Sean Miller

[CalStateTempe]

Vegas had us 8 to 1 when I got my yearly ticket two weekends ago. Just behind Duke and UK.

[rgdeuce]

There is no answer that preserves both. So we choose sides. My view is if we keep going down the player-centered path, it will kill the golden goose. I know that each of these changes diminishes the appeal of college hoops for me.

I think the golden goose analogy is very apt, it's the exact same thing that happened with football and the EA Sports games. I hope all those players are happy they got $20 for their likenesses and killed it for 1) all the players who thought being in a game was cool and 2) everyone else who enjoyed playing the games.

This. Everyone lost except for O'Bannon et al's attorneys, and the fans got it the worst.

[Main Event]

[Postmaster]

Someone ask him who is going to be eligible
That's BBALL related, right?

[YoDeFoe]

Dope.

[azcat49]

Just an FYI, supposedly there are pics of Rawle in the hospital followed by Rawle in a boot and then the next day he is out of the boot. Just leading to more scrutiny about whether he is "that" guy?

[CatFanOneMil]

Just an FYI, supposedly there are pics of Rawle in the hospital followed by Rawle in a boot and then the next day he is out of the boot. Just leading to more scrutiny about whether he is "that" guy?

Are there pictures of him in surgery and then no surgery required?

I dunno it seems like people will go to a lot of detail but this borders on area 51 type conspiracy...

[YoDeFoe]

Yeah he definitely had surgery. The school doesn't put out fake press releases on their players to cover scandals.

[Longhorned]

The moon landings were faked, too.

[Puerco]

The moon landings were faked, too.

What? Seriously? Oh, goddamnit.

[Harvey Specter]

The moon landings were faked, too.

What? Seriously? Oh, goddamnit.

2 words: Capricorn One.

OJ was in on it.

[catgrad97]

Stanley Kubrick directed.

[Statfreak77]

Just an FYI, supposedly there are pics of Rawle in the hospital followed by Rawle in a boot and then the next day he is out of the boot. Just leading to more scrutiny about whether he is "that" guy?

Where is there pictures or talk that he was out of the boot? Last I saw and knew, he was in a walking boot as of earlier this week.

[HiCat]

Dope.

Time?

[Statfreak77]

Dope.

Time?

2:30 PM MST.

[HiCat]

Dope.

Time?

2:30 PM MST.

Thanks for the info.

[NYCat]

[NYCat]

[Jefe]

missed the presser, waiting for a full vid

[NYCat]

[CalStateTempe]

Been working what was everyone's take away?

[Jefe]

I missed it, waiting on the full vid. Assuming it was under 10 mins long

Guys on the radio we're saying he didnt look good. Needs a vacation

[NYCat]

missed the presser, waiting for a full vid

Here you go (36 mins)

[HiCat]

I missed it, waiting on the full vid. Assuming it was under 10 mins long

Guys on the radio we're saying he didnt look good. Needs a vacation

Stress showing.

[CatFanOneMil]

I missed it, waiting on the full vid. Assuming it was under 10 mins long

Guys on the radio we're saying he didnt look good. Needs a vacation

Yeah I was wondering if there is more grey hair...but considering that Book set the recruiting momentum back to "Kevin-Crusty-the-clown-coach-O'Neil" days I'm kinda surprised he didn't look more like a crack whore on Sunday morning...

"As everyone knows RECRUITING is the lifeblood of a basketball program-Sean-never-let-them-see-you-sweat-again-Miller""...

In other words a vampire would rather suck rat blood than take a shot at us until this fiasco blows over...

[threenumberones]

missed the presser, waiting for a full vid

Here you go (36 mins)

Get no audio on that, weird.

[threenumberones]

missed the presser, waiting for a full vid

Here you go (36 mins)

Get no audio on that, weird.

Ah audio format issue. Can't use stereo. Just unplug your earphones if you are having the same issue.

[CatFanOneMil]

missed the presser, waiting for a full vid

Here you go (36 mins)

Get no audio on that, weird.

Ah audio format issue. Can't use stereo. Just unplug your earphones if you are having the same issue.

