Bear Down Wildcats

Postmaster wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 8:45 pm So what are the chances Krissa plays a game at Arizona?

Postmaster wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 9:36 pm NCAA took first half of season from him. Now the tournament is off the table.
Who knows if there will be more sanctions next season.

azgreg wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 5:23 pm

YoDeFoe wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 6:13 pm

Postmaster wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 6:08 pm I still haven’t heard what noa alleges miller did.
Quinerly, Alkins and Ayton were all cleared to play.

Lack of institutional control. Book broke the law, Phelps lightly violated amateurism with his help of Pinder. We still haven't actually gotten eyes on the document so we don't know the evidence that they're pointing to nor even the complete list of charges.

midnightx wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 10:48 pm

YoDeFoe wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 6:13 pm

Postmaster wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 6:08 pm I still haven’t heard what noa alleges miller did.
Quinerly, Alkins and Ayton were all cleared to play.

Lack of institutional control. Book broke the law, Phelps lightly violated amateurism with his help of Pinder. We still haven't actually gotten eyes on the document so we don't know the evidence that they're pointing to nor even the complete list of charges.

Lack of institutional control is really a broad and dangerous provision within the NCAA bylaws. So, Miller is supposed to know and be able to control what Book does on his own time? But it was enough to nail USC football, even though the program didn't have control over what Bush's parents did with an agent. That said, this mess probably goes beyond the Book and Phelps transgressions -- one suspects the NCAA is possibly considering other claims, including allegations that Miller paid Ayton, etc., regardless if there is verifiable evidence or provable facts, in hopes such allegations can be proven during the arbitration process.

ChooChooCat wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 11:07 pm

midnightx wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 10:48 pm

YoDeFoe wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 6:13 pm

Postmaster wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 6:08 pm I still haven’t heard what noa alleges miller did.
Quinerly, Alkins and Ayton were all cleared to play.

Lack of institutional control. Book broke the law, Phelps lightly violated amateurism with his help of Pinder. We still haven't actually gotten eyes on the document so we don't know the evidence that they're pointing to nor even the complete list of charges.

Lack of institutional control is really a broad and dangerous provision within the NCAA bylaws. So, Miller is supposed to know and be able to control what Book does on his own time? But it was enough to nail USC football, even though the program didn't have control over what Bush's parents did with an agent. That said, this mess probably goes beyond the Book and Phelps transgressions -- one suspects the NCAA is possibly considering other claims, including allegations that Miller paid Ayton, etc., regardless if there is verifiable evidence or provable facts, in hopes such allegations can be proven during the arbitration process.

Which is why it’s going to the IARP. Arizona’s lawyers have their shit together here and think they can beat anything that’s not Book’s fuckery, which he was obviously guilty of in a court of law, hence the decision to ban the postseason. Keep your fingers crossed they are as good as they think they are.

Postmaster wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 9:31 am I guess I’m just paranoid that Krissa will just get fed up and go home.

Postmaster wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 9:31 am I guess I’m just paranoid that Krissa will just get fed up and go home.

AZCatGirl wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 8:50 pm

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 8:28 pm And look, this is ultimately my opinion, but the real problem is the NCAA. People clearly want to give top prospects money. But the NCAA has decided it's wrong that young, African-American men receive market value for their talents. That money could go to the NCAA's billion plus dollar tv deal and enrich middle aged white men, the way it's supposed to, right?

So enact arbitrary rules and impose arbitrary punishments. The hilarious part of Parrish's argument is he thinks this years team doesn't deserve it...but maybe next year's will. Or the year after that. Like they're more morally culpable for **** that happened in 2017.

Yeah, it'd be nice if Miller got the bulk of the punishment. Suspend him for x amount of games and fine him x amount of dollars. Let's not take games away from kids who had nothing to do with any of this.

ChooChooCat wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 5:12 pm

Jefe wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 5:03 pm So we can ban ourselves from the postseason while in the middle of playing that same season? Wouldn't that need to be done prior to Game 1 for it to look good to the NCAA?

This is a half-assed attempt to self-impose the minimum punishment. Also an outside chance we just screwed over next years team and Wildcat fans worldwide.

Louisville did it with a NCAA tourney quality team a few years back right in the middle of the season (after how far we’re currently along).

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 10:05 am

AZCatGirl wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 8:50 pm

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 8:28 pm And look, this is ultimately my opinion, but the real problem is the NCAA. People clearly want to give top prospects money. But the NCAA has decided it's wrong that young, African-American men receive market value for their talents. That money could go to the NCAA's billion plus dollar tv deal and enrich middle aged white men, the way it's supposed to, right?

So enact arbitrary rules and impose arbitrary punishments. The hilarious part of Parrish's argument is he thinks this years team doesn't deserve it...but maybe next year's will. Or the year after that. Like they're more morally culpable for **** that happened in 2017.

