn good – IMO.

It is not worth an intelligent man’s time to be in the majority. By definition, there are already enough people to do that.

by kentuckygirl0724 on Jul 22, 2009 9:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

awwwww.....c'mon Tink....no sympathy

for the poor and downtrodden??…..lol….and actually some of those kids do have jobs….not all of these kids attend UK….there are a lot of programs where they have to work as part of their scholarship….I am not saying they are killing themselves….just that when someone profits in the way that everyone else does in college sports, the athletes ought to get a piece too….or at least get some peace from the NCAA….No one ever bought you dinner before and asked nothing in return

Remember, we're having fun now!!!

by ALLBLUCAT on Jul 22, 2009 9:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

"No one ever bought you dinner before and asked nothing in return"

There is a joke there……I won’t go for it though…..

If peeing your pants is cool, consider me Miles Davis.

by btcoop71 on Jul 22, 2009 9:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

now coop

I didnt even bring up Billy G to avoid the apprearnce of impropriety….and there were at least 4-5 jokes there…..lol

Remember, we're having fun now!!!

by ALLBLUCAT on Jul 22, 2009 9:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not sure I really get this

…or like it much.

It is not worth an intelligent man’s time to be in the majority. By definition, there are already enough people to do that.

by kentuckygirl0724 on Jul 22, 2009 10:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

just a reference to your undying support

of paying off ol Billy G there ma’am….no surlyness intended….didnt want to start that up again….

Remember, we're having fun now!!!

by ALLBLUCAT on Jul 22, 2009 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

(silently steps back)

slowly backs through the door, closes said door, runs like hell…..

If peeing your pants is cool, consider me Miles Davis.

by btcoop71 on Jul 22, 2009 11:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ahhh

I see. Much better than what I was thinking you meant. I’ll allow it. ;)

It is not worth an intelligent man’s time to be in the majority. By definition, there are already enough people to do that.

by kentuckygirl0724 on Jul 22, 2009 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'll second that

College athletes get perks that that average college student will never get. They are not being exploited. If anything, they are the ones doing the exploiting (if that makes sense). They get a free college education, free room and board, and tons of other free stuff in exchange for playing ball.

If peeing your pants is cool, consider me Miles Davis.

by btcoop71 on Jul 22, 2009 9:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i get fee stuff for playing ball too

shin splints and bruises usually

not as much fun as nike gear and free food

DEEETROIT BASKETBALLL!!!

by davw83 on Jul 22, 2009 9:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

free

DEEETROIT BASKETBALLL!!!

by davw83 on Jul 22, 2009 9:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I figured out ...

… how to minimize that:

1. Play by yourself, and;
2. Play for no more than 30 minutes at a time.

At my age, you worry less about shinsplints and bruises and more about your knees wearing out and leaving you a cripple. :-)

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 22, 2009 10:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Pick up games

it’s too bad so many of us live so far apart. We should have an ASOB pick up game.

DEEETROIT BASKETBALLL!!!

by davw83 on Jul 22, 2009 10:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'd rain 3s on your ass like it was my job

j/k

If peeing your pants is cool, consider me Miles Davis.

by btcoop71 on Jul 22, 2009 11:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes!

And I could come and stand on the sidelines and do this:

http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/feZTYw1aZQQ/SEC+Tournament+Second+Round/K88vHtNqBAo/Billy+Gillispie

It would be so much fun!

It is not worth an intelligent man’s time to be in the majority. By definition, there are already enough people to do that.

by kentuckygirl0724 on Jul 22, 2009 11:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You would have to look prettier doing that

than he did there Tink…..;-)

Remember, we're having fun now!!!

by ALLBLUCAT on Jul 22, 2009 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah.

I would love that. For a little while – 30 minutes at a time. :-)

As long as I get unopposed open looks at threes or can induce people to run at me so I can drive to the basket, all will be well. :-)

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 22, 2009 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dude....

