Re: Sean Miller
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2018 11:25 pm
Not playing your contrarian game tonight machina.
Time and place.
Time and place.
You have an ESPN report that has ZERO attribution. ZERO!!!! Schlabach cites a "source." What source? If you can't qualify the source, then what good is it? And I'd say right now the FBI has a pretty shitty track record when it comes to integrity. I don't want to get too political, but an entire government agency (or at least the people at the top) just engineered a blind eye to Hillary Clinton and is hellbent on taking down a sitting President. But that's for another board. The point is you can't float a story like this without better attribution. And what is the U of A supposed to do? Fire a coach over an ESPN report that cites an unnamed source that Sean Miller discussed paying a player? Please? Even if the ESPN report is accurate, it's terrible journalism. And Arizona would be stupid to fire a coach based on the information available at this time. If the information changes, then ok.pc in NM wrote:I think it's about "institutional control" at this stage. With such an explosive allegation as this, being documented by wiretaps, I believe that the university must ta k e action commensurate with the seriousness of the allegation.Longhorned wrote:Why would the top 20 teams be out? Why would Arizona be out? The NCAA isn't supposed to act until the FBI investigation is over. These are leaks.
I believe that should probably involve suspension of Miller (probably with pay) pending a thorough investigation. To even discuss the possibility of a bribe is an odfense, and unacceptable (unless immediately reported to compliance staff.
As for players, the information is far more vague - there u s no alleged information, in these reports, that payments were in fact made. Unless and until such information is surfaced, maybe they do not need to be suspended.
If any players are revealed to have accepted money, then they were ineligible to have played, and forfeits would be a likely consequence. If the university determines that self-sanction should include forfeits, then suspending post-season play would be a potential self-sanction....
This is how Arizona, or another team might "be out"....
Trier hasn’t been cleared just yetChooChooCat wrote:Hey guys, what I miss?
We're 2 point underdogs at Oregon tomorrow. Other than that...ChooChooCat wrote:Hey guys, what I miss?
Lot of cooks in the kitchen. And not everyone has the same recipe.CalStateTempe wrote:Then why would the fbi leak evidence to the media ruining millers reputation and career?
Well shit, good thing that's our only concern at this point. I'm sure the NCAA does the right thing here though. Bear Down!97cats wrote:Trier hasn’t been cleared just yetChooChooCat wrote:Hey guys, what I miss?
Use of unnamed sources is actually a rigorous process in journalism. The story is cleared by managing editors who see all the sources. If you can't use unnamed sources in a story, then you aren't going to get many sources.zonagrad wrote:You have an ESPN report that has ZERO attribution. ZERO!!!! Schlabach cites a "source." What source? If you can't qualify the source, then what good is it? And I'd say right now the FBI has a pretty shitty track record when it comes to integrity. I don't want to get too political, but an entire government agency (or at least the people at the top) just engineered a blind eye to Hillary Clinton and is hellbent on taking down a sitting President. But that's for another board. The point is you can't float a story like this without better attribution. And what is the U of A supposed to do? Fire a coach over an ESPN report that cites an unnamed source that Sean Miller discussed paying a player? Please? Even if the ESPN report is accurate, it's terrible journalism. And Arizona would be stupid to fire a coach based on the information available at this time. If the information changes, then ok.pc in NM wrote:I think it's about "institutional control" at this stage. With such an explosive allegation as this, being documented by wiretaps, I believe that the university must ta k e action commensurate with the seriousness of the allegation.Longhorned wrote:Why would the top 20 teams be out? Why would Arizona be out? The NCAA isn't supposed to act until the FBI investigation is over. These are leaks.
I believe that should probably involve suspension of Miller (probably with pay) pending a thorough investigation. To even discuss the possibility of a bribe is an odfense, and unacceptable (unless immediately reported to compliance staff.
As for players, the information is far more vague - there u s no alleged information, in these reports, that payments were in fact made. Unless and until such information is surfaced, maybe they do not need to be suspended.
If any players are revealed to have accepted money, then they were ineligible to have played, and forfeits would be a likely consequence. If the university determines that self-sanction should include forfeits, then suspending post-season play would be a potential self-sanction....
This is how Arizona, or another team might "be out"....
I dont know if I believe it but it would make sense if the FBI was trying to nail the agents or guys at the shoe companies.RichardCranium wrote:Just a thought I'd like to inject...
I have an acquaintance who used to be closely connected to several west coast Athletic Departments. Not specifically UA however, but he ran in the same circles. He has been spot on about several things he couldn't possibly have been spot on about unless he knew what was what (but he has made a few misses too). Anyway he was mostly dealing with football and is retired now, but he is getting hints from his old contacts that the phone call 'wiretap' that 'caught' Miller saying talk to me about the money, was made with FBI agents in the room with Miller, and that Miller is on the front foot about the whole damn thing.
Now I don't know how much of a grain of salt to take with that. 'My Guy' has been right a heckuva lot more than he has been wrong and usually doesn't say anything unless he is pretty much sure of what he is talking about. Having said that, I am just not sure that he is really close enough to his old contacts or who they are or what their motives are. They might just be playing him, I don't know.
If Miller leaves the UA, might it be for the Witness Protection Program?
