Tjarks says Calipari is"one of the most honest coaches in the sport..."
by blenheim bard on Feb 14, 2012 2:59 PM EST
Email
PrintJonathan Tjarks of SB Nation has his most recent update to his NBA Draft Toolbox, which any Kentucky fan will want to read and pass along to any UL fans who constantly play the harpies in his life decrying the "dishonesty" of Coach Cal.
See here for the full report; "NBA Draft Toolbox: John Calipari's Kentucky Squad Stacked Again"
As to why Calipari gets what seems to be his pick of the recruits, Tjarks attributes that to the Dajuan Wagner story.
Having Dajuan Wagner, his first big-time recruit since returning to college, for two or three years would have been huge for Calipari. After a freshman season where he averaged 21.2 points a game on 41 percent shooting, Wagner wasn't a lock to go pro,....
But as Calipari knew, a relatively unathletic 6'3 combo guard couldn't afford to pass up on the chance to be a lottery pick, as there was no guarantee NBA scouts wouldn't fall out of love with his game if he stayed in school.
In 2005, in what could have been his senior year at Memphis, Wager was diagnosed with ulcerative colitis, a rare internal infection which forced him to have surgery to remove his entire colon, effectively ending his basketball career.
Wagner, a reclusive figure since retiring, can always go back to school, but he ended up only having one shot at a making enough money to be financially secure for life.
If he had played for a more traditional coach, Wagner might have nothing to show for his career. Instead, he made over $8 million after the Cleveland Cavaliers took him No. 6 overall in 2002. Calipari could have sold him on the value of a college degree and playing for the love of the game, but it's not really a game for the players Calipari recruits, it's life.
As to the claim that Cal is a "cheater":
His reputation has been tarnished because his first two trips to the Final Four, with UMass in 1996 and Memphis in 2008, have been stripped from the record books. However, it's hard to muster much outrage over what actually happened: an agent was caught paying Marcus Camby at UMass while Derrick Rose has been accused of having someone else take the SAT for him in order to become eligible to play in college. ....
And if you consider the breath-taking number of far more serious scandals that have rocked college sports in the last year alone, Calipari's violations look like small potatoes indeed. He's one of the most honest coaches in the sport, which is probably why so many dislike him.
Unlike Digger and Knight, I think we can count Tjarks as one of Cal's fans.
He then breaks down the strengths and weaknesses of the five Cats he expects to be in the draft this Spring (AD, MK-G, Jones, Lamb and Miller) showing what he expects is there best and worst scenarios in the NBA, and short notes on Wiltjer and Teague who he expects wil be back next year for further seasoning.
A most interesting read.
62 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Wow
How did I miss what eventually happened to Wagner? Tough break, but it does highlight the importance of what Cal did for him.
Jonathan Tjarks...
…one of my favorite basketball writers. He puts together some awesome stuff. He’s more of an NBA guy—writing for RealGM—but delves into college basketball a little bit, especially for these well put-together “toolboxes”. He’s not really anti- or pro- any college team (except for possibly Texas, where he graduated from), more a “call em like I see em” type guy.
Thanks for the link, Bard.
Terrific Read!
I realize I’m preaching to the choir when I point out the travesty surrounding the divergence of penalties handed out by the NCAA COI. If Mike Krzyzewski and Duke didn’t have to suffer vacated games over Corey Maggette/Myron Piggie, UMass and Cal got screwed.
Yep, the inconsistency in enforcement
results in misconceptions such as Coach K walks on water and Coach Cal pollutes it.
Making waves in a sea of blue.
I read that earlier today and thought it was a well written story
(of course, I’m a little biased). It’s always good to hear the non-East Coast bias side of things.
He was also pretty spot on in his player analysis, except I’ll bow out of his NBA player comparisons ‘cause I just don’t know them that well.
I had to come back for one item
Tjarks calls AD a best-case “Black Swan” (worst-case Marcus Camby). Read about the Black Swan theory from Wikipedia.
The black swan theory or theory of black swan events is a metaphor that encapsulates the concept that the event is a surprise (to the observer) and has a major impact. After the fact, the event is rationalized by hindsight.
The theory was developed by Nassim Nicholas Taleb to explain:
The disproportionate role of high-impact, hard-to-predict, and rare events that are beyond the realm of normal expectations in history, science, finance and technology
Re-read that last sentence.
Isn’t it great getting to watch UK games this year? You can rationalize that in hindsight.
I had some pretty strong reactions to the article, honestly.
Not many of them really positive. I put up more of my thoughts on Rocky Top Talk, but in summary I find it ludicrous to defend someone who promotes the idea that cheating to get into College is, for anyone, “okay” and that holding college athletes to any sort of academic standard is stupid and pointless and unfair and that all these people who cheat (because, ultimately, that is what Rose and Camby did) are just victims of circumstance…?
Not my sort of writer, to be blunt.
______________________________________________
Boom. Here comes the Boom. Braydy or not. Here comes the boy from the West.
by bobothevol on Feb 14, 2012 9:35 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
legend has it
Or maybe urban legend, that coach Cal TORE up wagners scholarship in front of him and TOLD him he was entering the draft .
only one rule in my house - uk has to be your favorite college bball team
by memphis wildcat on Feb 14, 2012 11:29 PM EST via mobile reply actions
I'm not 100% in agreement either...
.. taking particular exception to the implication that Calipari knew and turned a “blind eye” to the actions of Camby and Rose when he states"
John Calipari would rather ensure the professional futures of his players than worry about the NCAA’s outdated concepts of amateurism.
Nothing I have read indicates that Calipari or rhe schools had any knowledge of the wrong doings, and when the situation came to Cal’s attention he reported it to the NCAA.