I would so be there!

by wldcatsfreak on Jul 22, 2009 9:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

WWWWWWWWWwwwwww

I always forget how many W’s to write…….anyway…

The World Wide Wes stuff comes from rivals and the national media. It is their attempt at spite. Like you said Tru, no one has every been able to produce credible proof of wrongdoing between him and Calipari at Memphis, and him and Calipari so far at UK.

If peeing your pants is cool, consider me Miles Davis.

by btcoop71 on Jul 21, 2009 1:13 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Shoe Contracts

I’m just wondering why the large shoe companies would worry about college players. They can’t use them in any ads or promotions. I guess it would be to get their foot in the door so to speak—-just like a friend hanging around wanting to be an agent.
Other than UK, I don’t know which shoe brand has which college. Occasionally the action slows down that you might be able to spot a swoosh on the uniform.
But I do agree it could be a big problem if Nike or Adidas controled the best players.
Sorry for the earlier premature posting—-newbie error.

by Tingle on Jul 21, 2009 3:25 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Any idea how many parents have to go buy their kids

the newest bball shoes after they see what the kids at UK are wearing on the court?
Any idea how many High Schools decide on their new uniforms and shoes after they see what the colleges are doing??….again….they know where the $$$ will come in from.

Remember, we're having fun now!!!

by ALLBLUCAT on Jul 21, 2009 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

"parents have to go buy their kids..."

That’s the parents fault. As to the High Schools choices, let them answer to their Board of Education. Its time for a little resonsibility and saying “NO”.

I’m not trying to provide excuses for shoe companies, they have to much power already; I’m just tired of societal and personal justification’s of “everybody’s doing it”. I’ll get off my soapbox, now.

by hoboat33 on Jul 21, 2009 5:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I should not have said "have".....I should have said

“DO you know how much $$$ comes in from parents buying their kids the latest shoes the UK boys wear on the court?”….but you are right…..there needs to me more saying “no”….my wife has no trouble with that phrase……

Remember, we're having fun now!!!

by ALLBLUCAT on Jul 21, 2009 9:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ebay

the best place to buy basketball shoes.

I rock a pair of Nike Elites that UK wore two seasons ago. Got em for half the price of a regular store.

DEEETROIT BASKETBALLL!!!

by davw83 on Jul 21, 2009 10:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Contracts

Shoe companies have contracts with High schools just like college’s. The problem with the shoe companies and the NCAA is that the NCAA has no way to regulate the shoe companies. It cant be done becuase the business the shoe companies are doing with these kids occur after they have left college. It’s not the NCAA’s place to tell students that they cant abide by what their future employer would like them to do.

DEEETROIT BASKETBALLL!!!

by davw83 on Jul 21, 2009 3:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

and further...

does anyone really think the NCAA wants to place restrictions on the very sponsors that line their pockets? Please. The NCAA ignores each and every conflict of interest that is in their collective favor and prosecutes the living hell out of everything that benefits one of their athletes.

by Ontherocks on Jul 21, 2009 3:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

can somebody

just tell me if the kid is coming to UK? I don’t care about all the other stuff. Just don’t break the rules. Tru, you and ABC are having a real good contest to see who can urinate the greatest distance. Enjoyed it though. Glad we don’t have to see the literal.

Food for thought: The virgin birth has much more to do with the absense of a natural earthly father then the use of a virgin mother. Now, chew.....Because, it's called a "corrupt seed", not a "corrupt egg"!

by blubloodcatfan on Jul 21, 2009 9:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

OK.....never had that analogy used on me before online.....

lol…..that was pretty good……ok…..you got me there preach…..hehe…

Remember, we're having fun now!!!

by ALLBLUCAT on Jul 21, 2009 9:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's a long running debate.

It resurfaces from time to time, but it’s all in good fun.

