Re: Bribery Scandal - FBI Probe - Book Richardson Involved
Posted: Wed Nov 06, 2019 1:26 pm
I think 99% of loyal fans agree with that last paragraph.
A co-op community for Arizona Fans
http://beardownwildcats.com/
I think DMJ just got his nuts bit off by ODogg!!!!Olsondogg wrote:My god. People are still worried cause of negative tweets and stories that nobody outside of the fan base cares about?
Cal has been dirty for decades and who the fuck cares. Win.
Also, if anyone has an idea what the NCAA does then they are fucking Nostradamus...it's the most disorganized and bat shit crazy entity in all of sports that has no rhyme or reason for doing what it does.
I'll wait for the example where self-sanctioning was a positive for the University/program. People are clutching their pearls when we had a FB program that was looking the other way on sexually abusing children, while current coaches in the PAC look the other way when multiple players--in multiple years--rape co-ed's.
Spare me the "we shoudla self sanctioned" bullshit about someone dropping bags to secure recruits. Arizona should put their lawyers to good use and tell the NCAA to fuck itself.
Game over, baby, game over!azcat49 wrote:I think DMJ just got his hurts bit off by ODogg!!!!Olsondogg wrote:My god. People are still worried cause of negative tweets and stories that nobody outside of the fan base cares about?
Cal has been dirty for decades and who the fuck cares. Win.
Also, if anyone has an idea what the NCAA does then they are fucking Nostradamus...it's the most disorganized and bat shit crazy entity in all of sports that has no rhyme or reason for doing what it does.
I'll wait for the example where self-sanctioning was a positive for the University/program. People are clutching their pearls when we had a FB program that was looking the other way on sexually abusing children, while current coaches in the PAC look the other way when multiple players--in multiple years--rape co-ed's.
Spare me the "we shoudla self sanctioned" bullshit about someone dropping bags to secure recruits. Arizona should put their lawyers to good use and tell the NCAA to fuck itself.
Sooo...we got KansASS that has Bill Selfie taking self's with Snoop Dog and strippers saying "Nope"...and Georgia Tech got a little hammered...but if you do a Googly search for who else 90% of the hits will be about Sean Miller and the Wildcats facing prison time for money laundering Nike shoe boxes in Deandre Aytons closet...Stan Wilcox, NCAA vice president for regulatory affairs, said two high-profile programs would receive notices of allegations by early July.
The remaining four would be rolled out later in the summer in what was described as a wave of NCAA investigations meant to clean up major-college basketball.
"There's even another group of cases that we're still working on," Wilcox said. "The main thing is that we're up and ready. We're moving forward and you'll see consequences."
Spaceman Spiff wrote:Dude, you're confusing sanctions with notices, leaving out NC State and Auburn and lots else.
Yes I agree, but I also think they sent out the most egregious violation notices with the best evidence first, if not then they are doing some sloppy work...YoDeFoe wrote:NC State and Kansas got notices already. I expect Arizona, USC, Auburn, Oklahoma St, LSU, Creighton, and Louisville to also receive notices related to the FBI investigation.
The NCAA is moving slowly. I'm sure they'd like to make the most aggressive case against these schools as possible, while also balancing against the concern of overstepping and having to later retreat.
We'll get a notice. I'm happy we weren't in the first two. I half expected we would be in the first two, and am pleasantly surprised to see the NCAA stick to evidence in going to NCSU and KU first.YoDeFoe wrote:NC State and Kansas got notices already. I expect Arizona, USC, Auburn, Oklahoma St, LSU, Creighton, and Louisville to also receive notices related to the FBI investigation.
The NCAA is moving slowly. I'm sure they'd like to make the most aggressive case against these schools as possible, while also balancing against the concern of overstepping and having to later retreat.