I think Tjarks is trying to put his view forward as Cal’s there. That attitude about money and collegiate sports seems common among writers and fans of the NBA, even those who also write about the NCAA, and some collegiate fans. I don’t agree with it, although I must admit some of the things that the NCAA does reminds me of the “old guard” in the Olympics, who did some rather weird things in the name of keeping the games strictly “amateur”.
I read the other part as an explanation of the behavior, and as I have mentioned before (in commenting on the most recent UConn controversy, when the NYTimes writer tried to claim that these infractions are racially prejudicial) that financially challenged athletes and their families are more likely to be less sophisticated in hiding their tracks and more likely to be tempted. A pair of new Nikes isn’t likely to tempt a Doctor’s son, nor stand out dramatically among his friends.
In your Rocky Top response you jump from your condemnation to make it a condemnation of Calipari.
am I seriously supposed to think highly of you for defending a coach? Especially after you have preached about how much Cal cared about the players… that he promptly fled from in the face of scandal or a be$tt$er$ job$ of$fer?
When Calipari left UMass he left as Coach of the Year, and UMass had the NC [only vacated later] and went to coach in the NBA. does the NBA pay better than UMass? I would certainly expect so, and if your snide comments about leaving for more money are supposed to indicate anything, I suppose it applies to most of us who would change jobs to get paid better. Somehow I think that might apply to you too.
Cal coached ten seasons at Memphis 1999 to 2009, and the season vacated over the Rose SAT test was his third season, hardly "promptly " fleeing the site of the “scandal”. And remember Rose had been cleared to play by the NCAA, with the charge of cheating coming after the event.
And the reason that he wasn’t treated like Pearl is simple, in neither case was he implicated in the actions of the players, which led to the sanctions. In Pearl’s case he was the violator, and then lied about it, and tried to get others to lie to the NCAA playing CYA. Given how your new coach is working out, I think you should be thankful, he looks like a winner.
When you apply it to the question of when a player is ready to make the jump from collegiate to the pro ranks, and whether it is in the best interests of the “program”, then I think Calipari is showing a level of honesty and candor that is all to uncommon among college coaches. And I think if you filter out any question of the long going rivalry between our schools, you will admit that there have been more than a few players that you have questioned why they didn’t make the jump, and concluded that someone had sold them on staying for the good of the ‘program’. A certain OSU player jumps to my mind, how about you?
I agree the basketball players get a fair deal in getting a chance at an education, coaching and training superior to the alternatives, and medical support while they hone their craft prior to going pro. A lot of baseball players agree and prefer to play college ball rather than go directly into the pro minor leagues, and they are eligible to go pro right out of high school. Hockey players with the qualifications academically are also choosing college hockey over minor pro hockey to prepare for the NHL, in many cases.
I would certainly expect so, and if your snide comments about leaving for more money are supposed to indicate anything, I suppose it applies to most of us who would change jobs to get paid better. Somehow I think that might apply to you too.
Absolutely it would, and again: I’m not really trying to attack Calipari for doing it, more attacking the boot-licking journalism that Tjark’s articles drip with. There are several coaches who have not left their programs for “better jobs” because they feel an obligation to finish out their contract, finish up with a group of recruits that he promised he would be around, etcetc., but that’s the business. That’s fine — though if you honestly believe that Cal had absolutely 0% knowledge of what was going on with Camby before he left, or with the Rose situation before he left, then I’ve got a bridge I’d like you to build in Alaska.
and the season vacated over the Rose SAT test was his third season, hardly "promptly " fleeing the site of the "scandal".
It was his final season that was vacated, when Rose led the Tigers to the National Championship game appearance. Cal was hired in very late May of 2009 and the Rose SAT stuff broke publicly just days later.
then I think Calipari is showing a level of honesty and candor that is all to uncommon among college coaches.
I agree, don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying it’s wrong to prod people towards the NBA. To suggest that he only does it out of the love in his heart, though, is absurd: Cal’s rep is a guy that will get the best players into the NBA soon and with a high lottery pick. That helps recruiting as much as anything else Cal has done, I am 100% sure of that. To say that Wagner (who, for the record, I am very happy for as someone who has had that disease diagnosed in a close friend) was made rich only because of Cal’s complete honesty is a bit dishonest: Wagner might very well have gone Pro anyways, and probably would have his Sophmore year without Cal’s help. That he didn’t is, in hindsight, a very good story.
______________________________________________
Boom. Here comes the Boom. Braydy or not. Here comes the boy from the West.
It was very late March 2009 or April 1, 2009
Almost an entire year after Memphis got the email from the NCAA (in May 2008) I believe. Also after Memphis was told that Rose had been cleared to play. “He is good to go…..On third thought, no, he isn’t wasn’t. Sorr-ry Charlie!” ;-) The NCAA charged the 07-08 season as null. Cal was at Memphis for the 08-09 season, if I am reading your ESPN link correctly.
Blue... there is no other color to Bleed !!!
The Rose thing has two points with it:
May 2008, May 2009. The first was when Rose was initially cleared to play, the second was when — after further investigation — it was found that Rose had someone else take the SAT for him and was retroactively deemed inelligable. These findings came out late spring, very very shortly on the heels of Cal accepting the Kentucky job. I recall it being just days at most, tbh.
______________________________________________
Boom. Here comes the Boom. Braydy or not. Here comes the boy from the West.
I will only address this one sentence, just because the rest has been adequately rebutted elsewhere.
To say that Wagner (who, for the record, I am very happy for as someone who has had that disease diagnosed in a close friend) was made rich only because of Cal’s complete honesty is a bit dishonest: Wagner might very well have gone Pro anyways, and probably would have his Sophmore year without Cal’s help. That he didn’t is, in hindsight, a very good story.
The fact of the matter is that Calipari was looking out for Wagner’s best interest, regardless of his eventual health problems. The fact that he did that is not dishonest, nor is it dishonest to suggest that it is possible Wagner only made money because Calipari insisted it was a mistake to turn pro immediately.
