Sean Miller

[Bruins01]

Somehow the worst part is that he thinks the bombs Cesay Sayoc sent out were fake.

I know you guys all generally love Sean Miller but the questions those reporters were asking him were fair and reasonable. Since when is "no comment" an acceptable answer from one of the highest paid PUBLIC employees in the state?

Some other examples from the years:

UCLA coach Steve Alford declined to comment on the case
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/uc ... 0614d9363b" target="_blank

No comment from Steve Alford on report linking him to open Indiana job
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/n ... /99399930/" target="_blank

“I have no comment on any of that.”
https://www.ocregister.com/2010/10/12/u ... eam-rules/" target="_blank

UCLA had no comment on the tweets.
http://www.espn.com/college-football/st ... chip-kelly" target="_blank

UCLA had no comment on his status Monday.
https://www.roanoke.com/sports/uva/uva- ... 5140d.html" target="_blank

“No comment,” he said.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/ear ... b8e7e3af31" target="_blank

I meant in the context of a serious public FBI investigation, not about innocuous tweets made by a player's father or your other examples, which obviously don't matter.

I'm not sure why you would expect me to defend Alford considering his hire is an embarrassing black mark that UCLA will forever have to bear.

My point, though, is that we should generally be in support of journalists asking reasonable questions, not of public employees defiantly refusing to answer them.

[Merkin]

So Sayoc should be let go since the bombs were duds?

Somehow the worst part is that he thinks the bombs Cesay Sayoc sent out were fake.

Oh I'm sorry, bombs that are completely incapable of working are real.

How about what happened to this American resident journalist? Fake too?

[catgrad97]

This isn't defiance. This isn't Bob Knight openly mocking journalists on a regular basis, unprovoked, at regular intervals during multiple postgame press conferences.

This is one dismissive comment made after a reporter wouldn't drop his line of questioning, both parties knowing full well that Miller can't comment on matters under open investigation.

Asking the same question three damn times and expecting a different answer isn't reasonable. It's annoying, and Miller responded to it as the annoying BS it was. Then moved on.

Yahoo! and ESPN can act as butt-hurt as they want to about it, but until they look at Kansas or North Carolina with the same degree of scrutiny, they are in no position to question what Miller's answers should or shouldn't be.

[Spaceman Spiff]

On what planet should people comment more freely on a federal investigation and trial than some miscellaneous personal stuff.

Public comment on a pending case or trial can poison an investigation, influence a jury pool and potentially mean a less than fair trial. People face prison time over those things. Answering no comment avoids any risk of influencing those proceedings.

Compare to Alford's no comment on Indiana. That does not run any risk of influencing a pending legal proceeding and no one could get prison time. The risk of answering that question is basically nonexistent compared to Miller's situation.

I don't fault the journalist for asking once. I fault him for asking the second and third time after the first no comment. The third time is when Miller told him to drive to Phoenix. It was deserved by that point. When you get that first no comment, you don't have to like it, but asking again and again is just being an asshole. You asked, you got your answer. Move on.

[Bruins01]

Those are all very reasonable points. It's just that all the sunglasses memes, et al. that are applauding a public official stonewalling journalists asking perfectly reasonable questions really rub me the wrong way. Miller's behavior can possibly be tolerated and defended, but it really shouldn't be celebrated.

[Chicat]

Those are all very reasonable points. It's just that all the sunglasses memes, et al. that are applauding a public official stonewalling journalists asking perfectly reasonable questions really rub me the wrong way. Miller's behavior can possibly be tolerated and defended, but it really shouldn't be celebrated.

You have to understand support for Miller in the context of our love for Arizona Basketball and the university in general. Fans who frequent this board don’t view him as a highly paid public official with a responsibility to the citizens of the state.

And if you don’t, you can drive back to Phoenix...

[EVCat]

Those are all very reasonable points. It's just that all the sunglasses memes, et al. that are applauding a public official stonewalling journalists asking perfectly reasonable questions really rub me the wrong way. Miller's behavior can possibly be tolerated and defended, but it really shouldn't be celebrated.

You say it is reasonable, given the context, then call it "stonewalling".

It should be celebrated because Tucson vs Phoenix...it should be celebrated because of the context...it should be celebrated because this subpoena is not really something major in this case that he has understandably said "no comment" to for a year...it should be celebrated because of the known motive of the asking party, who is not part of the usual beat, and was sent from a Phoenix station promising "answers" on their 4 pm broadcast to this "new development", which is a distortion of the situation. The reporter was coming to try to stir up a situation, and got one, only it was not a meltdown or an admission or anything more than a snarky comment coming in pretty far south of college head coach snarky comments to reporters over the years, and one that played to his base.

This was no stonewall. It was some extra flavor on a 3rd "no comment" to a reporter who was looking to make a mountain out of a likely-to-be-quashed molehill. He saw it for what it was, and added some sizzle. But you cannot "stonewall" against information that was never going to be had, and can't be offered for numerous reasons.

[Gilbertcat]

Following a weekend during which the UCLA Athletic Department had no comment regarding the termination of David Grace

https://www.bruinsnation.com/ucla_baske ... -statement" target="_blank

UCLA basketball assistant exchanged calls with key figure in bribery and corruption case

The records show Grace made a late-night call to Dawkins on May 18, 2017, that lasted 15 minutes. A few hours later, according to court records, Dawkins mentioned the conversation during a text message exchange with Brian Bowen, the father of five-star recruit Brian Bowen II. He eventually signed with Louisville but never played a game for the school after the federal investigation became public.

https://www.latimes.com/sports/ucla/la- ... story.html" target="_blank

[Newportcat]

Those are all very reasonable points. It's just that all the sunglasses memes, et al. that are applauding a public official stonewalling journalists asking perfectly reasonable questions really rub me the wrong way. Miller's behavior can possibly be tolerated and defended, but it really shouldn't be celebrated.

You have to understand support for Miller in the context of our love for Arizona Basketball and the university in general. Fans who frequent this board don’t view him as a highly paid public official with a responsibility to the citizens of the state.

And if you don’t, you can drive back to Phoenix...

Look these issues are all so divisive today. The world is a place where everyone seems to be angry and disagree. Journalistic integrity, politics, College basketball's future, Sean Miller, the FBI, all of it divides us.

I wish times were different....but they can be. Because there is something 99.99% of Arizona fans can agree on here

No one here gives an absolute fuck if we rub a UCLA fan the wrong way with what we think about Miller. Like two shits. Like even the littlest bit of shit.

Lets all come together and remember we all share that. We might be different but there are some things we all totally agree on like UCLA basketball fans opinions on Arizona basketball or its fans are absolutely worthless.



For the record, its this type of shit that makes me love Sean Miller

[Spaceman Spiff]

Those are all very reasonable points. It's just that all the sunglasses memes, et al. that are applauding a public official stonewalling journalists asking perfectly reasonable questions really rub me the wrong way. Miller's behavior can possibly be tolerated and defended, but it really shouldn't be celebrated.

It isn't stonewalling to not comment on a pending legal matter when he has been clear since day 1 he's not commenting on a pending legal matter. Heck, I could have answered the question before it was asked. That no comment is the absolute appropriate response in the legal context.

I celebrate it because the guy was a pushy jackass about it. I like that Miller defended himself and didn't let that dude ask the same question 4 or 5 times.

Once you get the first no comment answer and keep on with the same question, it isn't legitimate journalism any more. You've got a journalist who wants to be the show, not cover it. Miller put the guy in his place, and I don't feel bad for liking it.

If Miller had gotten mad at him on the first question, I would feel differently. When the reporter drove it further, that's just trying to start something, and I can be happy Miller ended it.

[zonagrad]

The biggest thing about this that is being ignored is how all the journalists stick together on this issue. The national reporters are now carrying water for this guy from Phoenix who doesn't have to cover Miller daily. Every reporter in that room should have thrown the guy under the bus (back to Phoenix).
Instead, they lay quiet as this guy tosses hand grenades at Miller knowing he can drive back to Phoenix because he won't have to try and get a sound bite from Miller on the next road trip. It's a thankless position for a guy like Pascoe. He knows Miller isn't gonna comment. Yet his editor demands he ask the question. But there's a respectful way to handle the topic such as, "Coach, there's new information now about the FBI investigation. Can you comment on the subpoena?" And that's it. This isn't the White House and these guys need to stop acting like Jim Acosta and grandstanding. Lute dealt with the same shit with guys from Phoenix and the national press. Miller doesn't owe any of these guys an answer. And I'm hoping he can serve up a big "FUCK YOU" to everyone when the dust settles.

[Postmaster]

The guy on 1490, Justin Spears?, keeps referring to this as a Pay For Play scandal.
That type of stuff is so annoying. No evidence or charge of paying players to go to a school.
I don’t know if he gets his talking points from ESPN or the Star.

Also, people need to realize that if Miller was on tape doing anything that would have made any player a non-amateur , he would have been charged for defrauding the State, just like Look.

[Alieberman]

If no FBI tape of Miller ever comes out in this trial, will we ever get a statement from the FBI regarding info if this tape actually exists?

[Newportcat]

The guy on 1490, Justin Spears?, keeps referring to this as a Pay For Play scandal.
That type of stuff is so annoying. No evidence or charge of paying players to go to a school.
I don’t know if he gets his talking points from ESPN or the Star.

Also, people need to realize that if Miller was on tape doing anything that would have made any player a non-amateur , he would have been charged for defrauding the State, just like Look.

You have to understand, there is no narrative in college basketball anymore. The biggest story on the court this year is a guy's shoe blowing out. The biggest narrative out there is this FBI thing. Click views and it is what the public is interested in. The public right now has zero interest in who wins the PAC 12 and I do not see that changing anytime soon.

Thats the saddest thing in all of this. The real story is the death of college basketball outside of the tournament. But all anyone wants to talk about is a guys shoes not working and upcoming trials that have literally exposed relatively nothing outside of how antiquated the current college basketball system is.

[Spaceman Spiff]

If no FBI tape of Miller ever comes out in this trial, will we ever get a statement from the FBI regarding info if this tape actually exists?

The FBI will probably never say anything. The NCAA can try to get evidence, but if they have to use FOIA, that can be challenging to say the least.

The FBI's interests are not the NCAA's. Or clearing Miller.

[PHXCATS]

If no FBI tape of Miller ever comes out in this trial, will we ever get a statement from the FBI regarding info if this tape actually exists?

The FBI will probably never say anything. The NCAA can try to get evidence, but if they have to use FOIA, that can be challenging to say the least.

The FBI's interests are not the NCAA's. Or clearing Miller.

Correct me if I am wrong about this but didn't Miller already say last year when he came back to coaching that he spoke with Dawkins and knew he was on wire tap but never offered to pay anyone?

[Spaceman Spiff]

If no FBI tape of Miller ever comes out in this trial, will we ever get a statement from the FBI regarding info if this tape actually exists?

The FBI will probably never say anything. The NCAA can try to get evidence, but if they have to use FOIA, that can be challenging to say the least.

The FBI's interests are not the NCAA's. Or clearing Miller.

Correct me if I am wrong about this but didn't Miller already say last year when he came back to coaching that he spoke with Dawkins and knew he was on wire tap but never offered to pay anyone?

He never said he knew he was on a wire, but he said he had a discussion where paying a player was proposed, but never agreed to pay the player.

I think most people assume it was Dawkins because of the evidence that the FBI has of a number of calls between Miller and Dawkins. Those calls in themselves don't necessarily mean a ton as Dawkins was clearly a major contact point for Brian Bowen's recruitment.

[azcat49]

His comment about The Davis family was telling. They obviously have his back and probably have saved his bacon

[CalStateTempe]

What was the comment J?

That’s pretty swag.

[azcat49]

What was the comment J?

That’s pretty swag.

He said something to the effect they have been by his families side during these trying times and that he appreciated their friendship

[Merkin]

What was the comment J?

That’s pretty swag.

https://tucson.com/sports/arizonawildca ... fe330.html" target="_blank

“In the darkest of times over the last two years, Cole and Jeannie Davis have never left my side,” Miller said. “They have never flinched. I don’t know where I’d be or my family would be without Cole and Jeannie.”

[PHXCATS]

If no FBI tape of Miller ever comes out in this trial, will we ever get a statement from the FBI regarding info if this tape actually exists?

The FBI will probably never say anything. The NCAA can try to get evidence, but if they have to use FOIA, that can be challenging to say the least.

The FBI's interests are not the NCAA's. Or clearing Miller.

Correct me if I am wrong about this but didn't Miller already say last year when he came back to coaching that he spoke with Dawkins and knew he was on wire tap but never offered to pay anyone?

He never said he knew he was on a wire, but he said he had a discussion where paying a player was proposed, but never agreed to pay the player.

I think most people assume it was Dawkins because of the evidence that the FBI has of a number of calls between Miller and Dawkins. Those calls in themselves don't necessarily mean a ton as Dawkins was clearly a major contact point for Brian Bowen's recruitment.

Thanks. I remember that part of the paying a player and Miller saying he refused and never did and that player did not go to UA. But I swear I remember something about Miller knowing he was on wire tap. I thought the law was that if you are not part of the criminal investigation meaning they are not investigating crimes you potentially committed, the FBI needed to give you notice you were on wire tap.

[CalStateTempe]

That’s bad ass.

Thanks for sharing the quotes guys.

[PHXCATS]

That’s bad ass.

Thanks for sharing the quotes guys.

There is zero chance that at the point he made these statements one year ago tomorrow that Miller did not know he was on wire tap. Either the FBI had to have warned him or he would have known from the FBI documents that were put out in September 2017.

So with that said, if the FBI or Dawkins has proof that Miller did pay a player through Dawkins, Miller will never coach again. He is not a stupid man so for The Monty show and all the other haters, bring on the trial bitches, oh and one more thing (if he even testifies which I doubt he does)

Fuck ESPN

[MC1983]

That statement is why I block out the noise. I don’t see how the school and lawyers would allow Miller to make that statement if they don’t know it to be true.

[Longhorned]

That statement is why I block out the noise. I don’t see how the school and lawyers would allow Miller to make that statement if they don’t know it to be true.

The University of Arizona wrote that statement.

[MC1983]

We should have nothing to worry about with that statement. I year later it still stands. Have the # 1 recruiting class to go with it. Bring on April.

[PHXCATS]

We should have nothing to worry about with that statement. I year later it still stands. Have the # 1 recruiting class to go with it. Bring on April.

Agree

Arizona's lawyers, Miller's lawyers and everyone who matters at the University and Athletic Department signed off on that statement. No way the FBI also is waiting to charge Miller after all this time. If it even comes to Miller testifying. That is why Hansen's article yesterday made no sense. Since it is Dawkins calling on Miller to testify, the FBI is not holding off on charging Miller in the chance the defense calls him

[Spaceman Spiff]

We should have nothing to worry about with that statement. I year later it still stands. Have the # 1 recruiting class to go with it. Bring on April.

Agree

Arizona's lawyers, Miller's lawyers and everyone who matters at the University and Athletic Department signed off on that statement. No way the FBI also is waiting to charge Miller after all this time. If it even comes to Miller testifying. That is why Hansen's article yesterday made no sense. Since it is Dawkins calling on Miller to testify, the FBI is not holding off on charging Miller in the chance the defense calls him

I would be stunned if the FBI was waiting to charge Miller. The only real potential is that there's a damaging statement from Miller on the wire that inexplicably didn't come up in the first trial.

[dmjcat]

We should have nothing to worry about with that statement. I year later it still stands. Have the # 1 recruiting class to go with it. Bring on April.

Agree

Arizona's lawyers, Miller's lawyers and everyone who matters at the University and Athletic Department signed off on that statement. No way the FBI also is waiting to charge Miller after all this time. If it even comes to Miller testifying. That is why Hansen's article yesterday made no sense. Since it is Dawkins calling on Miller to testify, the FBI is not holding off on charging Miller in the chance the defense calls him

I would be stunned if the FBI was waiting to charge Miller. The only real potential is that there's a damaging statement from Miller on the wire that inexplicably didn't come up in the first trial.

Completely agree that it is highly unlikely Miller gets charged........that would have already happened.

What I am worried about is that there may something on tape that is an NCAA violation.

Or what if Dawkins made it clear that he was going to pay a player that Miller was pursuing?? Even if Miller told him that he doesn't pay players the UA could still be in hot water with the NCAA......they could claim that Miller should have notified the NCAA of what Dawkins was doing. April is going to be a very nerve wracking month for UA BBall fans.

[Longhorned]

We should have nothing to worry about with that statement. I year later it still stands. Have the # 1 recruiting class to go with it. Bring on April.

Agree

Arizona's lawyers, Miller's lawyers and everyone who matters at the University and Athletic Department signed off on that statement. No way the FBI also is waiting to charge Miller after all this time. If it even comes to Miller testifying. That is why Hansen's article yesterday made no sense. Since it is Dawkins calling on Miller to testify, the FBI is not holding off on charging Miller in the chance the defense calls him

I would be stunned if the FBI was waiting to charge Miller. The only real potential is that there's a damaging statement from Miller on the wire that inexplicably didn't come up in the first trial.

Completely agree that it is highly unlikely Miller gets charged........that would have already happened.

What I am worried about is that there may something on tape that is an NCAA violation.

Or what if Dawkins made it clear that he was going to pay a player that Miller was pursuing?? Even if Miller told him that he doesn't pay players the UA could still be in hot water with the NCAA......they could claim that Miller should have notified the NCAA of what Dawkins was doing. April is going to be a very nerve wracking month for UA BBall fans.

There's no point in fearing what the NCAA is going to do. It's an erratic and reactionary organization founded on a lie that nobody believes. If they nail you for something, you'd have gotten nailed for something else, anyway. For everything you're afraid will happen, you can add 30 more things to imagine the NCAA doing to your program.

[pc in NM]

We should have nothing to worry about with that statement. I year later it still stands. Have the # 1 recruiting class to go with it. Bring on April.

Agree

Arizona's lawyers, Miller's lawyers and everyone who matters at the University and Athletic Department signed off on that statement. No way the FBI also is waiting to charge Miller after all this time. If it even comes to Miller testifying. That is why Hansen's article yesterday made no sense. Since it is Dawkins calling on Miller to testify, the FBI is not holding off on charging Miller in the chance the defense calls him

I would be stunned if the FBI was waiting to charge Miller. The only real potential is that there's a damaging statement from Miller on the wire that inexplicably didn't come up in the first trial.

Whoever wrote the statement, remember that the U of A did add the contract clause where he would lose $1 million of his $4.1 million longevity fund if he is criminally charged or found guilty of a Level 1 NCAA violation.

No one knows if, or what the feds have on CSM, and/or even less about their intentions with respect to future actions towards him; but if he did testify under oath and misstated a fact that a wiretap could contradict, that would be a "new" crime.

And. I'd have to agree with Miller, if CSM exercised his right to "take the fifth", he'd face no criminal liability, but the "optics" themselves could be crippling.

If he is squeaky clean, then I'd see no harm in his testifying - let the chips fall where they may...

Any lawyers here who can explain how he could quash the subpoena, and avoid having to testify?

[CatFanOneMil]

We should have nothing to worry about with that statement. I year later it still stands. Have the # 1 recruiting class to go with it. Bring on April.

Agree

Arizona's lawyers, Miller's lawyers and everyone who matters at the University and Athletic Department signed off on that statement. No way the FBI also is waiting to charge Miller after all this time. If it even comes to Miller testifying. That is why Hansen's article yesterday made no sense. Since it is Dawkins calling on Miller to testify, the FBI is not holding off on charging Miller in the chance the defense calls him

I would be stunned if the FBI was waiting to charge Miller. The only real potential is that there's a damaging statement from Miller on the wire that inexplicably didn't come up in the first trial.

No judge is going to let the defense wander around spouting off supposed evidence of others breaking the law which has nothing to do with the case on the docket...much less call those others in to testify of their own guilt...its like saying "I may have robbed the bank but Miller didn't use his turn signal and thats bad too"

Now if there was an actual conspiracy to commit fraud against the UofA by defrauding it out of scholarship funds by paying a player...THAT would actually be something they would charge Miller with and it would have happened a LONG time ago.

People keep speculating and fail to look at the evidence...if Miller was on tape trying to secure funds of any kind for any player it is a crime against the University because it defrauds them by allowing scholarships funds go to someone who is capable of paying full pop, he would be in cuffs along with Book.

There is no evidence of this. A tape with Miller exposing himself would be all that was needed to charge him.

A conspiracy to commit fraud is chargable...let that sink in, you don't actually have to do it, just conspire with intention and thats enough.

There.Is.No.Tape.

[Longhorned]

We should have nothing to worry about with that statement. I year later it still stands. Have the # 1 recruiting class to go with it. Bring on April.

Agree

Arizona's lawyers, Miller's lawyers and everyone who matters at the University and Athletic Department signed off on that statement. No way the FBI also is waiting to charge Miller after all this time. If it even comes to Miller testifying. That is why Hansen's article yesterday made no sense. Since it is Dawkins calling on Miller to testify, the FBI is not holding off on charging Miller in the chance the defense calls him

I would be stunned if the FBI was waiting to charge Miller. The only real potential is that there's a damaging statement from Miller on the wire that inexplicably didn't come up in the first trial.

Whoever wrote the statement, remember that the U of A did add the contract clause where he would lose $1 million of his $4.1 million longevity fund if he is criminally charged or found guilty of a Level 1 NCAA violation.

No one knows if, or what the feds have on CSM, and/or even less about their intentions with respect to future actions towards him; but if he did testify under oath and misstated a fact that a wiretap could contradict, that would be a "new" crime.

And. I'd have to agree with Miller, if CSM exercised his right to "take the fifth", he'd face no criminal liability, but the "optics" themselves could be crippling.

If he is squeaky clean, then I'd see no harm in his testifying - let the chips fall where they may...

Any lawyers here who can explain how he could quash the subpoena, and avoid having to testify?

You're right and I agree. I'd add that the same could be said of any number of coaches regarding what the feds have on them, and the entire reason for Sean Miller being in this particular position is Mark Schlabach's unretracted but discredited report that Miller is on a wiretap offering outrageous bundles of cash for Deandre Ayton.

So while we don't know if and what the FBI has on Miller, Arizona's position comes down to whether to go on what Miller says and backs up with one million dollars, or an ESPN report based on a single, uncorroborated, unnamed source, and which bears no relationship to the realities of the publicly known timeline.

This is why Miller wasn't fired, and why administrators aren't sweating. Miller could turn out to be a crook or a cheat, but so could other coaches, and finding out that Miller is a crook or a cheat wouldn't undermine the university's decision not to fire him over a report that reflects no journalistic standards precisely because it comes out of a sports and entertainment media organization that has nothing to do with journalism.

[CatFanOneMil]

Here's what amazes me about the subtle distortion of the truth:

Schlabach claims a tape with Miller on it exists. He claims a source has heard it.

Won't name the source. Source won't come forward.

No one knows what is supposed to actually be on the tape except some fictional person who refuses to admit to it.

The subtle shift here is that there is ACTUALLY a tape we just don't know whats on it.

We have heard that the feds possibly bugged Millers phones, we get this idea based on the fact that others have been incriminated on tape...

But here's the deal...getting a wiretap is FUCKING HARD...this is nopt CSI where you can go down to the local judge and he writes a wiretap, I know this for a fact becasue my daughter is one of THREE ONLY people in her District who are authorized to issue wiretap requests..three people in a fucking office of nearly 50 DA's...the other two are the head DA and the Assistant DA who have been there for over 20 years.
She qualified to do this because she NEVER pursued one without serious research and also has written appeals used by the Ninth Court to determine 5th amendment rights...before becoming a DA she worked with a Federal Defense Lawyer here in Tucson who had GPS laws thrown out, my daughter helped research the case...

My point is this, a wiretap on Miller would have to be signed off by a judge and that Judge would require evidence that suggested Sean Miller was actively breaking the law, that evidence needs to be COMPELLING or a Judge is going to say "No you are not invading a private citizens privacy on hearsay"..no warrant to tap will be granted without compelling evidence, regardless of what the movies and Netflix and CSI Miami suggest.

I'm telling you the ONLY tape that exist is Dawkins phone calls to Miller where Miller told him to fuck off and maybe called him to say "Leave my assistant coaches alone or I'll kick your ass myself"

And thus Dawkins has a hardon to pin something on Miller...something that doesn't exist.

[Spaceman Spiff]

We should have nothing to worry about with that statement. I year later it still stands. Have the # 1 recruiting class to go with it. Bring on April.

Agree

Arizona's lawyers, Miller's lawyers and everyone who matters at the University and Athletic Department signed off on that statement. No way the FBI also is waiting to charge Miller after all this time. If it even comes to Miller testifying. That is why Hansen's article yesterday made no sense. Since it is Dawkins calling on Miller to testify, the FBI is not holding off on charging Miller in the chance the defense calls him

I would be stunned if the FBI was waiting to charge Miller. The only real potential is that there's a damaging statement from Miller on the wire that inexplicably didn't come up in the first trial.

Whoever wrote the statement, remember that the U of A did add the contract clause where he would lose $1 million of his $4.1 million longevity fund if he is criminally charged or found guilty of a Level 1 NCAA violation.

No one knows if, or what the feds have on CSM, and/or even less about their intentions with respect to future actions towards him; but if he did testify under oath and misstated a fact that a wiretap could contradict, that would be a "new" crime.

And. I'd have to agree with Miller, if CSM exercised his right to "take the fifth", he'd face no criminal liability, but the "optics" themselves could be crippling.

If he is squeaky clean, then I'd see no harm in his testifying - let the chips fall where they may...

Any lawyers here who can explain how he could quash the subpoena, and avoid having to testify?

He can probably just file a motion to quash the subpoena. I'd assume the basic grounds will be the relevance to an actual defense as we've extensively discussed.

He should not want to testify, period. Nothing good can come from it. Even if he is completely clean and testifies completely truthfully...no positive comes out of that.

Taking the 5th is a weirder issue bc he is not charged with anything and it is extraordinarily unclear if he could be charged with anything. Almost regardless of his actions, it's really unclear if they would inculpate him in the criminal sense. NCAA violations aren't criminal and don't entitle someone to take the 5th.

If the prosecution asks to preclude him as an irrelevant witness, that would also achieve the same result without him testifying.

[97cats]

i love Miller but boy those were two bad last possessions, one out of a timeout.

chance to go up four and instead of going to the hot hand in Randolph he runs one high with Coleman and the Beavs tie the game at the other end.

on the final possession he runs the same action with Coleman and it takes a spectacular and wild play to win the game, again not getting Randolph the ball.

just speaking my internal monologue as I’m watching the game here - didn’t like it.

[Alieberman]

i love Miller but boy those were two bad last possessions, one out of a timeout.

chance to go up four and instead of going to the hot hand in Randolph he runs one high with Coleman and the Beavs tie the game at the other end.

on the final possession he runs the same action with Coleman and it takes a spectacular and wild play to win the game, again not getting Randolph the ball.

just speaking my internal monologue as I’m watching the game here - didn’t like it.

I can't believe we didn't give Randolph a chance to win us the game... but sometimes it's better to be lucky.

That was a hell of a team win

[ByJoveByJingle]

Does he get any credit for having an insanely undermined team in the game on the road with a 2 to 1 foul shot discrepaancy and 60% of our starting lineup out of the game? I like it. Just my inner monologue here.

[97cats]

Does he get any credit for having an insanely undermined team in the game on the road with a 2 to 1 foul shot discrepaancy and 60% of our starting lineup out of the game? I like it. Just my inner monologue here.

yes for sure, on a total I agree it was a good road win, heck an excellent road win. coach, players and all deserve a ton of credit.

however, the last two possessions make me scratch my head - that part was not good.

but a good win yes no doubt

[97cats]

I can't believe we didn't give Randolph a chance to win us the game... but sometimes it's better to be lucky.

That was a hell of a team win

credit on the follow and put back, Doutrive made a great play.

and yes, hell of a road win - Randolph is ok in my book

[84Cat]

If you watch the replay, Randolph was heavily guarded on that last play

[ByJoveByJingle]

Coaches calling plays is overrated. Players make plays, or they don’t. The genius end of game play call is rare.

[Postmaster]

Did Smith take a shot tonight?

[97cats]

If you watch the replay, Randolph was heavily guarded on that last play

there was 21 seconds left out of a timeout - Randolph has to get the ball in that situation

he was stuck in the corner after running one rub screen across free throw line extended, that was it.

one high with Coleman is not the action to win the game, just my opinion

[Postmaster]

Also, do you all think the last to possessions went as CSM drew them up or was it changed by what OSU was doing?
Serious question, not being snarky.

[97cats]

Coaches calling plays is overrated. Players make plays, or they don’t. The genius end of game play call is rare.

i agree with you again, just get Randolph the ball in that situation and let it fly - not Coleman

[97cats]

Also, do you all think the last to possessions went as CSM drew them up or was it changed by what OSU was doing?
Serious question, not being snarky.

Arizona ran one high with Coleman the last two possessions of the game, that was called.

the last out of a timeout

[84Cat]

If you watch the replay, Randolph was heavily guarded on that last play

there was 21 seconds left out of a timeout - Randolph has to get the ball in that situation

he was stuck in the corner after running one rub screen across free throw line extended, that was it.

one high with Coleman is not the action to win the game, just my opinion

No doubt we could have called a better play to get Randolph the ball.

[U.P. Zona Fan]

Man I miss Aaron Gordon, he was great out of a timeout, could get anywhere.