And I don’t urinate. I’m an insect. :-)

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 21, 2009 11:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I ain't fussin

at ya’ll, I laugh out loud (lol ?) most of the time I read comments in here. You guys are good! The thought just kind of struck me there. I like to use the shock effect at times. I do a “make over” sermon that would make you proud! But, I salute you all on here. The entertainment value, comedy value, information value, literary value, update value, insight value, they are all high marks on this site. And there are several of you in here that are talented. I am impressed. I also don’t want to forget the leakinghoze value. that is worth the price of admission.

by blubloodcatfan on Jul 23, 2009 8:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hey

I’ve used the word urinate from the pulpit! Chill out. I also used a cowpattie in a sermon illistration once.

by blubloodcatfan on Jul 21, 2009 9:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Another example of how one can justify anything

Truz, you’re preaching to the choir in Kentucky. But nobody outside the Commonwealth would agree with you. In fact, they would laugh at your argument.

by BillVol on Jul 22, 2009 10:40 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Which one?

I have made so many.

If you are talking about my main argument, I can only point out that all the facts are on my side. So if others want to believe that the sky is pink with purple polka-dots and Calipari is the Antichrist, I guess that’s okay by me. :-)

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 22, 2009 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nobody said he was the Antichrist......geez.....

and the facts as you see them are on your side…..there is still the perception out there…..didnt want you to break your arm there Tru…….all that patting yourself on the back……lol

Remember, we're having fun now!!!

by ALLBLUCAT on Jul 22, 2009 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wait ...

… what are we talking about here? I was talking about the argument in my main post above, not the debate you and I were having.

And I have been known to injure myself with self-congratulation on occasion, no doubt. I just want to make sure that we are talking about the same argument, which is about Calipari, Wesley, and Selby. :-)

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 22, 2009 10:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Facts?

Like using Marc Maggard as a reference? You use him as a reference and your credibility is shot from the word go. And UK has stated, according to Matt Jones, that they haven’t been in contact with Selby? This is proof? This makes your argument a fact? That’s all. You aren’t worth the time.

by BillVol on Jul 22, 2009 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dude your just mad you lost your recruit

I put the chances of him actually coming to UK at 4 to 1. We are recruiting the top four point guards in the class of 2010. We cant take them all.

DEEETROIT BASKETBALLL!!!

by davw83 on Jul 22, 2009 9:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wait a minute ...

… Maggard was not my only reference, now was he? No, I also quoted KSR. And I happen to think that Marc Maggard is telling the truth, whether or not you agree.

I did not say that I had “proof.” I said that the facts are on my side. I have two people whom I generally trust who claim to have spoken to people in the know. On the other hand, Calipari’s detractors have … nothing at all except trying to connect dots between Nike, Wesley, and Calipari. No quotes, no statements, no facts whatever.

I have two people who have UK contacts who say they were told what I reported. What is it you have, exactly? Did I miss a damning quote from Wesley? From Selby? From anybody? Did Sonny Vaccaro suddenly appear, Christ-like, to tell you something the rest of us have missed?

I have reported conversations from connected people. You have … well, you have bupkis. So what was you point again?

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 22, 2009 10:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If we're not worth the time...

Go blog on rocky top!!

"You are what you are and you ain't what you ain't"

by iam4ukintn on Jul 22, 2009 5:56 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Be nice.

We welcome all who would rationally discuss college basketball.

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 22, 2009 10:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

RTT is a good site

Just about everyone there are level headed.

If peeing your pants is cool, consider me Miles Davis.

by btcoop71 on Jul 23, 2009 8:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nice job on the TSK podcast.