Book didn’t get convicted. He plead guilty to taking bribes, not a single aspect of which invalidates or makes ineligible any player. None of his pleadings or punishment revolves around anything he did with players, money to players, or money for players.Spaceman Spiff wrote:We'll get a notice. I'm happy we weren't in the first two. I half expected we would be in the first two, and am pleasantly surprised to see the NCAA stick to evidence in going to NCSU and KU first.YoDeFoe wrote:NC State and Kansas got notices already. I expect Arizona, USC, Auburn, Oklahoma St, LSU, Creighton, and Louisville to also receive notices related to the FBI investigation.
The NCAA is moving slowly. I'm sure they'd like to make the most aggressive case against these schools as possible, while also balancing against the concern of overstepping and having to later retreat.
But Book got convicted in federal court. Something has to be coming for that. Assessing where we stand is always about the idea that it will be punishment that's less than crippling, not that anyone thinks we'll escape punishment.
Let's not be pedantic - whether by verdict or plea, Book committed a felony through his work for our program. We'll receive a notice for that misconduct.JMarkJohns wrote:Book didn’t get convicted. He plead guilty to taking bribes, not a single aspect of which invalidates or makes ineligible any player. None of his pleadings or punishment revolves around anything he did with players, money to players, or money for players.Spaceman Spiff wrote:We'll get a notice. I'm happy we weren't in the first two. I half expected we would be in the first two, and am pleasantly surprised to see the NCAA stick to evidence in going to NCSU and KU first.YoDeFoe wrote:NC State and Kansas got notices already. I expect Arizona, USC, Auburn, Oklahoma St, LSU, Creighton, and Louisville to also receive notices related to the FBI investigation.
The NCAA is moving slowly. I'm sure they'd like to make the most aggressive case against these schools as possible, while also balancing against the concern of overstepping and having to later retreat.
But Book got convicted in federal court. Something has to be coming for that. Assessing where we stand is always about the idea that it will be punishment that's less than crippling, not that anyone thinks we'll escape punishment.
There’s a lot of differences.
A notice of what? Book was fired as soon as Miller found out the extent and evidence for his wrongdoing...YoDeFoe wrote:Let's not be pedantic - whether by verdict or plea, Book committed a felony through his work for our program. We'll receive a notice for that misconduct.JMarkJohns wrote:Book didn’t get convicted. He plead guilty to taking bribes, not a single aspect of which invalidates or makes ineligible any player. None of his pleadings or punishment revolves around anything he did with players, money to players, or money for players.Spaceman Spiff wrote:We'll get a notice. I'm happy we weren't in the first two. I half expected we would be in the first two, and am pleasantly surprised to see the NCAA stick to evidence in going to NCSU and KU first.YoDeFoe wrote:NC State and Kansas got notices already. I expect Arizona, USC, Auburn, Oklahoma St, LSU, Creighton, and Louisville to also receive notices related to the FBI investigation.
The NCAA is moving slowly. I'm sure they'd like to make the most aggressive case against these schools as possible, while also balancing against the concern of overstepping and having to later retreat.
But Book got convicted in federal court. Something has to be coming for that. Assessing where we stand is always about the idea that it will be punishment that's less than crippling, not that anyone thinks we'll escape punishment.
There’s a lot of differences.
ChooChooCat wrote:The one thing to really dwell on here is in a court of law you need stone cold proof. In the court of the NCAA they don't need that to sanction. I know they're looking deep into Rawle Alkins's transcript right now based on Book's comments that he paid a guy to change his grades. There literally is no way the NCAA will ever get proof of someone ever being paid to do such an act (they certainly won't get it from Book directly), but that doesn't matter unfortunately.
When you plead guilty, you admit guilt and are convicted of a felony. There's no difference between plea and trial.JMarkJohns wrote:Book didn’t get convicted. He plead guilty to taking bribes, not a single aspect of which invalidates or makes ineligible any player. None of his pleadings or punishment revolves around anything he did with players, money to players, or money for players.Spaceman Spiff wrote:We'll get a notice. I'm happy we weren't in the first two. I half expected we would be in the first two, and am pleasantly surprised to see the NCAA stick to evidence in going to NCSU and KU first.YoDeFoe wrote:NC State and Kansas got notices already. I expect Arizona, USC, Auburn, Oklahoma St, LSU, Creighton, and Louisville to also receive notices related to the FBI investigation.