Was Calipari thinking that Wagner might be diagnosed with a rare inflammatory bowel disease that would require an organ replacement? Of course not, but he was rightly concerned about the possibility of an injury that could have led to the exact same result as the ulcerative colitis. The method of incapacity is completely irrelevant to his clear motive of looking out for the young man.
It is you who are being dishonest, primarily due to cognitive dissonance — you cannot stand to acknowledge the possibility that Calipari might be a really sincere “players-first” guy because your opinion of him simply will not allow it.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
Not at all.
And, like I said at the beginning, this isn’t meant to be a criticism of Cal, but rather Tjark’s stance at all in college sports, and ya’lls praising something that he writes like this.
I don’t think that Cal’s problems are rooted in his insincerity or lack of caring for his players. Sometimes I think he has too much of the former, but encouraging his players to take the opportunities presented by being a sure-fire lottery pick are not one of those things (I’ll point instead to some discipline measures he “enforced” while at Memphis. He’s done a better job, imo, at Kentucky).
______________________________________________
Boom. Here comes the Boom. Braydy or not. Here comes the boy from the West.
Some of his comments are praiseworthy. Not all.
Decrying the whole piece as dishonest because he takes a stand on college basketball you (or for that matter, I) is, in my view, not reasonable.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
I'm not decrying the whole piece.
I’m decrying complimenting one’s judgement while disagreeing with their approach to ethics. To grossly make the situation extreme, it’s like having the Taliban support something you do: yay, someone likes what I do! Oh.. that someone is a person who probably isn’t the best ally to have on this topic.
______________________________________________
Boom. Here comes the Boom. Braydy or not. Here comes the boy from the West.
Wait just a sec here.
Let’s just make sure we are talking apples to apples. I assume the offending paragraph is this one:
Ignore the absurdity of worrying about whether a 21-year-old college student would accept cash for playing basketball and put yourself in Rose’s shoes. The youngest of four sons, he was the last hope for his family to get out of the South Side of Chicago. But because of the age limit, he couldn’t go pro, while not playing in college would have dramatically lowered his draft stock. He was supposed to accept losing millions of dollars because he couldn’t pass an ultimately meaningless test that would have no bearing on his professional career?
Okay, did you even bother to follow the link to the article that provides context to the statement? What he is clearly trying to say here is that it is wrong for the NBA to require college for one year, not right for Rose to cheat on the test, however meaningless it is in the real world.
From Rose’s standpoint, that situation represents a classic ethical dilemma – doing the right thing jeopardizes a powerful non-ethical consideration, i.e. he is faced with the possibility of not being able to attend college and the possibility of not being able to lift his dirt-poor family out of poverty even if he otherwise plays by the rules. The author is merely pointing out this conflict, not endorsing his actions, although for all I know, he may well agree with what Rose was alleged to have done.
So what you are doing here is saying that he is praising Rose’s actions by not condemning them. But to condemn him requires that you ignore the fact that he and his family is drowning in poverty, and he is supposed to ignore that and play by the rules, even if it means that they must be forever condemned to that poverty by a score on an exam that is meaningful only because circumstances having nothing to do with his ability threaten his entire future? That’s a tough pill to swallow, and I guarantee that many otherwise good people would choke on it.
There are many things wrong with the current system, and this is but one of them, but I don’t agree with any suggestion that cheating is an ethical way out, and the author isn’t saying it is. What he is saying is that Rose had a difficult choice that we simply can’t empathize with, and he’s right about that. Rose has to live with his choices, but don’t blame the author for pointing out the obvious – that this system threatened to ensnare and derail his one chance to lift his family out of poverty. It’s the same thing as stealing when you are starving – ethical considerations are often, and sometimes rightfully, placed below powerful non-ethical considerations like life or death, but not only that extreme.
I’m not saying that is so in this case. I am saying that I have no idea what I would do faced with the same choice, and I am very glad I don’t have to.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
I'll keep it short and only address one point
There are several coaches who have not left their programs for "better jobs" because they feel an obligation to finish out their contract….
Division I? Please name them.
War is God's way of teaching Americans geography. - Ambrose Bierce
Troy Calhoun quickly comes to mind.
As does Chris Petersen.
______________________________________________
Boom. Here comes the Boom. Braydy or not. Here comes the boy from the West.
Sorry,
Thought we were talking about basketball…..and getting offers from big name programs. BTW – Who offered Calhoun a job? (Wasn’t aware the USAF Academy’s players were there primarily for football and the coach.)
War is God's way of teaching Americans geography. - Ambrose Bierce
Tennessee
(reportedly)
If I cared more about my UNC side, I'd call myself "Tar Volon," and that'd be awesome.
Bolts, Canes, Preds (now in different conferences!). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity
Rocky Top Talk
by Incipient_Senescence on Feb 15, 2012 10:00 PM EST up reply actions
"It breaks your heart. It is designed to break your heart. The game begins in the spring, when everything else begins again, and it blossoms in the summer, filling the afternoons and evenings, and then as soon as the chill rains come, it stops and leaves you to face the fall alone." A. Bartlett Giamatti
by sddbaker on Feb 16, 2012 2:10 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
And, let's recap:
I never said that Cal turned a “blind eye” to the events, nor did I say he facilitated them or ignored them in any way. It happens, players you recruit do stupid things and the school is punished for it because the player usually can’t be. But the notion that Cal knew nothing of what was going on either time before he left for better jobs is, to me, absurd. If it’s true then Cal has an incredibly poor grasp on his program, and if it’s true — well, that’s really what people need to decide for themselves. I think it is morally irresponsible to leave a program in the vanguard of scandal, and that’s just that.
______________________________________________
Boom. Here comes the Boom. Braydy or not. Here comes the boy from the West.