In our defense to:

Naturally, the Tennessee media and blogs jumped on that story to connect the dots straight back to Coach Cal, …

I would at least like to point out that RTT isn’t drawing conclusions yet, and my very first comment advocated a wait-and-see approach that simply allowed all possibilities to stay on the table. :-D

And within that context, I’ll offer my opinion on two things. First, while I fully agree that it’s not reasonable to conclude anything against Calipari right now, I am of the opinion that there is absolutely nothing wrong with exploring and understanding the possibilities. Because we simply don’t have a complete continuum of information on the way things worked out, the pieces that do exist allow for a very wide range of interpretations. However, no interpretation will change what actually happened; over time, the ones most off-base will get relegated to the trash heap as further information clarifies. (But again, this is simply an opinion of my own and is a difference in threshold, not a difference in facts or interpretations.)

The second is that most UT people I’ve encountered would have no problem with this as well:

The reality is, UK has stated, according to Matt Jones of Kentucky Sports Radio, that John Calipari has not been in contact with Josh Selby since he committed to Tennessee.

Actually, they’d probably rather strongly agree with that point. Their interpretation is that Wes gets involved in these things precisely so Calipari doesn’t have to. And it’s not so much that Wes is helping Calipari, but that he is helping Nike. (Calipari just happens to be/have been a coach at a Nike-sponsored school that is a UT rival, so the discussion is usually in the context of Calipari.) For a term, the ‘conspiracy theory’ is that Nike is getting involved in the recruiting process in a way that leaves the coaches clean so that the NCAA can’t do anything about it. That then gets into a separate discussion about how involved endorsement companies should be.

And again, I don’t think I’m disagreeing with anything you’ve said. I’m still self-imposing a ban on any conclusions (a general practice that has been remarkably useful for me) so I won’t go so far as to discount any possibilities. But I don’t see anything wrong with allowing for all possibilities at the moment, even if they’re distasteful.

by Hooper on Jul 23, 2009 2:47 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Hoop, you may be right on target there

I will staunchly defend Calipari’s approach as “working the system”….its the NIKE involvement that makes me want to hurl in the direction of Indianapolis and the NCAA corporate offices. I have made a few other references to this in my comments, and have been told that I have no facts, and that my comments are irrational concerning the NCAA and it’s magnamous hypocrasy where corporate dollars are concerned ( and how I feel the players dont participate in that, but that is for a different discussion thread)….but IF…..and I say IF because I too want facts to get presented that are never going to come out, NIKE has that kind of control then it needs to be stopped. This is supposed to be amateur athletics, run by an independent body which is SUPPOSED to be above and beyond corporate influences. They have no problem with holding those athletes to higher standards, just with holding themselves to them.

Remember, we're having fun now!!!

by ALLBLUCAT on Jul 23, 2009 8:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nike

Seems to me like UT just needs to drop Adidas and switch to Nike and you can get your recruit back.

DEEETROIT BASKETBALLL!!!

by davw83 on Jul 23, 2009 9:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

LOL

But then that’d screw us over in football…

by Hooper on Jul 23, 2009 9:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Heh.

Well, that just goes to show where UT’s priorities are. :-)

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 23, 2009 9:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for that.

Regarding this:

Actually, they’d probably rather strongly agree with that point. Their interpretation is that Wes gets involved in these things precisely so Calipari doesn’t have to. And it’s not so much that Wes is helping Calipari, but that he is helping Nike. (Calipari just happens to be/have been a coach at a Nike-sponsored school that is a UT rival, so the discussion is usually in the context of Calipari.) For a term, the ‘conspiracy theory’ is that Nike is getting involved in the recruiting process in a way that leaves the coaches clean so that the NCAA can’t do anything about it. That then gets into a separate discussion about how involved endorsement companies should be.

If Wesley wants to suggest recruits to go to Nike schools, that is absolutely his right. Even if his interests are nefarious, i.e. that he is consciously trying to help Calipari as well as Nike (acting as an agent for Calipari is a violation of NCAA rules) there is still nothing that the NCAA can do about it as long as Calipari and Wesley have not conspired to the act.