One thing I HATE about the UA pressers is the atrocious way the audio is done, mic's are disproportionate, like yesterday it was only the left channel (I looked at the stream)..its terrible.

[YoDeFoe]

Trier holds himself like an upperclassman, like a man. Great to see him wear his leadership.

[HiCat]

University of Arizona's statements suggest school will defend Sean Miller from potential NCAA investigation
Bruce Pascoe, tucson.com Published 8:34 p.m. MT Oct. 9, 2017

Months, or even years, might pass before the FBI's investigation into college basketball translates into potential NCAA violations.

But Arizona has already begun stating its case.

The claims last week by Arizona coach Sean Miller, athletic director Dave Heeke and president Robert Robbins that Miller has acknowledged his responsibility to foster compliance — and statements by Miller and Heeke that the UA coach has long been doing so — demonstrate the university is prepared to defend Miller under an NCAA rule that can penalize head coaches even if they aren't aware of violations involving their programs.

Miller was not implicated in the federal complaint that resulted in the Sept. 26 arrest of UA assistant coach Book Richardson and nine other college basketball figures, but NCAA Bylaw 11.1.1.1. states that head coaches are responsible for the actions of their direct or indirect reports unless they can "rebut the presumption of responsibility."

That rebuttal possibility, which is not mentioned in the NCAA manual but is in a supplemental guide for head coaches, can take head coaches off the hook.

FBI investigation: University of Arizona to conduct probe

Instituted in 2013, Bylaw 11.1.1.1 essentially eliminates plausible deniability and puts head coaches under a guilty-until-proven-innocent standard. In order to rebut the presumption of responsibility, head coaches must prove they have fostered an atmosphere of compliance and have actively monitored their direct and indirect reports.

“They’re making sure the coaches are engaged, so they can’t turn a blind eye to it,” said Christian Dennie, a Texas-based attorney who specializes in working with schools on NCAA issues. “If they can make sure the coach is doing the right thing, they’ll probably be OK.”

So even if the NCAA finds Richardson was guilty of taking $20,000 in bribes as alleged in the federal complaint, Arizona and Miller might not be punished if the school can prove Richardson acted on his own and repeatedly misled Miller when asked repeatedly about compliance. (There are, of course, other allegations Arizona could face as a result of the complaint.)


http://www.azcentral.com/story/sports/n ... 748816001/" target="_blank

[Longhorned]

Thanks HiCat. Hard to imagine the university doesn’t already have a convincing set of diachronic documents that demonstrates Miller’s pattern of compliance guidance. Otherwise we wouldn’t see this stance.

[Hank of sb]

University of Arizona's statements suggest school will defend Sean Miller from potential NCAA investigation
Bruce Pascoe, tucson.com Published 8:34 p.m. MT Oct. 9, 2017

Months, or even years, might pass before the FBI's investigation into college basketball translates into potential NCAA violations.

But Arizona has already begun stating its case.

The claims last week by Arizona coach Sean Miller, athletic director Dave Heeke and president Robert Robbins that Miller has acknowledged his responsibility to foster compliance — and statements by Miller and Heeke that the UA coach has long been doing so — demonstrate the university is prepared to defend Miller under an NCAA rule that can penalize head coaches even if they aren't aware of violations involving their programs.

Miller was not implicated in the federal complaint that resulted in the Sept. 26 arrest of UA assistant coach Book Richardson and nine other college basketball figures, but NCAA Bylaw 11.1.1.1. states that head coaches are responsible for the actions of their direct or indirect reports unless they can "rebut the presumption of responsibility."

That rebuttal possibility, which is not mentioned in the NCAA manual but is in a supplemental guide for head coaches, can take head coaches off the hook.

FBI investigation: University of Arizona to conduct probe

Instituted in 2013, Bylaw 11.1.1.1 essentially eliminates plausible deniability and puts head coaches under a guilty-until-proven-innocent standard. In order to rebut the presumption of responsibility, head coaches must prove they have fostered an atmosphere of compliance and have actively monitored their direct and indirect reports.

“They’re making sure the coaches are engaged, so they can’t turn a blind eye to it,” said Christian Dennie, a Texas-based attorney who specializes in working with schools on NCAA issues. “If they can make sure the coach is doing the right thing, they’ll probably be OK.”

So even if the NCAA finds Richardson was guilty of taking $20,000 in bribes as alleged in the federal complaint, Arizona and Miller might not be punished if the school can prove Richardson acted on his own and repeatedly misled Miller when asked repeatedly about compliance. (There are, of course, other allegations Arizona could face as a result of the complaint.)


http://www.azcentral.com/story/sports/n ... 748816001/" target="_blank

Can't see how there might be an email chain where Miller might find the exculpatory nugget.

Book: "I think I got Quinerly on the hook. You want him, right?"

Miller: "Make sure you are doing this right."

Besides, ALL emails will be subpoenaed. There will be no cherry picking. I could just as easily imagine Miller saying:

"Whatever it takes."

Indeed, Miller could say the above and have no coded agenda in his statement whatsoever. Just go back to our own missives and reread them knowing now the FBI is now looking for bad intent.

Regardless, "Arizona and Miller might be punished........" Ya think? How the NCAA can do otherwise, i.e. not punish, I can't see. Indeed, given NCAA's ongoing feckless record, they will be practically forced to punish the 6 schools involved this go around-- just to for their own heads.

The overhang with the NCAA has started; it's a mini death penalty in itself unless the school addresses it.

I am hoping an impartial university report helps the school expedite this matter no matter what the recommendation.

[Spaceman Spiff]

University of Arizona's statements suggest school will defend Sean Miller from potential NCAA investigation
Bruce Pascoe, tucson.com Published 8:34 p.m. MT Oct. 9, 2017

Months, or even years, might pass before the FBI's investigation into college basketball translates into potential NCAA violations.

But Arizona has already begun stating its case.

The claims last week by Arizona coach Sean Miller, athletic director Dave Heeke and president Robert Robbins that Miller has acknowledged his responsibility to foster compliance — and statements by Miller and Heeke that the UA coach has long been doing so — demonstrate the university is prepared to defend Miller under an NCAA rule that can penalize head coaches even if they aren't aware of violations involving their programs.

Miller was not implicated in the federal complaint that resulted in the Sept. 26 arrest of UA assistant coach Book Richardson and nine other college basketball figures, but NCAA Bylaw 11.1.1.1. states that head coaches are responsible for the actions of their direct or indirect reports unless they can "rebut the presumption of responsibility."

That rebuttal possibility, which is not mentioned in the NCAA manual but is in a supplemental guide for head coaches, can take head coaches off the hook.

FBI investigation: University of Arizona to conduct probe

Instituted in 2013, Bylaw 11.1.1.1 essentially eliminates plausible deniability and puts head coaches under a guilty-until-proven-innocent standard. In order to rebut the presumption of responsibility, head coaches must prove they have fostered an atmosphere of compliance and have actively monitored their direct and indirect reports.

“They’re making sure the coaches are engaged, so they can’t turn a blind eye to it,” said Christian Dennie, a Texas-based attorney who specializes in working with schools on NCAA issues. “If they can make sure the coach is doing the right thing, they’ll probably be OK.”

So even if the NCAA finds Richardson was guilty of taking $20,000 in bribes as alleged in the federal complaint, Arizona and Miller might not be punished if the school can prove Richardson acted on his own and repeatedly misled Miller when asked repeatedly about compliance. (There are, of course, other allegations Arizona could face as a result of the complaint.)


http://www.azcentral.com/story/sports/n ... 748816001/" target="_blank

Can't see how there might be an email chain where Miller might find the exculpatory nugget.

Book: "I think I got Quinerly on the hook. You want him, right?"

Miller: "Make sure you are doing this right."

Besides, ALL emails will be subpoenaed. There will be no cherry picking. I could just as easily imagine Miller saying:

"Whatever it takes."

Indeed, Miller could say the above and have no coded agenda in his statement whatsoever. Just go back to our own missives and reread them knowing now the FBI is now looking for bad intent.

Regardless, "Arizona and Miller might be punished........" Ya think? How the NCAA can do otherwise, i.e. not punish, I can't see. Indeed, given NCAA's ongoing feckless record, they will be practically forced to punish the 6 schools involved this go around-- just to for their own heads.

The overhang with the NCAA has started; it's a mini death penalty in itself unless the school addresses it.

I am hoping an impartial university report helps the school expedite this matter no matter what the recommendation.

I think you're conflating the difference between proving the negative and the actual exculpatory evidence in this case. The truly exculpatory thing is not Miller being aware of Book's potential actions and discouraging him. It's a lack of knowledge.

By its nature, that will not leave a trail of proof, but a trail of the absence of the same.

[Hank of sb]

I think you're conflating the difference between proving the negative and the actual exculpatory evidence in this case. The truly exculpatory thing is not Miller being aware of Book's potential actions and discouraging him. It's a lack of knowledge.

By its nature, that will not leave a trail of proof, but a trail of the absence of the same.

You are right.

Let's say all that is known now is all that will ever be known--the investigation is now over, we just don't know it.

That leaves the matter at hand: Book.

As there will be a consensus to do so, the NCAA will (most likely) come down on this.

[CatFanOneMil]

(There are, of course, other allegations Arizona could face as a result of the complaint.)

Like fucking what?


http://www.azcentral.com/story/sports/n ... 748816001/" target="_blank

Can't see how there might be an email chain where Miller might find the exculpatory nugget.

You sound disappointed

Book: "I think I got Quinerly on the hook. You want him, right?"

Miller: "Make sure you are doing this right."

Email could just as easily say "Hey Book, your monthly financial statement that I have required is showing some odd activity that is inconsistent with the standards we agreed upon after the leaking info issue, please plan on meeting with me after red.blue game and explaining yourself"...my imaginary position is actually more feasible than yours.

Besides, ALL emails will be subpoenaed. There will be no cherry picking. I could just as easily imagine Miller saying:

"Whatever it takes."

Indeed, Miller could say the above and have no coded agenda in his statement whatsoever. Just go back to our own missives and reread them knowing now the FBI is now looking for bad intent.

Regardless, "Arizona and Miller might be punished........" Ya think? How the NCAA can do otherwise, i.e. not punish, I can't see. Indeed, given NCAA's ongoing feckless record, they will be practically forced to punish the 6 schools involved this go around-- just to for their own heads.

The overhang with the NCAA has started; it's a mini death penalty in itself unless the school addresses it.

I am hoping an impartial university report helps the school expedite this matter no matter what the recommendation.

They hired an OUTSIDE legal firm I'm sure your hopes will be realised...but down that road the general tone of what you think seems to contradict with what you hope, you are a person divided within himself...

[Spaceman Spiff]

I think you're conflating the difference between proving the negative and the actual exculpatory evidence in this case. The truly exculpatory thing is not Miller being aware of Book's potential actions and discouraging him. It's a lack of knowledge.

By its nature, that will not leave a trail of proof, but a trail of the absence of the same.

You are right.

Let's say all that is known now is all that will ever be known--the investigation is now over, we just don't know it.

That leaves the matter at hand: Book.

As there will be a consensus to do so, the NCAA will (most likely) come down on this.

I agree we will likely be punished for Book's actions even without an implication of anyone else. If that is the case, I think there will be sanctions, but not severe. What Book is accused of, without more, is something that does not directly invoke the major concerns that trigger the NCAA dropping the heavy hammer.

Now, if the NCAA goes further and says Book did what he did because Arizona did not emphasize a climate of compliance, then things get harsher. This is the muddy middle ground. The climate arguments are always more fungible.

The final possibility is direct involvement of others. This is where we'd get a bigger hammer. This is obviously early, but I don't think things are heading this route, given Arizona's public rhetoric so far.

[Hank of sb]

(There are, of course, other allegations Arizona could face as a result of the complaint.)

Like fucking what?

You would do better by addressing this question to the person that originally wrote it.

I was responding on the likelihood of NCAA moving forward just on what we have now.