Not you...
but Tjarks implies him turning a blind eye with his statement…
John Calipari would rather ensure the professional futures of his players than worry about the NCAA’s outdated concepts of amateurism. ……
And if you consider the breath-taking number of far more serious scandals that have rocked college sports in the last year alone, Calipari’s violations look like small potatoes indeed….
And as I originally wrote it I had taken exception to those remarks and deleted them before posting for brevity and for the fact I thought they were a side branch to the main theme of the article.
By-the-by, I have read nothing that Cal has said that implies he feels the rules should be ignored, but he has made comments about how they might be changed to be more reasonable, as per allowing for a living stipend to scholarship students. I benefited from that “living stipend” on my academic scholarship when I went to Kenyon College, and when I was at UK was paid to tutor the same athletes that aren’t allowed to earn walking around money today. given the abuses of the “pay, but no work” jobs that used to exist, I think the modest “living stipend” is a worthwhile idea.
You say:
.
But the notion that Cal knew nothing of what was going on either time before he left for better jobs is, to me, absurd. If it’s true then Cal has an incredibly poor grasp on his program, and if it’s true — well, that’s really what people need to decide for themselves.
And ignore that Calipari turned Camby in when he learned of it. And as for deciding for ourselves, we can do that on “emotion” as fans, or rely on the NCAA investigations, which found no basis for faulting the coaches or the schools in either case. I can feel the rules are sometimes dumb, I don’t feel that having a barbeque at the coach’s house is a horrendous act, but we can see how it can be horrendous when we look at the acts of a booster at Miami. Pearl’s big sin was lying to the investigators.
I’m old enough to remember the Sutton scandal with the envelope of money, and was ashamed that such a thing happened at my school. I sympathize with fans who end up with their school besmirched by the actions of those they trusted and revered. And I grew up with an intense dis-like for the orange of UT and love of the blue of UK. That does not mean I want “bad things” to happen to them like the plagues that God brought down on the Egyptians to free the Jews or those that Job suffered to test his faith.
I will cheerfully root for the Wildcats to defeat the Vols in any contest, heck I will root for Middle Tennessee to beat up on the Vols when it come s to that., but that’s all part of the game, isn’t it?
by blenheim bard on Feb 15, 2012 10:51 AM EST up reply actions
Personally I have nothing but sympathy for people who are so blind as to continue to imply that coach Calipari was and is a cheater. I reiterate what I said 2 years ago. This man has never even been accused of a violation of NCAA guidelines.
In our society a person is innocent until PROVEN guilty. To accuse, without proof, is bad enough. But to declare one guilty without proof is insane. You’re welcome.
::searches really really hard for whoever called Calipari a cheater here:: I’m not seeing it.
______________________________________________
Boom. Here comes the Boom. Braydy or not. Here comes the boy from the West.
your'e right bobo.....no one called him a cheater HERE
but he was called that and a lot worse at RTT and numerous other places from the day it was announced he was coming here and even before that……you don’t have to search hard to find those comments…..
I am now and shall forever be the Cat in The Hat, The Artist Formerly Known As ABC!!!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Feb 15, 2012 7:19 AM EST up reply actions
Bobo has been respectable here
We asked him to not call Cal names HERE and he obliged. We cannot expect RTT to follow our wishes.
Blue... there is no other color to Bleed !!!
that does not mean that it should be implied that it never happened......
and the statement, no matter how it is worded, has that connotation…..But his response was posted at RTT, and the alluded to here…..that brings it into the conversation…..talking about half the story is like my breakfast including eggs and no bacon……..sure, I’ll eat it, but it leaves me feeling like something is missing
I am now and shall forever be the Cat in The Hat, The Artist Formerly Known As ABC!!!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Feb 15, 2012 8:07 AM EST up reply actions
from the day it was announced he was coming to Kentucky?
nah, man, your timeline is off. We’ve been hating him waaaaaay longer than that. He’s the one who said that playing UT did absolutely nothing to boost Memphis’ non-conference schedule
If I cared more about my UNC side, I'd call myself "Tar Volon," and that'd be awesome.
Bolts, Canes, Preds (now in different conferences!). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity
Rocky Top Talk
by Incipient_Senescence on Feb 15, 2012 12:22 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Got under your skin, didn't he
I love the waaaaaay you put it.
"SPORTS"--Not interested----"CATS"--Pull up a chair,I've got all night.
When you have a winning record in a "rivalry"
And the opposing coach whines about having to play you every year because “OMG Tennessee is suxz”… yeah, gets under your skin. What Cal was really saying was that he didn’t like it that Tennessee got such great exposure (see also: beating his teams) in Memphis.
______________________________________________
Boom. Here comes the Boom. Braydy or not. Here comes the boy from the West.
by bobothevol on Feb 15, 2012 2:54 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Hi, Bobo
"But the real issues that I have with Tjarks, and his article, is what you won’t find quoted on A Sea of Blue."
I think you’ve got some substance to your criticisms. But, I’d like to come to the defense of ‘blenheim bard.’ With no attempt to put words into the ‘bard’s’ mouth, the reason you didn’t find those portions of Tjark’s article to which you most objected quoted on ASOB was that he and most members of the BBN have problems with those same aspects of Tjark’s rationalizations as you did.
However, for you to take the ‘bard’ and us to task for lauding other portions of Tjark’s article, essentially picking and choosing what to applaud while ignoring others parts, is a little over the top, especially by a member of a blog community who just recently went rafting on the river Denial over their own basketball coach.
Despite assertions to the contrary, members of the BBN are not "win at any cost" demon fans willing to "violate all the rules" and "betray any trust." We believe in winning through excellence. [Some of the BBN believe in this ethos and Kentucky basketball’s adherence to it so strongly, delusionally imo, that they reject even the possibility our program could be guilty of the violations it has been punished for in the past, the last being over 20 years ago.] I personally don’t know any ‘Cat fans who believe our program shouldn’t adhere within a set of consistently interpreted and applied rules. Maybe most of us don’t believe the NCAA consistently interprets and applies its rules, particularly with regard to their application to University of Kentucky athletics, but not one of the Kentucky fans I know thinks it would be ‘ok’ for a player to take money or other non-pecuniary compensation from an agent or have someone else take an entrance exam. So, while we can appreciate the praise Tjark heaped on Cal and our team, we are honestly discerning enough to abjure the parts that don’t fit our own ethical views.
"… am I seriously supposed to think highly of you for defending a coach? Especially after you have preached about how much Cal cared about the players… that he promptly fled from in the face of scandal or a be$tt$er$ job$ of$fer?"
Is this a serious condemnation of Cal? Cal left UMass because he got an NBA job offer. There was no flight from consequences. He got the NBA job offer because he coached a mid-major to the Final Four – a juxtaposition of events which coincided with the NCAA investigation of Marcus Camby. If a teacher leaves education to do accounting, does that mean when she was a teacher she didn’t care about or do right by her students – of course not.
As background for the benefit of Vol fans who may not be aware of all the events at UMass. After taking University of Massachusetts Amherst to the 1996 NCAA Final Four, Calipari’s star center Marcus Camby was found to have taken money, clothes, jewelry and the services of prostitutes from two sports agents, John Lounsbury and Wesley Spears, clearly in contravention of NCAA rules. However, the NCAA’s investigation found neither the University nor Calipari were aware of Camby’s relationship with the sport agents. (Indeed, Camby lived off campus at the time and testified that he went to extended lengths to hide his activities from Calipari and the rest of the UMass coaching staff. It was Calipari who reported Camby to the NCAA when Camby came to him and confessed his violations.) And as unusual as it was up to that time for the school and coach not to suffer some severe penalties when a player is involved in a scandal like this, Calipari received no personal sanctions at all and UMass only had to refund the $151,000 it earned from NCAA tournament appearances that year and forfeit its tournament victories because Camby’s involvement with agents made him retroactively ineligible. (Camby later reimbursed UMass the $151,000.) In fact, the NCAA stated in its correspondence that both Calipari and UMass were themselves victims of Camby’s actions.
"I think it is morally irresponsible to leave a program in the vanguard of scandal, and that’s just that."
Like you, most people who find fault with Cal in this situation normally state either they don’t believe he didn’t know Camby was compromised or they stipulate that even if he didn’t know – as head coach, he should have and was thereby guilty (of something, if not clearly specified) and the NCAA was remiss in not sanctioning him. But despite how you may feel about Calipari’s culpability or lack thereof, the University and NCAA didn’t think he had done anything wrong – so what was the real ethical bar to his taking a great new career opportunity? There wasn’t any large burden of sanctions the program had to shoulder going forward. Though it’s hard to fault the UMass fans who felt gigged to have their only Final-Four vacated, the reality is the program walked away from the NCAA investigation entirely clean. And, given your opinion of Calipari and your previously expressed denouncements regarding his character and integrity, I’m surprised you didn’t laud his departure from college athletics to the Nets.
And finally, this notion that being paid a large sum of money somehow sullies a person’s motives or morals. Lots of people ‘do well by doing good.’ Pretty much all the heads of large charities and philanthropic organizations make big bucks, even some of the religious ones. And even if they didn’t, though Cal and his wife Joan garner major philanthropic accolades, you would hardly expect Calipari to undertake some vow of poverty to prove he cares about his players. In fact, to quote Abraham Lincoln, "It is literally true that you can succeed best and quickest by helping others to succeed."
by TeamWeaver on Feb 15, 2012 7:18 AM EST reply actions 4 recs
Great comment TW
If I may fix one thing, “his wife Joan Ellen”. ;-)
Blue... there is no other color to Bleed !!!
I think someone else had the "synaptic misfire".....lol...
or more like “synaptic meltdown”
I am now and shall forever be the Cat in The Hat, The Artist Formerly Known As ABC!!!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Feb 15, 2012 10:02 AM EST up reply actions
thank you
and you hit the nail on the head about my editing of my comments.
by blenheim bard on Feb 15, 2012 10:53 AM EST up reply actions
Outstanding.
I would not change a thing except the already-noted wife’s name.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
Great response,
And I’ll only respond to one portion of it — mostly because I just came off an 8 hour shift of moving boxes from here to there. Like I_S kinda says below, there’s reasonable defense of Cal and then there’s irrational defense of Cal. Saying that “there was nothing more he could do about the Camby situation” is rational, and that’s fine and a plenty fair argument — one that I would agree with. Saying that “he didn’t know at all” is, in my opinion, a bit naive of understanding how things work. My issue with Cal and his two biggest “controversies” isn’t how guilty he was, it was that he left on the heels of vacating the school’s best success. To me he cut-ship and ran rather than making a bit of an effort to ensure he left a stable product behind him.
I don’t think Coach Cal is a horrible person. I don’t hate him. He’s done a lot more for charity than I ever will, and I really respect that. If I met him I’d probably be giddy with the sort of excitement most of us get when meeting a famous person. But neither do I think that he’s morally above reproach; there are several instances I can point to while he was at Memphis that I had serious problems with how he handled player discipline and comments he made about opposing players, fanbases, coaches, yaddayadda. He’s been better at not being an egotistical jerk at Kentucky, I will say that, but we have a much longer relationship with Cal that ya’ll have, and better memories. We don’t Like Cal, and we never will, the same reason none of you guys would have ever liked Pearl regardless of the way he exited UT.
______________________________________________
Boom. Here comes the Boom. Braydy or not. Here comes the boy from the West.
Though to add just a small tidbit:
I think you can do all the right things and still do something wrong: see also, Alabama Greyshirting.
______________________________________________
Boom. Here comes the Boom. Braydy or not. Here comes the boy from the West.
Well, TW...
…but not one of the Kentucky fans I know thinks it would be ‘ok’ for a player to take money or other non-pecuniary compensation from an agent or have someone else take an entrance exam.
I think I may have to raise my hand a little bit on this one.
As for the latter, which is academic fraud, I have no support whatsoever. I want these kids to be students. Real students. I have no tolerance for academic fraud on a university campus.
But the former is taken from this bizarre world of uber-amateurism that the universities, through the NCAA, have created for their benefit. Here is where things get a lot more slippery for me. Do the family finances of young teenagers skilled in acting, singing or tennis not benefit from the youngster’s skills? Do not the teenagers themselves?
When I was in college, I really did not spend much time thinking about if the student sitting beside me in class was breaking any “rules”. But if I did, about all I would care about is that the other student was not cheating on their test. That they were not committing academic fraud. (Again, that is if I cared anything about them at all, which in fact I usually didn’t.) It sure as heck made no difference to me how much money they had. Or were earning. Or made while they were in high school. Or anything else about their family finances.
I cannot for the life of me imagine going back in time and changing just because the student beside me happened to also be a basketball or football player. Why would I care?
Going back to your original quote, I really and truly do not equate academic fraud with breaking one of the NCAA’s rules on uber-amateurism for its basketball and football players or beyond that… for high school football and basketball players. There is just no way those two are the same to me. I cannot tolerate the former, but have reached the point of never wanting to read anything else for the rest of my life pertaining to the latter.
I think it is a real sleight of hand on the part of the universities to have created this world where the public can even begin to equate the two and do not know why so many people continue to lap all of that up like cats (no pun intended) sitting in front of a bowl of milk. Maybe it is because it gives fans the opportunity to point fingers at another program ever so often and, feeling a sudden surge in moral superiority, call them “cheaters”? Fans are competitive with each other.
And no, I am not necessarily saying that all of the uber-amateurism rules should just be ignored and broken. They are what they are. Rules.
But, good grief…. I already had enough to worry about while I was sitting in class. If there is anything that can make following college basketball tiresome, it is this.
.
"I'm not present I'm a drug that makes you dream I'm an aerostar I'm a cutlass supreme In the wrong lane Trying to turn against the flow I'm the ocean I'm the giant undertow I'm the ocean..." - N. Young
Well, now we get down to what really tells the tale.
We have reached the point that we all knew was coming this year. Frankly I expected it a lot sooner, but not from the direction whence it came. Tjarks is an NBA recruiting writer, so frankly, I had never read anything he wrote before this article was posted. But after bobo decided to lend his assessment to the comments, and to post even more over at RTT, I decided to go back and read the guy’s posts from about the last 6 weeks. Truthfully, I will never be a huge NBA fan, simply because I don’t have the time to follow it the way I do college basketball. But Tjarks strikes me as a reasonable person who finds some of the NCAA’s archaic nonsense to be less than genuine. However, that is not what this was truly about.
Tjarks finds Calipari to be a breath of fresh air in a profession that is riddled with hypocrisy and genuine ignorance of reality. Both these traits are found to be admirable by the NCAA, but to the rest of the world, not so much so. And I find it somewhat amazing that someone who’s own coach was purged from the system by rules which put him in a situation where he felt the need to lie to investigators over something as innocuous as a barbecue, is looking at a writer’s comments concerning the coach who has put more players in the NBA in the last three years than anyone and complaining about his writing about him.
Look, rules exist for a reason, and whatever you want to say about the situation it ultimately boils down to the fact that rules were broken under Calipari’s watch and, subsequently, he was punished for them with his two most successful teams having to vacate what they accomplished.
I wonder if this would have been your response had the players at Tennessee had been found to be in violation of NCAA rules when they decided to go" joyriding" last year? Instead they were only in violation of the law, so I guess that gets them a pass? This sounds more to me like situational ethics at best.
Of course, I suppose us Tennessee fans should breathe a sigh of relief, shouldn’t we? I am certain that Tjark’s article about how Bruce Pearl was a victim of circumstance and stupid NCAA rules is right around the corner, right?
Since Tjarks limits his writing (for the most part) to NBA recruiting, I doubt it happens, but what if he did? Or what if he were asked the question and answered it as being offended that Pearl were in the situation to begin with? Would that improve you opinion of him?
I am the world’s worst homer…..admitted and have no qualms about it. However, using feigned moral indignation to cover up for something lacking elsewhere is just a waste of time and energy when it has no basis beyond sounding like a scene from Macbeth.
Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
…………………full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
I am now and shall forever be the Cat in The Hat, The Artist Formerly Known As ABC!!!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Feb 15, 2012 8:04 AM EST reply actions
I don't think bobo is defending Pearl's honor here (and with good reason)
just saying that there’s defending Cal in certain reasonable ways and there’s defending Cal by calling him the most honest all the while saying that his breaking rules (if it happened) didn’t matter because the rules are dumb. The former is fine. The latter is what Tjarks’ article was all about.
If I cared more about my UNC side, I'd call myself "Tar Volon," and that'd be awesome.
Bolts, Canes, Preds (now in different conferences!). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity
Rocky Top Talk
by Incipient_Senescence on Feb 15, 2012 12:31 PM EST up reply actions
My respons would be ...
… that he may be the most honest, especially about his intentions. I see nothing flawed about that comment in the context in which it was offered. If you divorce it from its context, then maybe you have a point and maybe you don’t. Nobody has credibly accused him of dishonesty or offered defensible proof of it — almost everyone just imputes it to him based on an assumption he must be.