That’s supremely unlikely, though. Wesley is clearly sophisticated enough to understand that his friendship with Calipari and association with Nike places a target on every conversation he has. If he really does have Calipari’s best interests at heart as a friend, I am fairly confident that he understands that it’s a net negative if his actions reflect suspicion on Calipari. With that said, he is clearly in the relationship business, so his conversation with Selby was unlikely to have been along the lines of encouraging him to go to Kentucky specifically.

It is possible, and consistent with his responsibilities to Nike, that he may have indicated the advantages in choosing a Nike school over a non-Nike one. I’m not sure what could be done about that if he did, in fact, do so. It is not an NCAA violation, although encouraging a kid to break his word is certainly ethically problematic if that did in fact happen, but there is no place for recourse on that — it is perfectly legal and within NCAA rules.

With all that said, I doubt any of that happened. Wesley is famous for trying to develop personal relationships with future pros for his own later ends, and I expect that was all he was doing.

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 23, 2009 9:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sure.

Whether ‘nonaffiliated entities’ can have discussions with prospects is the more primal question in this debate. Nike isn’t a booster for UK and it’d get dicey for the NCAA to attempt to restrict their business operations. It’s a fascinating question, but one that should be considered in a vacuum rather than within the context of a current event – or else we’ll never get a fair debate over it.

And I certainly don’t mean to imply that Wes is necessarily a villain. Much like recruiting in football, if there’s not an explicit rule against something, you can’t blame somebody for doing it.

by Hooper on Jul 23, 2009 10:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well ...

… one can always blame them … :-)

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 24, 2009 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

As an adjunct to the above ...

… My purpose in pointing out that UK is denying any contact by Calipari is to suggest that Calipari was not really interested in Selby and considered him off the table. In fact, his recruiting suggests strongly that is also the case.

So why would he conspire with Wesley to free up Selby at the risk of NCAA probation when he has so many other recruits at Selby’s position lined up? That isn’t the act of a reasonable or ethical man, and I believe Calipari to be very reasonable and ethical, for the most part.

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 23, 2009 9:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

the current 'charge' from the UTcamp

is that Wes is trying to steer Selby toward any Nike school, not just UK necessarily. Oregon is one that gets mentioned specifically.

by Hooper on Jul 23, 2009 10:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah.

I heard that, too. Well, we just really don’t know, I guess. It is certainly possible, and if so, I guess there’s not much that can be done.

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 24, 2009 11:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Now wait a minute Tru....

Are you saying someone can get a little bit pregnant?

I believe Calipari to be very reasonable and ethical, for the most part.

Now we are saying he will be a “little bit unethical?”…please explain.

Remember, we're having fun now!!!

by ALLBLUCAT on Jul 23, 2009 10:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No, I don't think you understood what I was trying to say.

Everybody is unethical in their behavior from time to time. I have criticized Calipari for essentially running of a recruit he signed as part of a package deal with Memphis a few years back when the more coveted player went straight to the Association. I don’t think that was ethical behavior.

We all have ethical lapses, and I’m sure Calipari does, also. So I hesitate to label him “ethical” with no qualifications, because it’s not only inaccurate, it’s inhuman. :-)

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 24, 2009 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

OK I can live with that

just didnt read that way to me….I tend to look for whats meant not whats written….my bad

Remember, we're having fun now!!!

by ALLBLUCAT on Jul 24, 2009 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hell yea go after Selby! Who cares what others think? This is business and if the kid wants to leave Tenn and go to UK then why not take him? Everyone hates UK and about as many hate Calipari .. Now that they are together everything UK (and Cal ) does will be in question so why care what others think if UK gets Selby? Heaven forbid the kid change his mind and go to UK because he thinks he fits into Cals style..Now if he comes to UK he will carry the lable of being bought by WW. And UK sent WW just to lure Selby away..Just another type of jealousy for UK .. Always stirring up a bunch of crap. If Selby is back on the market then UK should grab him before someone else does!

by RossKYcats on Jul 23, 2009 10:46 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs