Bribery Scandal - FBI Probe - Book Richardson Involved

[rgdeuce]

I don't understand why the local press would want to see Miller fall. Granted, I don't live in Tucson, so I'm not as close to this as others may be, but I've been under the impression that Sean Miller is well liked in the Tucson community. It's not on the same level of adoration as Lute, obviously, but he seems to be on his way. Is this not the case? Is he unpopular locally?

Miller is fine. The media is struggling on a local and national level. They are not trusted, viewership is down, the internet has nearly destroyed print newspapers and magazines, and more and more people are getting their news from independent sources. As such, they have to pray for big stuff like this for eyes and keep the people here by adding fuel to the flames.

Is it just that the local papers/mags haven't developed strong online content? I know I get a lot of my AZ hoops updates through social media. Some of those young guys with their own sites/apps do a terrific job of covering the team.

Anyway, this "silent period" we're going through is likely going to last a while longer, and the rumors will fly. The timing is interesting because Red/Blue is fast approaching. But as others have noted, I expect a situation similar to what we saw with Trier. It's going to hang over them all year, but they won't be commenting on it. The NCAA isn't going to drop the hammer until after the season, maybe even later than that. And it's anyone's guess how strongly that hammer's going to fall on the program. I'm concerned about the recruiting impact, but there was a report over the weekend that B Williams and S O'Neal are holding firm in their commitments. Does this scare Bol Bol away? Shittu? I would think it has to have some impact. Guess we'll see.

The internet gave any ordinary joe a voice. Unless you take a liking to a particular journalist's writing style or are stuck in your ways in having a hard copy of print with your morning coffee, there is little reason to check for what a Greg Hansen or any other Tucson journalist/news personality has to say. In most cases, these journalists never played any of the major sports past age 15, we have access to pressers with the questions they ask and there are tons of more well-connected people writing blogs or sending tweets. Take this place for example: we got a tremendous insider and several others who at any given time have a pulse as to what is going on for the most part; guys who played college basketball and plenty more who have a good grasp on the game; finely-aged gentlemen with photographic memories who can drop an Arizona history lesson on us; and plenty of intelligent people who can elevate a topic to a higher level of discussion. And we don't have to pay a dime.

[rgdeuce]

Opinion dudes are no different than you or me. Except that more people pay attention to their opinions. And they get paid to share them. but their speculation is nothing different than what you read above in this very thread.

I don't know about you, but I have as much chance measuring up against paid staff writers as I do pro athletes.

Give yourself a little bit more credit. I'd listen to what you had to say about Arizona basketball before pretty much any in-town news personality.

[rgdeuce]

Hey Russ . . . no one asked you.

That's his calling card. "Hey guys, let me drop some wisdom for you, even though you don't want or need it. I know you all think you are miserable, but let me make it worse with my know-it-all-ness in a minimum of 1,000 words."

hey if you guys all want to grasp at the wrong straw feel free.

The FBI didn't do all this to prevent 4 assistant coaches from defrauding their schools, they did it to be able to pursue federal crimes and see who else they can get in the net.

There's a great thread on USChoops about the legal aspects here, a USC fan Chase is grasping at the same straws you guys are, and UCLA fan shipwreckedcrew, a former federal prosecutor, is explaining to him why he's wrong and why the FBI did what they did. It's by far the best analysis I've seen on this. You guys keep saying I want UA to be guilty here as if none of you are speaking because you want UA to NOT be guilty. I think tons of schools have done the same thing and will eventually get implicated too, but that doesn't mean Arizona is the victim of a rogue assistant coach.

http://uschoops.com/vbulletin/forum/mai ... stigations" target="_blank

Ok first I went and read ALL of the commentary between the two lawyers and the last post by chaseinmanhatten seems to be quite valid, there is plenty of cases requiring the Feds to prove nexus with federal funds/programs to make the FBI case tenuous...

Second lets address this post..." You guys keep saying I want UA to be guilty here as if none of you are speaking because you want UA to NOT be guilty. I think tons of schools have done the same thing and will eventually get implicated too, but that doesn't mean Arizona is the victim of a rogue assistant coach."....so your basically admitting you WANT UA to be found guilty...from what I can tell you've already set up court and decided that yes Miller is guilty and a lot of other schools are as well, I think your proposition is much more tenuous than the FBI's they at least have made absolutely no claim that Miller is guilty of this stuff, hell they haven't even said Pitino is guilty only that a phone traced to a coach in his school might be involved...but lets lay aside all the legal arguments for a minute and look at you clear admission that you WANT Arizona to be guilty...I find this to be very strange behavior...sort of the kind of thing you'd find vagrants doing in an alley under a bridge...I think a more accepted term for you is "Troll"

So you read ALL the commentary and chose to believe the part Chase wrote that sounds good for USC, and completely ignored the last part SWC wrote which basically ended the debate?


"The district court you cited -- the lowest level federal court whose decisions are controlling over no one -- was later reversed and the rationale put forward by that court, which you adopted to start this entire line of analysis, was tossed out by the Supreme Court in 2004. That was recognized by the 9th Circuit in 2005. No one has suggested the law has changed in the last 12 years."

District Court decisions mean a hell of a lot until the appellate court in their circuit says otherwise. In very recent times there are plenty of examples of this (eg: District Courts holding up executive orders).

[RiseAndFire]

miller diehards, it's reaching paterno like levels and coach can't even issue a simple denial statement- the guys in total hiding . please explain the total devotion?
so what then, is it that he gets really fired up about certain things ? really want to know

What is your fucking problem?Is there a failure to communicate happening?
What part of "Cannot comment on an ongoing investigation" do you not get?

Its the FUCKING FBI moron...Miller cannot LEGALLY comment without the Universities express approval and multiple layers of lawyer approval.

Get the fuck off.

I very seldom block people but for you I will make an exception.

Consider that Pitino issued a denial statement (right before he got s-canned). Was there a headline where the FBI is now coming after Pitino and Louisville?? I'm pretty sure Pitino has lawyers too yet he was able to make a statement.

but not a single Miller-apologist can tell me why you're willing to stick your head in the sand for Miller? Take away the recruiting "witchcraft" and you're left with a boring mid-major style of play, no tangible postseason success outside the Pac12, and a guy who usually blames the players or the refs whenever they lose or play poorly.

Ultimately its BASKETBALL we're talking about here. 5 guys trying to put an orange ball in a hoop for our entertainment. Don't lose sight of that

[Spaceman Spiff]

I don't get what point Russ Smith is trying to make. The link from the SC board discusses the validity of the criminal charges in comparison to statute.

Even if Book is acquitted in the criminal case, he's gone from Arizona basketball. Whether he's found guilty of what he's charged with won't change his future or the extent to which the issues the NCAA would be concerned with (paying players, Miller's knowledge) are proveable.

Arizona can't be guilty. Book Richardson can be guilty. People here arguing that we should not get program crippling sanctions are not grounding it interpretation of federal statutes.

[Spaceman Spiff]

miller diehards, it's reaching paterno like levels and coach can't even issue a simple denial statement- the guys in total hiding . please explain the total devotion?
so what then, is it that he gets really fired up about certain things ? really want to know

What is your fucking problem?Is there a failure to communicate happening?
What part of "Cannot comment on an ongoing investigation" do you not get?

Its the FUCKING FBI moron...Miller cannot LEGALLY comment without the Universities express approval and multiple layers of lawyer approval.

Get the fuck off.

I very seldom block people but for you I will make an exception.

Consider that Pitino issued a denial statement (right before he got s-canned). Was there a headline where the FBI is now coming after Pitino and Louisville?? I'm pretty sure Pitino has lawyers too yet he was able to make a statement.

but not a single Miller-apologist can tell me why you're willing to stick your head in the sand for Miller? Take away the recruiting "witchcraft" and you're left with a boring mid-major style of play, no tangible postseason success outside the Pac12, and a guy who usually blames the players or the refs whenever they lose or play poorly.

Ultimately its BASKETBALL we're talking about here. 5 guys trying to put an orange ball in a hoop for our entertainment. Don't lose sight of that

You are a treasure. You're legit arguing that Miller's style of play should play a role in the pending NCAA issues. We should be ready to can him because he plays packline and a slower tempo than you want, not because he actually had knowledge of what Book was doing.

Why don't you create a number matrix to explain the FBI complaint. I'll start with the factors and you can fill them in:

1. Book is an idiot--0
2. Miller sponsored Book--0
3. Miller's stubborn refusal to divert from packline made Book think he could do anything--0
4. Miller's fixed substitutions made Book think he'd be taken out in a month anyways, so he went big--0
5. Miller's slow tempo made Arizona less reactive to the scandal--0
6. General blame for Miller--0
7. PJC could have seen the bribery, but he was too short--0

[Longhorned]

I don't get what point Russ Smith is trying to make. The link from the SC board discusses the validity of the criminal charges in comparison to statute.

Even if Book is acquitted in the criminal case, he's gone from Arizona basketball. Whether he's found guilty of what he's charged with won't change his future or the extent to which the issues the NCAA would be concerned with (paying players, Miller's knowledge) are proveable.

Arizona can't be guilty. Book Richardson can be guilty. People here arguing that we should not get program crippling sanctions are not grounding it interpretation of federal statutes.

I was hoping that Russ Smith was going to enter that USC thread and post there the same takeaway from the former federal prosecutor's comments that he posted here. The response from his fellow Bruin would have been polite, I'm sure, but also funny for those of us following from home.

[NYCat]

I don't understand why people keep quoting, replying and arguing w him. Don't take the bait

[Beachcat97]

I don't understand why people keep quoting, replying and arguing w him. Don't take the bait

Exactly. RaF and Russ aren't worth engaging. They're here to troll. Nothing more.

[CalStateTempe]

I've ignored them and it makes this threa md a bit better

[Spaceman Spiff]

I don't understand why people keep quoting, replying and arguing w him. Don't take the bait

What else is there to discuss right now?

It's not like I'm really thinking this is anything other than trolling.

[prh]

I thought we were going to ban him after comparing Miller to Paterno

[YoDeFoe]

Take away the recruiting "witchcraft" and you're left with a boring mid-major style of play, no tangible postseason success outside the Pac12, and a guy who usually blames the players or the refs whenever they lose or play poorly

I don't think we live in the same reality.

[YoDeFoe]

Why don't you create a number matrix to explain the FBI complaint. I'll start with the factors and you can fill them in:

1. Book is an idiot--0
2. Miller sponsored Book--0
3. Miller's stubborn refusal to divert from packline made Book think he could do anything--0
4. Miller's fixed substitutions made Book think he'd be taken out in a month anyways, so he went big--0
5. Miller's slow tempo made Arizona less reactive to the scandal--0
6. General blame for Miller--0
7. PJC could have seen the bribery, but he was too short--0

[Chicat]

Consider that any time anyone has seen my penis they've either laughed until tears came to their eyes, dry heaved uncontrollably, or both...

Well, that would explain your posts.

[MountainCat]

Last week it was noted that CSM was at practice by PJC and others. Even though it was never noted (or I never saw it), I assumed that all players were accounted for also.

Has anyone heard any different?

[MrBug708]

I don't understand why people keep quoting, replying and arguing w him. Don't take the bait

Exactly. RaF and Russ aren't worth engaging. They're here to troll. Nothing more.

[EVCat]

Yes phenom as I began thinking yesterday, I don't think the Calvary is coming and I think we are screwed per the NCAA and Larry scotts pac12

But...can it possibly be that the FBI conducted a 3+ year investigation, with wiretaps and fancy charts and all of that, to get this?

I mean...they got 3 schools hard and us kind of, maybe, if all the talk turns out to be true.

Not exactly menace to society stuff here. They aren't the NCAA. The larger issues this brings up really aren't in their wheelhouse.

[EVCat]

Reading some of the sentiment on here...I get it. It is hard when players leave after one year. It is helped by those players generally being positive, good guys like an Aaron Gordon or Lauri Markkanen, or in a 2 year case, someone as awesome and caring as a Rondae Hollis-Jefferson.

I guess what I am saying is I can see how it COULD cause a loss of connection, but we have been blessed during this period with some really dynamic, positive people on our roster. I get watching Steve Kerr for 5 years or Sean Elliott for 4 was different...I was there. I watched Jud Buechler wait his turn then become a star. I watched Matt Muehelbach run his total wins in McKale to absurd levels.

But this Arizona program, short maybe the 2015-16 season that was so patchwork (but still had plenty of 4 year types in Zeus and Gabe), has absolutely been one to connect with. From the aforementioned awesomemess of a guy like Rondae, or the way Aaron Gordon made us all feel less dirty about the one-and-done era, to Nick Johnson being a leader extraordinaire, the glue guy that went out and found the property that would house the majority of the team, to build chemistry. And though he was only here 2 years (well, two + a redshirt), is there a player in the history of the UA that you couldn't put TJ McConnell against and have a solid race for most beloved player and player to most love McKale and the Arizona crowds? Stanley Johnson was more traditional one-and-done, but even he connected with Tucson and by all real accounts, had some hard times leaving. He also did whatever was needed for the team, all while going through the cancer-ridden deterioration of his mother. He was an absolute rock in retrospect. While Miller's first teams were bumpy, as he was just filling spots, he has largely created a culture here that is reminiscent of the Lute Olson era prior to 2000, where the teams largely have decent people, players who embrace Tucson and McKale and stay loyal to the program even with short stays. The Richard Jefferson gymnasium represented for years the largest gift from a player, and he was an early entry. The one hiccup obviously came with the Elliott Pitts issue, which tore apart the team chemistry that was already fragile that season with players who had been here 4 years having to share senior leadership with one year transfers. But, really, from the moment Nick Johnson became a Cat, I have been able to embrace the players in this program just like in the past. I think (as mentioned) our one-and-dones have largely been pretty remarkable people (not you, Grant), and have made me feel less dirty about the process. Even Kobi was pretty good with his accepting the situation, at least publically, and not destroying this last year's chemistry over his diminished role. And look at the season we are getting ready to embark upon...A senior PG, a junior SG, a sophomore SF (if Rawle comes back), a senior C...we aren't exactly without 4 year impact players to embrace.

So, while I get the sentiment, I haven't felt that same disconnection. I follow AG in the NBA as much as any former Cat, and TJ McConnell's successes have become the most important thing happening in the NBA to me. That's why I say I am not one who thinks the system we have now is all that bad...I will admit I feel less that way hearing that players are essentially told where to go by handlers, but like everything, there is some truth and some overstated hyperbole to that, just like not every player gets paid. You can see who the club-dominated kids are. Yet someone like Gabe York, who was clearly owned by Compton Magic, whose childhood was basically looking at their coaches and leadership as the formative male role models in his life, went to a Nike school. So the grip can't be that tight...if a kid like Gabe, who was highly thought of coming out of high school, whose heart and soul were with his AAU team, a team that is the epitome of Adidas control, could choose a Nike school, there must be some freewill out there. As always, it is never as dire as those who wish to tell the story will make it sound.

[EVCat]

I don't understand why people keep quoting, replying and arguing w him. Don't take the bait

What else is there to discuss right now?

It's not like I'm really thinking this is anything other than trolling.

I hear you...sometimes you ignore the troll, but sometimes you recognize that there are ill-informed people out there looking for some discussion about this situation, and they may stumble upon this thread. There are times you have to disarm the words of the trolls for the lurkers.

[phenom5]

Yes phenom as I began thinking yesterday, I don't think the Calvary is coming and I think we are screwed per the NCAA and Larry scotts pac12

But...can it possibly be that the FBI conducted a 3+ year investigation, with wiretaps and fancy charts and all of that, to get this?

I mean...they got 3 schools hard and us kind of, maybe, if all the talk turns out to be true.

Not exactly menace to society stuff here. They aren't the NCAA. The larger issues this brings up really aren't in their wheelhouse.

I don't think that us, and a handful of other schools on some relatively minor violations ("minor" in L'Ville's case is debatable) is the Feds end-game. That's the ig money, I.E. Adidas, Nike, etc. If they can get that with a few asst coaches, or agents, and execs, then they don't have a reason to dig deeper on CBB or CFB programs. And the NCAA definitely doesn't have any motivation to dig any deeper.

[CatHoops]

Agreed phenom5

[CalStateTempe]

The waiting is the hardest part
Everyday seems one more yard
You take it on faith you take it to the heart
The waaaaiiiiting is the hardest part

[Spaceman Spiff]

Yes phenom as I began thinking yesterday, I don't think the Calvary is coming and I think we are screwed per the NCAA and Larry scotts pac12

But...can it possibly be that the FBI conducted a 3+ year investigation, with wiretaps and fancy charts and all of that, to get this?

I mean...they got 3 schools hard and us kind of, maybe, if all the talk turns out to be true.

Not exactly menace to society stuff here. They aren't the NCAA. The larger issues this brings up really aren't in their wheelhouse.

I don't think that us, and a handful of other schools on some relatively minor violations ("minor" in L'Ville's case is debatable) is the Feds end-game. That's the ig money, I.E. Adidas, Nike, etc. If they can get that with a few asst coaches, or agents, and execs, then they don't have a reason to dig deeper on CBB or CFB programs. And the NCAA definitely doesn't have any motivation to dig any deeper.

This is the way I think of the issue of how many schools have similar issues. It isn't a "well, they do it too" argument. It's a point that if this is as widespread as some experts say (and yeah, I think it is) the NCAA can't keep digging without eviscerating its own product at some point.

[EVCat]

The waiting is the hardest part
Everyday seems one more yard
You take it on faith you take it to the heart
The waaaaiiiiting is the hardest part

Are you just going for the kill?

Man...

[CalStateTempe]

I literally honestly had no idea when I made this post.

Look at the timestamp here compared to when I found out and posted in the musician thread. Edit just check...wow literally like 10minites and this post was one minute before it hit our board in the other thread...

Here I was just bitchjng about the lack of info since last Thursday, but I guess nonnews is good news...

[EVCat]

That's crazy, then. I figured you heard about the heart attack before that.

Free-fallin' today....

[gumby]

Feel free to talk me off the ledge, but...

Anybody else getting an uneasy feeling about this whole thing? The notion that this is rampant (it is) and more big programs will be implicated seems to be waning. It is starting to feel like L'Ville and UA are the big names, and the Feds are more interested in going after the big money (Adidas, Nike, et al). I am getting this sinking feeling that the 7 schools named initially are the only ones. And the NCAA will be more than happy to make an example out of the initial schools named. They have to show that they are cracking down after all (and yes, that scene from Casablanca comes to mind).


Probably nothing more than a reaction to the weekend, and the lack of news...

I feel this way, which is why UofA should kick and scream all the way. Sadly, I think the administration would rather jettison Miller than blow up the whole thing, if it came down to it.

This is why I hope the Nike and Adidas guys squeal like a "Deliverance" pig. Then the systemic nature of this could no longer be ignored.

[Puerco]

Opinion dudes are no different than you or me. Except that more people pay attention to their opinions. And they get paid to share them. but their speculation is nothing different than what you read above in this very thread.

I don't know about you, but I have as much chance measuring up against paid staff writers as I do pro athletes.

Which is why they get paid for their speculation while you and I do not. Some of the contributors to this thread, however...

[gumby]

Yes phenom as I began thinking yesterday, I don't think the Calvary is coming and I think we are screwed per the NCAA and Larry scotts pac12

And UofA? Think it will make the case that this is systemic and not isolated?

[gumby]

The people reading this thread <<<<<<<<< people following this in general.

People reading/listening to media about this >>>>>>>> people reading this thread or those like them.

What happens from here won't be shaped by "insiders" posting with fake names. It will take them going to journalists and spilling in such a way that the information can be confirmed.

Gatto and Code would be swell sources.

[Russ Smith]

I don't get what point Russ Smith is trying to make. The link from the SC board discusses the validity of the criminal charges in comparison to statute.

Even if Book is acquitted in the criminal case, he's gone from Arizona basketball. Whether he's found guilty of what he's charged with won't change his future or the extent to which the issues the NCAA would be concerned with (paying players, Miller's knowledge) are proveable.

Arizona can't be guilty. Book Richardson can be guilty. People here arguing that we should not get program crippling sanctions are not grounding it interpretation of federal statutes.

The point I'm arguing is the people saying Book was a rogue coach and UA is a victim and even the FBI said so, are simply jumping on the wrong part of the case. Again the reason they are saying that Book defrauded his employer is not that they think Arizona is a victim here, it's because that allows them to use this statute, USC 666 to charge Book with federal crimes. Doing that then allows them to try and get Book to talk and give up more names and more information which is how the FBI works. This case started with one guy talking and bringing in more guys.

I don't think Miller was doing what Book did, and I don't think Miller is completely unaware that rules were being broken in recruiting kids. I don't think he gets fired unless more comes out, I do think he'll get at least reprimanded by the NCAA here, I don't think the NCAA is going to buy that he's a victim of a rogue coach.

[CalStateTempe]

Russ go play in your own sandbox, we're sick of you pooping and leaving in ours.

[Chicat]

I don't get what point Russ Smith is trying to make. The link from the SC board discusses the validity of the criminal charges in comparison to statute.

Even if Book is acquitted in the criminal case, he's gone from Arizona basketball. Whether he's found guilty of what he's charged with won't change his future or the extent to which the issues the NCAA would be concerned with (paying players, Miller's knowledge) are proveable.

Arizona can't be guilty. Book Richardson can be guilty. People here arguing that we should not get program crippling sanctions are not grounding it interpretation of federal statutes.

The point I'm arguing is.....

....... one absolutely no one here asked you for. Or maybe I missed where a poster said, "Hmmm, I wonder what a troll with an obvious axe to grind against Arizona thinks and if he'd be so kind as to come to our fansite and repeat it as nauseum."

[Harvey Specter]

Yes phenom as I began thinking yesterday, I don't think the Calvary is coming and I think we are screwed per the NCAA and Larry scotts pac12

But...can it possibly be that the FBI conducted a 3+ year investigation, with wiretaps and fancy charts and all of that, to get this?

I mean...they got 3 schools hard and us kind of, maybe, if all the talk turns out to be true.

Not exactly menace to society stuff here. They aren't the NCAA. The larger issues this brings up really aren't in their wheelhouse.

I don't think that us, and a handful of other schools on some relatively minor violations ("minor" in L'Ville's case is debatable) is the Feds end-game. That's the ig money, I.E. Adidas, Nike, etc. If they can get that with a few asst coaches, or agents, and execs, then they don't have a reason to dig deeper on CBB or CFB programs. And the NCAA definitely doesn't have any motivation to dig any deeper.

Exactly.... the schools are not the targets. They are collateral damage.

The targets of this investigation were corporations. Whether or not the FBIn have what they need to take down the whales is TBD... but they knew the minute that the first indictments were made public, everyone would recoil into extreme caution mode.

Anything they get from here on in seems destined to come from the perps they have already identified... or from fruits of the poisonous tree (others who are exposed by those in custody... who also end up singing).

[Hank of sb]

Feel free to talk me off the ledge, but...

Anybody else getting an uneasy feeling about this whole thing? The notion that this is rampant (it is) and more big programs will be implicated seems to be waning. It is starting to feel like L'Ville and UA are the big names, and the Feds are more interested in going after the big money (Adidas, Nike, et al). I am getting this sinking feeling that the 7 schools named initially are the only ones. And the NCAA will be more than happy to make an example out of the initial schools named. They have to show that they are cracking down after all (and yes, that scene from Casablanca comes to mind).


Probably nothing more than a reaction to the weekend, and the lack of news...

I feel this way, which is why UofA should kick and scream all the way. Sadly, I think the administration would rather jettison Miller than blow up the whole thing, if it came down to it.

This is why I hope the Nike and Adidas guys squeal like a "Deliverance" pig. Then the systemic nature of this could no longer be ignored.

If you want to snitch ("blow up the whole thing"), you need the goods. Otherwise you are whining, making the optics even worse.

Arizona on tape. Others: nada.

The adminsitration has many mandates. For sure, basketball is up there, but never can it be number 1.

If you are right about "jettisoning Miller," this president, given his previous statements, will have made a weighted call.

I always thought the Runnin Rebels greatest accomplishment went unheralded--it was 1992, the year after their two great runs.

Banned by the NCAA, they went 26-2, 18-0 in conference.

[Russ Smith]

I don't get what point Russ Smith is trying to make. The link from the SC board discusses the validity of the criminal charges in comparison to statute.

Even if Book is acquitted in the criminal case, he's gone from Arizona basketball. Whether he's found guilty of what he's charged with won't change his future or the extent to which the issues the NCAA would be concerned with (paying players, Miller's knowledge) are proveable.

Arizona can't be guilty. Book Richardson can be guilty. People here arguing that we should not get program crippling sanctions are not grounding it interpretation of federal statutes.

I was hoping that Russ Smith was going to enter that USC thread and post there the same takeaway from the former federal prosecutor's comments that he posted here. The response from his fellow Bruin would have been polite, I'm sure, but also funny for those of us following from home.

"The reference to the NCAA rules and regulations is to establish that by taking the bribes as alleged, the assistant coaches violated the duties to their school and the NCAA that they had agreed to abide by. They willingly took on an obligation to act in a certain manner, and then in exchange for money they disregarded that obligation. That establishes the "corrupt" element in the conduct. Taking the money is the actus rea. Violating the duty freely taken is the mens rea. "

To be clear he's posted a ton of stuff on this on BRO and he's made it very clear the FBI is using that to establish a federal crime has been committed, not because they think the schools are the victim here.

I would add, I think all of us probably can see the really offensive angle here of what Richardson and Bland and Person were doing that we've discussed at length on UCLA boards.They're defrauding the kids here, they're not acting in the best interests of the kids they're taking bribes and then steering kids to agents and advisers that clearly aren't in the best interests of the kids. They put financial gain ahead of what's good for the kids. Person in particular as has been pointed out repeatedly on BRO, he actually promised a member of one kids family that he was NOT personally benefitting from this arrangement, he took money, gave part of it to the kid, steered the kid, and then told the kid and his family he hadn't gotten any money. That's incredibly corrupt.

not all these kids were innocent of course it's apparent some of them openly asked for money, as did the parents. In the Quinerly bit they said BOok had been "helping him" for awhile, but the mom wasn't aware of it and at some point SHE asked for money and then Book had to ask for more to pay her. The way it's worded we don't know if Book offered him money or he asked, but he's openly stating the mom asked him for money not knowing he was already paying her son. That's not an innocent victim either.

[Russ Smith]

I don't get what point Russ Smith is trying to make. The link from the SC board discusses the validity of the criminal charges in comparison to statute.

Even if Book is acquitted in the criminal case, he's gone from Arizona basketball. Whether he's found guilty of what he's charged with won't change his future or the extent to which the issues the NCAA would be concerned with (paying players, Miller's knowledge) are proveable.

Arizona can't be guilty. Book Richardson can be guilty. People here arguing that we should not get program crippling sanctions are not grounding it interpretation of federal statutes.

The point I'm arguing is.....

....... one absolutely no one here asked you for. Or maybe I missed where a poster said, "Hmmm, I wonder what a troll with an obvious axe to grind against Arizona thinks and if he'd be so kind as to come to our fansite and repeat it as nauseum."

I literally responded to a post saying I don't get what Russ' point is.

[CalStateTempe]

God damn this thread has become near damn unreadable...

[Jefe]

Apologies if this was already brought up but Heeke was hired Feb 25th and Robbins was hired on April 7.

Do we think our Pres and AD were informed? I would hope they found out much earlier than we did

[Spaceman Spiff]

I don't get what point Russ Smith is trying to make. The link from the SC board discusses the validity of the criminal charges in comparison to statute.

Even if Book is acquitted in the criminal case, he's gone from Arizona basketball. Whether he's found guilty of what he's charged with won't change his future or the extent to which the issues the NCAA would be concerned with (paying players, Miller's knowledge) are proveable.

Arizona can't be guilty. Book Richardson can be guilty. People here arguing that we should not get program crippling sanctions are not grounding it interpretation of federal statutes.

The point I'm arguing is the people saying Book was a rogue coach and UA is a victim and even the FBI said so, are simply jumping on the wrong part of the case. Again the reason they are saying that Book defrauded his employer is not that they think Arizona is a victim here, it's because that allows them to use this statute, USC 666 to charge Book with federal crimes. Doing that then allows them to try and get Book to talk and give up more names and more information which is how the FBI works. This case started with one guy talking and bringing in more guys.

I don't think Miller was doing what Book did, and I don't think Miller is completely unaware that rules were being broken in recruiting kids. I don't think he gets fired unless more comes out, I do think he'll get at least reprimanded by the NCAA here, I don't think the NCAA is going to buy that he's a victim of a rogue coach.

You're arguing against a fake opponent. No one is making those points.

The validity of the statute and victim status are entirely creations of federal statutes, and I don't see anyone saying NCAA sanctions are dependent on federal statutory law. You're offering a meh rebuttal to a claim no one's making.

Valid or invalid, the US Code is not NCAA rules and vice versa. It's simple.

[gumby]

http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/coll ... 23976.html" target="_blank

Good piece.

Optimists expect systemic improvements in the wake of the Scandal of ’17, from fairer treatment for athletes to heightened integrity off and on court and field. Skeptics – or are they realists? – foresee a few high-profile fall guys, much talk of reform, and modest change. Similarly muted outcomes customarily follow most of our major corporate, political or intercollegiate scandals. After all, there’s always another plea bargain, heart-tugging excuse or comeback just around the corner.

I'm an optimist.

[Hank of sb]

I see no difference between "realism" and "muted outcomes," which, IMO, makes the probability 2 to1 in favor of realism.

Optimism is always my preference; I just never expect it and, hence, pack my bags accordingly.

I assume any adminsistrative officer might manage/oversee with caution in mind.

[Ned Zissou]

My second dumb question of this post:

I looked up the definition of "criminal entrapment" and this is what I found:
"Entrapment is a defense to criminal charges, and it's based on interaction between police officers and the defendant prior to (or during) the alleged crime. A typical entrapment scenario arises when law enforcement officers use coercion and other overbearing tactics to induce someone to commit a crime.

Can it be argued that what happened to Book (I know he was dumb and caused a lot of pain for the program) was entrapment!?!?!?!

[YoDeFoe]

My second dumb question of this post:

I looked up the definition of "criminal entrapment" and this is what I found:
"Entrapment is a defense to criminal charges, and it's based on interaction between police officers and the defendant prior to (or during) the alleged crime. A typical entrapment scenario arises when law enforcement officers use coercion and other overbearing tactics to induce someone to commit a crime.

Can it be argued that what happened to Book (I know he was dumb and caused a lot of pain for the program) was entrapment!?!?!?!

No.

LPT: If you're googling legal terms to create an argument against an FBI criminal complaint, you're wasting your time.

[Longhorned]

Roy, who is so credible that not even academic fraud can stick to him, says Nike doesn't help with recruiting. I suppose that's helpful for containing Arizona's problem in the Book shelf.

[HiCat]

My second dumb question of this post:

I looked up the definition of "criminal entrapment" and this is what I found:
"Entrapment is a defense to criminal charges, and it's based on interaction between police officers and the defendant prior to (or during) the alleged crime. A typical entrapment scenario arises when law enforcement officers use coercion and other overbearing tactics to induce someone to commit a crime.

Can it be argued that what happened to Book (I know he was dumb and caused a lot of pain for the program) was entrapment!?!?!?!

Ned Zissou"]My second dumb question of this post:

Not a dumb question.

You can run an entrapment defense, but the burden is on the defendant (Book in this case) to prove it. The probability that the defense can prove that law enforcement induced him to commit bribery etc. is not high based on the facts
so far.

If Book's planning to go to trial rather than deal, maybe entrapment can be used as
a "head fake" by his defense team. Without more discovery, it seems too early to tell how things might shake out during trial.

[Spaceman Spiff]

I wouldn't suggest getting legal advice on the internet period, and I certainly don't try to give it. Entrapment is statutory, so there's variation. The big issues for Book:

-Entrapment generally goes better when you have contact with the police. Book only spoke to Sood and Dawkins about the bribes. It's hard to say the police entrapped you when you never speak to the police.
-Book went back for more bribes. It's equally difficult to say you wouldn't have done this without the police when you go back for seconds.

That's before you even get to things like statutes and burdens.

[Longhorned]

Every time I get caught on Bear Down Wildcats when I should be working, I claim entrapment.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Every time I get caught on Bear Down Wildcats when I should be working, I claim entrapment.

I'm interested in who you think is 50.