What the author things of the rules are, in my view, irrelevant to the substance of his piece. They are used, as if it were necessary, as a justification to contradict the unalloyed lie that most people are convinced is the truth, but I think that is simply wasted words.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
I think his feelings on rule-following (not the rules, mind you, the rule-following) lend doubt on his ability to judge moral character
that is all. It’s not about Cal, it’s about Tjarks
If I cared more about my UNC side, I'd call myself "Tar Volon," and that'd be awesome.
Bolts, Canes, Preds (now in different conferences!). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity
Rocky Top Talk
by Incipient_Senescence on Feb 15, 2012 3:59 PM EST up reply actions
You will never find me
defending a Tennessee player for violating any rule at any level. I get happy when I see players harshly punished for making mistakes whether they are on my team or not and I always gain respect for a coach who suspends players from a big game.
As far as situation ethics go, you’d have to find me saying that I don’t think Tennessee players should be punished for XXX to have a point, there. I don’t think what Pearl did was as horrible as what other coaches have done recently — nothing Pearl did really gave him a competitive advantage or was a violation used with the intent to sway someone’s mind — but it comes down to rules exist for a reason: order. When you start subjectively disregarding some of them because you think they’re “dumb” you open up the door for interpretation at all levels.
But, yeah. Like I_S says, it’s one thing to say that Cal and Memphis wasn’t at fault for the Derrick Rose thing as they got him cleared, blah blah, didn’t know this or that, blah blah… And its another thing to say that Derrick Rose is a victim of the NCAA system because he had to cheat on a test in order to qualify for a minimum academic standard at a public university.
______________________________________________
Boom. Here comes the Boom. Braydy or not. Here comes the boy from the West.
But the guy is paid to voice his opinion as it pertains to NBA level talent in college....
he is not claiming that as fact.
I am now and shall forever be the Cat in The Hat, The Artist Formerly Known As ABC!!!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Feb 15, 2012 3:36 PM EST up reply actions
But, yeah. Like I_S says, it’s one thing to say that Cal and Memphis wasn’t at fault for the Derrick Rose thing as they got him cleared, blah blah, didn’t know this or that, blah blah… And its another thing to say that Derrick Rose is a victim of the NCAA system because he had to cheat on a test in order to qualify for a minimum academic standard at a public university.
Okay, so you disagree with that. So do I. That doesn’t render his whole argument, or his entire piece dishonest or ridiculous.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
it just casts doubt on his moral judgments in general
Rules are dumb and people should ignore them, so kudos to Cal for not worrying about them. Isn’t he so honest?
There still may be some good points in the article, but he poisons his own well to some extent
If I cared more about my UNC side, I'd call myself "Tar Volon," and that'd be awesome.
Bolts, Canes, Preds (now in different conferences!). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity
Rocky Top Talk
by Incipient_Senescence on Feb 15, 2012 5:36 PM EST up reply actions
So, because he finds the rules to be both hypocritical and out of date, he cannot hold a valid opinion of anything?
The man gave his opinion of Calipari’s approach to helping his kids get NBA or other professional basketball careers, which he is not just good at, he is the best, and because people who played under Calipari broke rules, you find the man’s opinion to be tainted because he dismisses that as being no big deal?
I am just curious, were any of you around for the Salem Witch Trials??? Because it seems to me that you would have fit in well. One of these days a whole lot of people surrounding college sports are going to be brought out of the dark ages. I have no problem with following the rules, but persecution without proof of wrongdoing went out with the Spanish Inquisition.
I am now and shall forever be the Cat in The Hat, The Artist Formerly Known As ABC!!!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Feb 15, 2012 7:55 PM EST up reply actions
did I ever say he can't have a valid opinion on anything?
when you’re advocating rule-breaking, I’m not really interested in your thoughts on integrity. that’s it. I don’t understand how this makes me a witch-hunter
If I cared more about my UNC side, I'd call myself "Tar Volon," and that'd be awesome.
Bolts, Canes, Preds (now in different conferences!). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity
Rocky Top Talk
by Incipient_Senescence on Feb 15, 2012 10:06 PM EST up reply actions
please see Glenn's post above......
just saying that there’s defending Cal in certain reasonable ways and there’s defending Cal by calling him the most honest all the while saying that his breaking rules (if it happened) didn’t matter because the rules are dumb. The former is fine. The latter is what Tjarks’ article was all about.
I assume when you read your own words above I do not have to explain further. The whole point here is that the entire article is not about what you are claiming……but because you seem to disagree with the contention that Rose cheated to get in (and Tjarks didnt take high offense with that) that his praise of Calipari’s abilities should be subject to complete disregard
I am now and shall forever be the Cat in The Hat, The Artist Formerly Known As ABC!!!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Feb 15, 2012 10:43 PM EST up reply actions
I saw Glenn's post above
that’s why I responded to it. I’ve even clarified multiple times, and you’re still attacking a straw man.
You’re right in that it’s not what the whole article is about. The article is mostly about draft evaluations, on which I cast no aspersions. However, it is what the claims I’m disputing are about.
Tjarks straight out says that John Calipari isn’t worried about little things like NCAA rules. And he says that as a good thing. And that it makes him honest. And that the honesty is the reason he’s disliked.
Those are four claims. The way I see it, the combination of the first and second make the author someone unqualified to speak on the third and fourth. That’s all I’m saying. And keep in mind these claims have nothing to do with Calipari’s abilities as a coach. They have nothing to do with the ability or integrity of the players. They even have nothing to do with Calipari’s strong relationships with his players (which I’ve already mentioned is established rather nicely earlier). So don’t try to say I’m needlessly throwing away good arguments on any of those points.
If I cared more about my UNC side, I'd call myself "Tar Volon," and that'd be awesome.
Bolts, Canes, Preds (now in different conferences!). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity
Rocky Top Talk
by Incipient_Senescence on Feb 15, 2012 11:02 PM EST up reply actions
Assuming for a moment that you were right about the first two (just for the sake of argument)
What in the Wide Wide World of Sports do they have to do with the others? First off, Tjarks makes a mistake by saying that Calipari doesn’t worry about NCAA rules. If that were the case the SEC would have been dealing with a certain center named Kanter last year with just as much difficulty as they are having with Davis this year. Calipari, I believe, sees a hypocrisy in those rules, as do many others. The difference being is that he has found a way to make his opinions known without coming off as crazy or disgruntled.
The problem here is the fact that still, even after everything that has been brought to light over the years, some people still refuse to recognize the fact that John Calipari has not been charged with anything in the prior two incidents that everyone keeps bringing up. My only complaint with Tjarks article is that it does not go dfar enough in raising that point. He sums it up by claiming that Calipari doesn’t worry about it, he just goes on. That is incorrect, but it is simply that writer’s way of rolling up the things he was not focusing on ans getting to his point. I don’t believe he is accurate in what he stated, but I understand his logic.
The funny thing is, if Calipari’s record right now was 13-12…..none of you would care, nor would Tjarks. If he hadn’t been so successful in the past, no one would think about it twice. But because he is now as successful as he is, and still doing things basically the same way, only on a much grander scale, it scalds some folks out there. I dont like NCAA rules…..I think they are a load of hypocritical horse manure. I could care less if Calipari followed even one of them, except for the fact that you have to follow them to compete in NCAA Basketball. And after the situation your very own coach was put through in that he felt he had to lie to the NCAA over what has to be the stupidest rule I have ever heard of, I would think that you folks who claimed to have such support for your own coach over the time he was there, would have some of those same thoughts. But hey, if you don’t , you don’t. To each his own.
The truth is there are no good arguments here. Tjarks wrote an article praising what he believed incorrectly to be Calipari’s attitude, and his abilities to put those young men into the NBA, but it doesn’t make Tjarks a bad journalist, nor does it make it a bad article. It just gives all of us something to hammer back and forth at each other over.
Another day in paradise.
I am now and shall forever be the Cat in The Hat, The Artist Formerly Known As ABC!!!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Feb 15, 2012 11:28 PM EST up reply actions
seriously, Greg
we’ve had reasonable discussions here before, but you’re just not reading what I’m writing here.
“assuming for a moment you were right about the first two”? What assuming? It’s there in black and white (and red for the hyperlink). He says in no uncertain terms that Cal isn’t really concerned with the rules (which, like you, I believe is false). And it’s obvious from the tone of the article that he sees that as a good thing. If you deny that, then there’s absolutely no basis for discussion.
As far as what the first two have to do with the third, it’s the same point I’ve repeated about a thousand times already. The first two make up a moral judgment that I find laughably off base. The third is another moral judgment made by the same person whose moral judgments I’ve just found to be laughably off base. I am now unlikely to believe it. Is that really such a stretch?
And you’re right, if Cal were 13-12, Tjarks wouldn’t have written the article, and we wouldn’t be having this discussion. I’d probably still dislike Cal, because he’s still the man that was so easy to hate at Memphis. Some things never change.
Tjarks wrote an article praising what he believed incorrectly to be Cal’s attitude (and which would’ve been a bad attitude, were it Cal’s attitude), and it doesn’t make Tjarks a bad journalist, but it does make Tjarks’ point bad.
If I cared more about my UNC side, I'd call myself "Tar Volon," and that'd be awesome.
Bolts, Canes, Preds (now in different conferences!). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity
Rocky Top Talk
by Incipient_Senescence on Feb 16, 2012 12:06 AM EST up reply actions
I think you are missing Tjarks points as a whole.....but thats just me.
I am now and shall forever be the Cat in The Hat, The Artist Formerly Known As ABC!!!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Feb 17, 2012 9:35 AM EST up reply actions
Open Thread For Televised Practice?
Hope so, needed.
"In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
Glenn, a2, bard, Weaver and Greg
I was hoping someone would show up and respond. Thanks for coming to the rescue. My typing skills prevent anything more than a two line comment.
"SPORTS"--Not interested----"CATS"--Pull up a chair,I've got all night.
I asked Tjarks for clarification...
..but found it in a link within the story http://www.policymic.com/articles/don-t-blame-college-athletes-for-cheating
While I don’t accept it whole clothe, he makes a valid point I think with his observation that there is no viable alternative to playing collegiate sports if you wish to go pro in either football or basketball. this I would point out does not apply to such sports as baseball or hockey, which have valid developmental paths that have no academic requirements.
Nothing I have read or heard from Calipari suggests that he condones “cheating”, although given his own background i am sure he can sympathize with the struggle of poor kids to parlay their athletic prowess into a “golden ticket” out of poverty,.. regardless of how unsuited they might be for the academic life. And having seen and paid the cost of having athletes get caught violating the rules I feel confident that he works hard at avoiding a repetition of that lesson.
And I think on reading the linked post on ‘cheating" it is Tjork’s opinion we are getting here, not Calipari’s, and it is not an amoral laughing at the rules that Tjorks is putting forward, but a reasoned explanation how the system almost forces certain athletes into trying to beat the system out of necessity.
It is the equivalent problem to whether the honest man would steal to feed his starvingchild, given no honest alternative to get the child food. hard for us to imagine today, what with food banks and various social nets, but during the “dirty thirties” many a previously honest man faced those exact conditions and did what they had to. There were few, if any jobs, and low wages, with many more people looking for work than there were jobs.
Whether you agree with his conclusion, I think you have to see that the problem exists, and why it will continue to be a problem, until something is done to give an alternative solution.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
[UPDATED 01/18/2012]
Related FanPosts on A Sea Of Blue
Related FanShots on A Sea Of Blue
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