The NCAA is moving slowly. I'm sure they'd like to make the most aggressive case against these schools as possible, while also balancing against the concern of overstepping and having to later retreat.
But Book got convicted in federal court. Something has to be coming for that. Assessing where we stand is always about the idea that it will be punishment that's less than crippling, not that anyone thinks we'll escape punishment.
There’s a lot of differences.
Steering players isn’t a crime or NCAA penalty. Promoting agencies for post-NCAA career isn’t at issue. It’s a state employee being paid to, which is illegal.Spaceman Spiff wrote:When you plead guilty, you admit guilt and are convicted of a felony. There's no difference between plea and trial.JMarkJohns wrote:Book didn’t get convicted. He plead guilty to taking bribes, not a single aspect of which invalidates or makes ineligible any player. None of his pleadings or punishment revolves around anything he did with players, money to players, or money for players.Spaceman Spiff wrote:We'll get a notice. I'm happy we weren't in the first two. I half expected we would be in the first two, and am pleasantly surprised to see the NCAA stick to evidence in going to NCSU and KU first.YoDeFoe wrote:NC State and Kansas got notices already. I expect Arizona, USC, Auburn, Oklahoma St, LSU, Creighton, and Louisville to also receive notices related to the FBI investigation.
The NCAA is moving slowly. I'm sure they'd like to make the most aggressive case against these schools as possible, while also balancing against the concern of overstepping and having to later retreat.
But Book got convicted in federal court. Something has to be coming for that. Assessing where we stand is always about the idea that it will be punishment that's less than crippling, not that anyone thinks we'll escape punishment.
There’s a lot of differences.
I agree much more about the bribery. He pled guilty to taking bribes to steer players, though.
Longhorned wrote:I think the question of Book paying someone to change Atkinson’s transcript is unrelated to Book’s felony, and obviously would be in the NCAA purview. I can also see how it’s something Arizona’s compliance office wouldn’t have caught, since they would have been among the targets of deceit. Since it was in Book’s personal interests to bring Miller a prize NYC recruit, it would also fit the pattern of Book’s deceit of Miller. And it would absolutely be legit if the NCAA hits our program if they find evidence Book did that.
Book was clearly awful for Arizona, and many of us on the outside seem to have grasped that before Miller understood the relationship needed to end immediately. This example of Book’s mouthing off is potentially different from his self-serving lies. Just have to wait and see.
We're going to have scholarships reduced in like 2023 over something that happened in summer 2017.Jefe wrote:
ExactlyChooChooCat wrote:That's just about what we should be looking at.
Pretty much EXACTLY what we should expect with one notable exception, we did not have any players affected by Books actions like Evans did (Evans' actions caused one Oklahoma State player, later to be revealed in federal court as Jeffrey Carroll, to miss three games at the start of the 2017-18 season. The source told CBS Sports that Evans is also accused by the NCAA of accepting at least $18,000 and as much as $40,000).ChooChooCat wrote:That's just about what we should be looking at.
Frankly, it would be pretty reasonable. I've never thought we'd escape unscathed, but it seems a relatively reasonable penalty.ChooChooCat wrote:That's just about what we should be looking at.
Unless Arizona gets at least a post-season ban -- the national perception is going to be the NCAA went light on Arizona. And we shouldn't get a post-season ban because so far there is zero evidence. The irresponsible reporting by ESPN and others severely damaged Arizona and Miller's reputation. In fact, that would be one of the arguments the UA lawyers should throw at the NCAA: that we've endured nearly two years of punishment by the misrepresentation of the facts. I doubt the NCAA gives a shit -- but it's the truth.CatFanOneMil wrote:Pretty much EXACTLY what we should expect with one notable exception, we did not have any players affected by Books actions like Evans did (Evans' actions caused one Oklahoma State player, later to be revealed in federal court as Jeffrey Carroll, to miss three games at the start of the 2017-18 season. The source told CBS Sports that Evans is also accused by the NCAA of accepting at least $18,000 and as much as $40,000).ChooChooCat wrote:That's just about what we should be looking at.
While I do not expect the NCAA to go "lightly" on UofA, the designation of a Level I violation is probably connected to the issue of damaging a student athlete...
I fully expect heads will explode when UA gets their letter...people are gonna be fucking livid...when in fact WE should be livid.
Sort of... they held out Carroll while investigating. We simply played Alkins and chose not to hold him out. Both were being targeted by their assistant coach for steering to Dawkins.PHXCATS wrote:ExactlyChooChooCat wrote:That's just about what we should be looking at.
Keep in mind that Oklahoma's coach caused a player to miss time. Book's actions did not
It's certainly an argument I would make, and it dovetails with one of our main arguments of defense: that Book said a lot of things that simply weren't true, that were self serving in gaining him more bribery money but which became incredibly damaging to the university/program as they reverberated through the media. The stories he told weren't true and we've suffered the burden of those false and negative rumors since the beginning of the trail. Connect that to the lost recruits (very easy from timing and their own statements) and there's measurable damage.zonagrad wrote:Unless Arizona gets at least a post-season ban -- the national perception is going to be the NCAA went light on Arizona. And we shouldn't get a post-season ban because so far there is zero evidence. The irresponsible reporting by ESPN and others severely damaged Arizona and Miller's reputation. In fact, that would be one of the arguments the UA lawyers should throw at the NCAA: that we've endured nearly two years of punishment by the misrepresentation of the facts. I doubt the NCAA gives a shit -- but it's the truth.CatFanOneMil wrote:Pretty much EXACTLY what we should expect with one notable exception, we did not have any players affected by Books actions like Evans did (Evans' actions caused one Oklahoma State player, later to be revealed in federal court as Jeffrey Carroll, to miss three games at the start of the 2017-18 season. The source told CBS Sports that Evans is also accused by the NCAA of accepting at least $18,000 and as much as $40,000).ChooChooCat wrote:That's just about what we should be looking at.
While I do not expect the NCAA to go "lightly" on UofA, the designation of a Level I violation is probably connected to the issue of damaging a student athlete...
I fully expect heads will explode when UA gets their letter...people are gonna be fucking livid...when in fact WE should be livid.
Which is part of why I'm not going to blow those off. Maybe there's something in there, something that shakes loose. We're more exposed than other programs because of all of those loose threads.ChooChooCat wrote:The Book stories and namely the Rawle transcript stuff is what's taking so long for the NCAA to finalize their stuff on us quite frankly.
Dan Shulman and Jay Bilas are calling the game against Gonzaga according to the game notesCatFanOneMil wrote:So it seems to me that ESPN has basically forgotten about all the NCAA stuff for now, especially when it comes to Kansas.
I'm not really surprised but watching Kansas play on ESPN you would never know that there have been some serious allegations raised against the team for basically cheating...not one damn word.
This goes for other teams as well...and I notice that as a general rule ESPN has been throwing their worst announcers at our games...
Wonder what pops up against Gonzaga?
https://espnpressroom.com/us/college-basketball-mens/" target="_blank84Cat wrote:Dan Shulman and Jay Bilas are calling the game against Gonzaga according to the game notesCatFanOneMil wrote:So it seems to me that ESPN has basically forgotten about all the NCAA stuff for now, especially when it comes to Kansas.
I'm not really surprised but watching Kansas play on ESPN you would never know that there have been some serious allegations raised against the team for basically cheating...not one damn word.
This goes for other teams as well...and I notice that as a general rule ESPN has been throwing their worst announcers at our games...
Wonder what pops up against Gonzaga?
Let me first say that espn and Larry Scott are absolute trash at their jobs. Lets make that extremely clear.CatFanOneMil wrote:So it seems to me that ESPN has basically forgotten about all the NCAA stuff for now, especially when it comes to Kansas.
I'm not really surprised but watching Kansas play on ESPN you would never know that there have been some serious allegations raised against the team for basically cheating...not one damn word.
This goes for other teams as well...and I notice that as a general rule ESPN has been throwing their worst announcers at our games...
Wonder what pops up against Gonzaga?
RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) Attorneys for former North Carolina State coach Mark Gottfried are questioning the fairness of the NCAA process after he was charged with failing to adequately monitor the Wolfpack men's basketball program for violations, including during the recruitment of former basketball star Dennis Smith Jr.
In a response to NCAA charges filed over the summer, the attorneys say Gottfried - now coach at Cal State Northridge - fulfilled his obligations to monitor the program and was following NCAA rules. They also say the NCAA is improperly using court testimony last year by a government witness that he delivered $40,000 to former Wolfpack assistant coach Orlando Early intended for Smith's family in 2015.
Specifically, attorneys Scott Tompsett and Elliot Abrams say NCAA bylaws prohibit its use in the infractions process because the court case it originated from is under appeal.
''The NCAA broke their own rule when they considered evidence from a court case on appeal and then relied on that evidence to charge Mr. Gottfried with a Level I violation,'' they said in a statement to The Associated Press. ''They should withdraw the allegation and let the court case run its course.''
The AP obtained a copy of Gottfried's response from N.C. State through a public-records request Wednesday. The NCAA filed four charges in July in the wake of college basketball's corruption scandal, with Gottfried charged individually under the provision of head-coach responsibility for violations within his program.
The NCAA has alleged that T.J. Gassnola was acting as an outside consultant of Adidas - which has an apparel deal with the school - to ''ensure Smith's commitment'' to the Wolfpack with the payment.
Yet the school, which released its response Monday, states the NCAA has not proven money was actually provided to Smith while questioning Gassnola's credibility. It also noted Smith - who entered the NBA draft in 2017 after one year at North Carolina State - denied receiving money in an interview with the school earlier this year.
In their response, Gottfried's attorneys say the NCAA enforcement staff hasn't told Gottfried how he failed to adequately monitor Early's recruitment of Smith or what he was required to have done differently, saying that the lack of clarity ''may be not a lack of desire but a lack of ability'' to explain it.
Additionally, the response accuses the NCAA of ''prejudgment'' after public comments by NCAA officials earlier this year that charges were forthcoming even with investigations ongoing.
The rest of case focuses largely on improper complimentary admissions on the men's basketball guest pass list. Gottfried's attorneys argue he directed his staff to communicate with the school's compliance office regularly, and relied on compliance staffers to monitor admissions logs.
The NCAA enforcement staff has 60 days to file its own response, which typically leads to a hearing with a panel of the infractions committee followed by a ruling weeks to months later. The staff of current coach Kevin Keatts, who replaced Gottfried in March 2017, has not been accused of wrongdoing.
Jefe wrote:https://www.thescore.com/ncaab/news/190 ... -ncaa-case
Ex-NC State coach's attorneys question fairness of NCAA case
RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) Attorneys for former North Carolina State coach Mark Gottfried are questioning the fairness of the NCAA process after he was charged with failing to adequately monitor the Wolfpack men's basketball program for violations, including during the recruitment of former basketball star Dennis Smith Jr.
In a response to NCAA charges filed over the summer, the attorneys say Gottfried - now coach at Cal State Northridge - fulfilled his obligations to monitor the program and was following NCAA rules. They also say the NCAA is improperly using court testimony last year by a government witness that he delivered $40,000 to former Wolfpack assistant coach Orlando Early intended for Smith's family in 2015.
Specifically, attorneys Scott Tompsett and Elliot Abrams say NCAA bylaws prohibit its use in the infractions process because the court case it originated from is under appeal.
''The NCAA broke their own rule when they considered evidence from a court case on appeal and then relied on that evidence to charge Mr. Gottfried with a Level I violation,'' they said in a statement to The Associated Press. ''They should withdraw the allegation and let the court case run its course.''
The AP obtained a copy of Gottfried's response from N.C. State through a public-records request Wednesday. The NCAA filed four charges in July in the wake of college basketball's corruption scandal, with Gottfried charged individually under the provision of head-coach responsibility for violations within his program.
The NCAA has alleged that T.J. Gassnola was acting as an outside consultant of Adidas - which has an apparel deal with the school - to ''ensure Smith's commitment'' to the Wolfpack with the payment.
Yet the school, which released its response Monday, states the NCAA has not proven money was actually provided to Smith while questioning Gassnola's credibility. It also noted Smith - who entered the NBA draft in 2017 after one year at North Carolina State - denied receiving money in an interview with the school earlier this year.
In their response, Gottfried's attorneys say the NCAA enforcement staff hasn't told Gottfried how he failed to adequately monitor Early's recruitment of Smith or what he was required to have done differently, saying that the lack of clarity ''may be not a lack of desire but a lack of ability'' to explain it.
Additionally, the response accuses the NCAA of ''prejudgment'' after public comments by NCAA officials earlier this year that charges were forthcoming even with investigations ongoing.
The rest of case focuses largely on improper complimentary admissions on the men's basketball guest pass list. Gottfried's attorneys argue he directed his staff to communicate with the school's compliance office regularly, and relied on compliance staffers to monitor admissions logs.
The NCAA enforcement staff has 60 days to file its own response, which typically leads to a hearing with a panel of the infractions committee followed by a ruling weeks to months later. The staff of current coach Kevin Keatts, who replaced Gottfried in March 2017, has not been accused of wrongdoing.
You are spot onzonagrad wrote:I think Miller can show he followed all the rules a lot easier than the NCAA can show Miller allowed rules to be broken because at the end of the day -- there's no proof any rules were broken. Bad optics because of Book Richardson. But no violations. None.
What specific NCAA rules are you referencing, and how, specifically were they broken?TheCat wrote:What we face and we will lose is that a head coach is responsible for the actions of his staff. We may mitigate some by showing meticulous records but the fact remains you failed to be compliant to the rules. Now if Kansas gets the same or less punishment than us I will lose my MF'n mind.
you have not even tried to identify what, if any, NCAA rule has been violated.TheCat wrote:PC in NM,
NCAA Division I Bylaw 11.1.1.1 states that a head coach is
presumed to be responsible for the actions of all staff members who
report, directly or indirectly, to the head coach. The head coach will
be held accountable for violations in the program unless he or she
can rebut the presumption of responsibility.
A key point to remember is the Committee on Infractions, not the enforcement staff,
that concludes whether the head coach satisfied the requirements of Bylaw
11.1.1.1. The Committee on Infractions is made up of representatives from
the membership and the public
After ESPN how do you think we are perceived?
This is true. However, it's not a zero tolerance rule. As long as the school and coach show that they were ahead of the situation as soon as they were aware of it, they are fine.TheCat wrote:PC in NM,
NCAA Division I Bylaw 11.1.1.1 states that a head coach is
presumed to be responsible for the actions of all staff members who
report, directly or indirectly, to the head coach. The head coach will
be held accountable for violations in the program unless he or she
can rebut the presumption of responsibility.
A key point to remember is the Committee on Infractions, not the enforcement staff,
that concludes whether the head coach satisfied the requirements of Bylaw
11.1.1.1. The Committee on Infractions is made up of representatives from
the membership and the public
After ESPN how do you think we are perceived?