[Hank of sb]

I think you're conflating the difference between proving the negative and the actual exculpatory evidence in this case. The truly exculpatory thing is not Miller being aware of Book's potential actions and discouraging him. It's a lack of knowledge.

By its nature, that will not leave a trail of proof, but a trail of the absence of the same.

You are right.

Let's say all that is known now is all that will ever be known--the investigation is now over, we just don't know it.

That leaves the matter at hand: Book.

As there will be a consensus to do so, the NCAA will (most likely) come down on this.

I agree we will likely be punished for Book's actions even without an implication of anyone else. If that is the case, I think there will be sanctions, but not severe. What Book is accused of, without more, is something that does not directly invoke the major concerns that trigger the NCAA dropping the heavy hammer.

Now, if the NCAA goes further and says Book did what he did because Arizona did not emphasize a climate of compliance, then things get harsher. This is the muddy middle ground. The climate arguments are always more fungible.

The final possibility is direct involvement of others. This is where we'd get a bigger hammer. This is obviously early, but I don't think things are heading this route, given Arizona's public rhetoric so far.

Yes. Best case this is a wrap. Right now.

But "best case" still sees some form of sanctioning coming.

We still need to find agreement on how to mitigate the damages of time. The NCAA could care less about time....and all its effects.

[Merkin]

Vegas tourney this week? Or just a hub for another destination? Bol Bol?

Both of them going must mean its a big time recruit

Vegas tourneys aren't until July.

I honestly don't know of any big recruits currently in Vegas or at least any that we're currently on.

Maybe they're getting on a connected flight out of LV or maybe they found Ajay Thakore's "dead body" and really felt the urge to take a piss on it?

Having a burger with the Maryland AD?

[YoDeFoe]

I don't get it...?

[UAEebs86]

I don't get it...?

Allegedly, Kevin Anderson ate a cheeseburger in the hotel room when he was interviewing Sean Miller for the Maryland job.

[Hank of sb]

I don't get it...?

AGAIN!

[Jefe]

Who are the reporters he can't stand again? Its always the guy to Millers far left

[HiCat]

Who are the reporters he can't stand again? Its always the guy to Millers far left

Thanks for posting the presser. Always good to hear Miller's updates.

[HiCat]

Sean Miller, Deandre Ayton, Emmanuel Akot discuss win vs. Eastern New Mexico

https://www.azdesertswarm.com/basketbal ... highlights" target="_blank

[HiCat]

Lorenzo Romar not expected to change Arizona’s tempo
10 comments
Sean Miller won’t budge on his defensive principles, thus it’s unlikely Arizona’s pace will increase

Ryan Kelapire@RKelapire Nov 3, 2017, 12:04pm PDT

When Lorenzo Romar was hired by Sean Miller and the Arizona Wildcats this offseason, some believed a stylistic change, even just a slight alteration, would be coming to Arizona basketball.

After all, Romar and Miller have largely differing coaching philosophies, especially on the defensive side of the ball.

In their best years under Romar, the Washington Huskies used a relentless, aggressive man-to-man defense that prided itself on forcing quick, tough shots and ideally an ample amount of turnovers, which then fueled UW’s traditionally uptempo offense.

On the other hand, Miller’s teams deploy the “pack-line” man-to-man defense, a conservative scheme that packs the paint and forces opposing teams to execute in the halfcourt to generate quality shots.

The Wildcats have been effective on defense under Miller to be sure, but the pack-line defense results in UA playing at one of the slowest paces in college basketball year in and year out, since they don’t force a ton of turnovers and opponents often burn the shot clock to find quality looks.

https://www.azdesertswarm.com/basketbal ... head-coach" target="_blank

[HiCat]

Post game Chico State

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QJb_41JK_Y" target="_blank


Trier and Deandre
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ra8CBPTlWpY" target="_blank

[Jefe]

Someone tell Coach we play Sunday not Monday

[Statfreak77]

Someone tell Coach we play Sunday not Monday

To his credit, he did mention the "play 2 games in 3 days" so he was sort of, kind of right.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Someone tell Coach we play Sunday not Monday

I'm confident we won't forfeit by showing on the wrong day. Although that would be interesting.