Yeah, it'd be nice if Miller got the bulk of the punishment. Suspend him for x amount of games and fine him x amount of dollars. Let's not take games away from kids who had nothing to do with any of this.

I'm not even sure about that. I look at it like this. The thing I'm certain we need to be punished for is Book taking a bribe. That did not benefit Miller in any way and he never would have condoned it, if only because it was a huge risk that did not benefit the program in any way.

That's really the thing that's clear and proven. I dislike the "institutional control" where we act like head coaches police all private actions of assistants. Unless there's some proof Book's action benefitted Miller or Arizona, I see no point in sanctioning Miller over them.

BBQ wildcat wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 10:18 am I don't get some of the posters here saying that the NCAA might add charges or add punishment. They gave us their NOA, and those are the charges. The UA applied to go through the IARP and the case was accepted. The panel will do its thing (not sure what that entails -- some kind of "trial"?, depositions?, or whatever), then makes their decision on what the punishment will be. That decision can't be appealed, either by the UA OR the NCAA.

At least that is my understanding, that at this point, the NCAA is completely out of the picture as far as this mess is concerned. Or am I missing something?

midnightx wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 10:11 amYes, that is one of the problems with "lack of institutional control." The head coach is held accountable for actions by others that the head coach often can have no knowledge of without having his or her staff under surveillance. It makes no sense, but it is allegedly in the NCAA bylaws. Whether the arbitrator has to still punish Miller under those bylaws with a suspension is questionable.

mofo wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:30 am

midnightx wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 10:11 amYes, that is one of the problems with "lack of institutional control." The head coach is held accountable for actions by others that the head coach often can have no knowledge of without having his or her staff under surveillance. It makes no sense, but it is allegedly in the NCAA bylaws. Whether the arbitrator has to still punish Miller under those bylaws with a suspension is questionable.

I agree that it shouldn't be this way if Miller didn't know about it. Playing devil's advocate however, this is the same standard that exists at every company in America. If an employee goes rogue and does something illegal related to company business, both the employee and the company can be held accountable in the court of law even if nobody else was aware. Seems like universities are businesses and the same should apply, at least the NCAA can justify it that way anyway.

On another note, at this point does the IARP or NCAA issue penalties? My understanding is the IARP arbitration is for the charges but does it also include the penalty or does this fall back on the NCAA?

EastCoastCat wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:40 am Also, wasn't it true that the 9 infractions (5 Level 1) were not entirely associated with the basketball program? I recall a few of them were against the swimming & diving program?

I ask because on the ESPN scroll they seem to indicate our self-imposed postseason ban was due to all 9 infractions against the basketball program which I think is factually false.

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:48 amThe biggest issue I have with your company analogy is that the illegality here doesn't benefit the university. If a company employee robs a bank, the company doesn't get in trouble unless they somehow encouraged/benefitted. It gets lost, but Arizona is legally the victim of Book's actions.

That's my big problem with making Arizona or Miller take a fall if the only issues is Book taking a bribe. The bribe is private conduct that doesn't benefit Arizona or Miller in the same way a bank robbery wouldn't benefit them.

There's still a price to be paid for having a criminal assistant coach, but far less than if the coach was acting for the program.

mofo wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 12:16 pm

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:48 amThe biggest issue I have with your company analogy is that the illegality here doesn't benefit the university. If a company employee robs a bank, the company doesn't get in trouble unless they somehow encouraged/benefitted. It gets lost, but Arizona is legally the victim of Book's actions.

That's my big problem with making Arizona or Miller take a fall if the only issues is Book taking a bribe. The bribe is private conduct that doesn't benefit Arizona or Miller in the same way a bank robbery wouldn't benefit them.

There's still a price to be paid for having a criminal assistant coach, but far less than if the coach was acting for the program.

I think an argument could be made that if a kid could get paid by going to a school and chose that school, then it could have benefitted that school. In this case the school didn't do the paying nor was aware of it, the payment wasn't to attend Arizona and as far as I know the kid didn't even get paid b/c Book kept it. But in a very indirect way this could be perceived as a benefit to attend Arizona, as well as any other school who had a player the agent had an eye on - but they didn't get caught.

I don't agree with it but can understand the argument.

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:50 am

EastCoastCat wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:40 am Also, wasn't it true that the 9 infractions (5 Level 1) were not entirely associated with the basketball program? I recall a few of them were against the swimming & diving program?

I ask because on the ESPN scroll they seem to indicate our self-imposed postseason ban was due to all 9 infractions against the basketball program which I think is factually false.

It's unclear. Swimming and diving was included, but it isn't known if the 9 infractions were parted out by program or whether the NCAA lumped both Swimming/Basketball into a single infraction.

It seems like they got lumped together in institutional control, but the assumption is that some of the 9 were more specific, and unknown if they were lumped together there.

ChooChooCat wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 7:48 pm

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:50 am

EastCoastCat wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:40 am Also, wasn't it true that the 9 infractions (5 Level 1) were not entirely associated with the basketball program? I recall a few of them were against the swimming & diving program?

I ask because on the ESPN scroll they seem to indicate our self-imposed postseason ban was due to all 9 infractions against the basketball program which I think is factually false.

It's unclear. Swimming and diving was included, but it isn't known if the 9 infractions were parted out by program or whether the NCAA lumped both Swimming/Basketball into a single infraction.

It seems like they got lumped together in institutional control, but the assumption is that some of the 9 were more specific, and unknown if they were lumped together there.

All 9 were basketball, swimming, or university in general related. I think 3 were for the basketball program specifically. One was Book, one is Miller lack of institutional control, and I’m pretty sure the other is Phelps. It may be 4 now that I think of it with the last one being the total fabricated bullshit of our failure to cooperate because Phelps and Book didn’t want to talk to the NCAA after neither were employed by U of A.

YoDeFoe wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:09 am

ChooChooCat wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 7:48 pm

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:50 am

EastCoastCat wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:40 am Also, wasn't it true that the 9 infractions (5 Level 1) were not entirely associated with the basketball program? I recall a few of them were against the swimming & diving program?

I ask because on the ESPN scroll they seem to indicate our self-imposed postseason ban was due to all 9 infractions against the basketball program which I think is factually false.

It's unclear. Swimming and diving was included, but it isn't known if the 9 infractions were parted out by program or whether the NCAA lumped both Swimming/Basketball into a single infraction.

It seems like they got lumped together in institutional control, but the assumption is that some of the 9 were more specific, and unknown if they were lumped together there.

All 9 were basketball, swimming, or university in general related. I think 3 were for the basketball program specifically. One was Book, one is Miller lack of institutional control, and I’m pretty sure the other is Phelps. It may be 4 now that I think of it with the last one being the total fabricated bullshit of our failure to cooperate because Phelps and Book didn’t want to talk to the NCAA after neither were employed by U of A.

That was my favorite one. "WHY DIDN'T YOU FORCE THE PERSON WHO DOESN'T WORK FOR YOU TO TALK TO US?"

I don't know, NCAA, Rhianna won't return my DMs but you don't see me pissing up your leg over it.

ChooChooCat wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:36 am Also Phelps was more than willing to talk to the NCAA. So that part was absolute bullshit from the start.

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:54 am

ChooChooCat wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:36 am Also Phelps was more than willing to talk to the NCAA. So that part was absolute bullshit from the start.

The IARP can conduct investigation and hear testimony. We should get Phelps to come tell that to the IARP.

zonagrad wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:51 am Every major media outlet continues to work on the premise that Arizona and Miller are presumed guilty and must be punished. It's upside down, where in the real world you are presumed innocent and the state (in this case the NCAA) must prove their case. What evidence of wrongdoing by Miller does the NCAA have? Book worked an illegal, private deal with a shady agent. He was rightly fired and did time. If the FBI considered the UA a victim, why is the NCAA trying to punish the victim, especially when there's zero of evidence of Arizona benefitting from the scheme?

A Mark Schlabach article that used an unnamed source (likely a Dawkins' defense attorney) that alleged illegal payments by Miller to Ayton is being given more credence than it should. Does this pass the NCAA smell test for evidence? Based on this low bar for evidence, shouldn't Duke be answering to Level 1 allegations as well regarding Zion?

Lastly, Arizona can rightly argue that because of the media coverage, they have in fact been dealing with de facto punishment already. The program has endured three years of a dark cloud hanging over the program with still nothing tangibly proven.

It's a travesty how Arizona and Miller have been treated by the media in comparison to Kansas, Duke, etc...

ChooChooCat wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:57 am

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:54 am

ChooChooCat wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:36 am Also Phelps was more than willing to talk to the NCAA. So that part was absolute bullshit from the start.

The IARP can conduct investigation and hear testimony. We should get Phelps to come tell that to the IARP.

Doubt we could compel Phelps to come talk on our behalf now, but I do know he had zero issue talking with the NCAA when they requested to.

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:28 am

ChooChooCat wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:57 am

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:54 am

ChooChooCat wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:36 am Also Phelps was more than willing to talk to the NCAA. So that part was absolute bullshit from the start.

The IARP can conduct investigation and hear testimony. We should get Phelps to come tell that to the IARP.

Doubt we could compel Phelps to come talk on our behalf now, but I do know he had zero issue talking with the NCAA when they requested to.

It's a pipe dream, but perhaps at least he'd submit an affidavit that he was willing to talk. I know he probably has no love for us, but if the IARP would weigh things like show causes, etc...still probably a pipe dream, buut whatever.

YoDeFoe wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:47 am

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:28 am

ChooChooCat wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:57 am

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:54 am

ChooChooCat wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:36 am Also Phelps was more than willing to talk to the NCAA. So that part was absolute bullshit from the start.

The IARP can conduct investigation and hear testimony. We should get Phelps to come tell that to the IARP.

Doubt we could compel Phelps to come talk on our behalf now, but I do know he had zero issue talking with the NCAA when they requested to.

It's a pipe dream, but perhaps at least he'd submit an affidavit that he was willing to talk. I know he probably has no love for us, but if the IARP would weigh things like show causes, etc...still probably a pipe dream, buut whatever.

Here's what gives me hope: the actual IARP panel. It's largely a collection of expert arbitrators, litigators, and mediators. These are people who live in the real world.

Beachcat97 wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 2:16 pm Bear down and beat the Huskies!

azgreg wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 8:12 pm

Catintheheat wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 8:13 pm Looking at the Cats lineup. I believe this would have been a sweet-16 or better team. Best team since 16-17. The guards are better because of how unselfish they are. Plus, I don't see chuckers on the team. They play smart. Defensively, I'd like to see them take more chances in stripping the ball, and jumping into passing lanes. Their quickness is a strength and the team out to be tailored to this. They play excellent transition basketball but play a good half-court game too, thanks to the decision-making, and not just the guards.

Thinking how good this team is now and their incredible potential If we return the team, and I believe it is possible, this team could be the best team since 14-15 and a National Championship wouldn't be out to the question. Definitely Final Four good. This is the most fun team to watch since 14-15,

One last point. This reminds me more of a Lute Olson team than Sean Miller teams.

dmjcat wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 9:18 pm

Catintheheat wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 8:13 pm Looking at the Cats lineup. I believe this would have been a sweet-16 or better team. Best team since 16-17. The guards are better because of how unselfish they are. Plus, I don't see chuckers on the team. They play smart. Defensively, I'd like to see them take more chances in stripping the ball, and jumping into passing lanes. Their quickness is a strength and the team out to be tailored to this. They play excellent transition basketball but play a good half-court game too, thanks to the decision-making, and not just the guards.

Thinking how good this team is now and their incredible potential If we return the team, and I believe it is possible, this team could be the best team since 14-15 and a National Championship wouldn't be out to the question. Definitely Final Four good. This is the most fun team to watch since 14-15,

One last point. This reminds me more of a Lute Olson team than Sean Miller teams.

Personally I am just enjoying this team now, in the present. This isn't the Lute Olson era anymore. The players have the NBA, the NBA G league, and Overseas leagues to play in. Frankly, I will be surprised if the team returns intact for next season.

dmjcat wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 9:18 pm

Catintheheat wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 8:13 pm Looking at the Cats lineup. I believe this would have been a sweet-16 or better team. Best team since 16-17. The guards are better because of how unselfish they are. Plus, I don't see chuckers on the team. They play smart. Defensively, I'd like to see them take more chances in stripping the ball, and jumping into passing lanes. Their quickness is a strength and the team out to be tailored to this. They play excellent transition basketball but play a good half-court game too, thanks to the decision-making, and not just the guards.

Thinking how good this team is now and their incredible potential If we return the team, and I believe it is possible, this team could be the best team since 14-15 and a National Championship wouldn't be out to the question. Definitely Final Four good. This is the most fun team to watch since 14-15,

One last point. This reminds me more of a Lute Olson team than Sean Miller teams.

Personally I am just enjoying this team now, in the present. This isn't the Lute Olson era anymore. The players have the NBA, the NBA G league, and Overseas leagues to play in. Frankly, I will be surprised if the team returns intact for next season.

azcat49 wrote: Fri Jan 01, 2021 9:40 am Right now wouldn’t we be one scholarship over the limit? Also how do they handle the rule where they give kids an extra year? Just increase the scholarship limit for one year?

BeardownZonaZona wrote: Fri Jan 01, 2021 10:36 am Seniors can come back and not count against the scholarship amount so I'd assume we would bring Ira Lee and Brown Jr. back with open arms

BeardownZonaZona wrote: Fri Jan 01, 2021 10:36 am Seniors can come back and not count against the scholarship amount so I'd assume we would bring Ira Lee and Brown Jr. back with open arms

Merkin wrote: Fri Jan 01, 2021 11:24 am

BeardownZonaZona wrote: Fri Jan 01, 2021 10:36 am Seniors can come back and not count against the scholarship amount so I'd assume we would bring Ira Lee and Brown Jr. back with open arms

Spiff and others have stated that they are not coming back under any situation