Nowhere have I recommended "firing a coach"...zonagrad wrote:You have an ESPN report that has ZERO attribution. ZERO!!!! Schlabach cites a "source." What source? If you can't qualify the source, then what good is it? And I'd say right now the FBI has a pretty shitty track record when it comes to integrity. I don't want to get too political, but an entire government agency (or at least the people at the top) just engineered a blind eye to Hillary Clinton and is hellbent on taking down a sitting President. But that's for another board. The point is you can't float a story like this without better attribution. And what is the U of A supposed to do? Fire a coach over an ESPN report that cites an unnamed source that Sean Miller discussed paying a player? Please? Even if the ESPN report is accurate, it's terrible journalism. And Arizona would be stupid to fire a coach based on the information available at this time. If the information changes, then ok.pc in NM wrote:I think it's about "institutional control" at this stage. With such an explosive allegation as this, being documented by wiretaps, I believe that the university must ta k e action commensurate with the seriousness of the allegation.Longhorned wrote:Why would the top 20 teams be out? Why would Arizona be out? The NCAA isn't supposed to act until the FBI investigation is over. These are leaks.
I believe that should probably involve suspension of Miller (probably with pay) pending a thorough investigation. To even discuss the possibility of a bribe is an odfense, and unacceptable (unless immediately reported to compliance staff.
As for players, the information is far more vague - there u s no alleged information, in these reports, that payments were in fact made. Unless and until such information is surfaced, maybe they do not need to be suspended.
If any players are revealed to have accepted money, then they were ineligible to have played, and forfeits would be a likely consequence. If the university determines that self-sanction should include forfeits, then suspending post-season play would be a potential self-sanction....
This is how Arizona, or another team might "be out"....
This is fake newsLonghorned wrote:Use of unnamed sources is actually a rigorous process in journalism. The story is cleared by managing editors who see all the sources. If you can't use unnamed sources in a story, then you aren't going to get many sources.zonagrad wrote:You have an ESPN report that has ZERO attribution. ZERO!!!! Schlabach cites a "source." What source? If you can't qualify the source, then what good is it? And I'd say right now the FBI has a pretty shitty track record when it comes to integrity. I don't want to get too political, but an entire government agency (or at least the people at the top) just engineered a blind eye to Hillary Clinton and is hellbent on taking down a sitting President. But that's for another board. The point is you can't float a story like this without better attribution. And what is the U of A supposed to do? Fire a coach over an ESPN report that cites an unnamed source that Sean Miller discussed paying a player? Please? Even if the ESPN report is accurate, it's terrible journalism. And Arizona would be stupid to fire a coach based on the information available at this time. If the information changes, then ok.pc in NM wrote:I think it's about "institutional control" at this stage. With such an explosive allegation as this, being documented by wiretaps, I believe that the university must ta k e action commensurate with the seriousness of the allegation.Longhorned wrote:Why would the top 20 teams be out? Why would Arizona be out? The NCAA isn't supposed to act until the FBI investigation is over. These are leaks.
I believe that should probably involve suspension of Miller (probably with pay) pending a thorough investigation. To even discuss the possibility of a bribe is an odfense, and unacceptable (unless immediately reported to compliance staff.
As for players, the information is far more vague - there u s no alleged information, in these reports, that payments were in fact made. Unless and until such information is surfaced, maybe they do not need to be suspended.
If any players are revealed to have accepted money, then they were ineligible to have played, and forfeits would be a likely consequence. If the university determines that self-sanction should include forfeits, then suspending post-season play would be a potential self-sanction....
This is how Arizona, or another team might "be out"....
Larry Scott probably will.Olsondogg wrote:Who wants to talk over a beer in Vegas in 2 weeks?
Thanks for sharing additional insight into your views. It provides some very helpful context to your perspective.zonagrad wrote:You have an ESPN report that has ZERO attribution. ZERO!!!! Schlabach cites a "source." What source? If you can't qualify the source, then what good is it? And I'd say right now the FBI has a pretty shitty track record when it comes to integrity. I don't want to get too political, but an entire government agency (or at least the people at the top) just engineered a blind eye to Hillary Clinton and is hellbent on taking down a sitting President. But that's for another board. The point is you can't float a story like this without better attribution. And what is the U of A supposed to do? Fire a coach over an ESPN report that cites an unnamed source that Sean Miller discussed paying a player? Please? Even if the ESPN report is accurate, it's terrible journalism. And Arizona would be stupid to fire a coach based on the information available at this time. If the information changes, then ok.pc in NM wrote:I think it's about "institutional control" at this stage. With such an explosive allegation as this, being documented by wiretaps, I believe that the university must ta k e action commensurate with the seriousness of the allegation.Longhorned wrote:Why would the top 20 teams be out? Why would Arizona be out? The NCAA isn't supposed to act until the FBI investigation is over. These are leaks.
I believe that should probably involve suspension of Miller (probably with pay) pending a thorough investigation. To even discuss the possibility of a bribe is an odfense, and unacceptable (unless immediately reported to compliance staff.
As for players, the information is far more vague - there u s no alleged information, in these reports, that payments were in fact made. Unless and until such information is surfaced, maybe they do not need to be suspended.
If any players are revealed to have accepted money, then they were ineligible to have played, and forfeits would be a likely consequence. If the university determines that self-sanction should include forfeits, then suspending post-season play would be a potential self-sanction....
This is how Arizona, or another team might "be out"....
I can name two FBI agents whose texting contradicts your point about integrity. And I'm not attacking the entire FBI, but rather acknowledging that there are people within bureaucracies that do not have any integrity at all.pc in NM wrote:Nowhere have I recommended "firing a coach"...zonagrad wrote:pc in NM wrote:I think it's about "institutional control" at this stage. With such an explosive allegation as this, being documented by wiretaps, I believe that the university must ta k e action commensurate with the seriousness of the allegation.Longhorned wrote:Why would the top 20 teams be out? Why would Arizona be out? The NCAA isn't supposed to act until the FBI investigation is over. These are leaks.
I believe that should probably involve suspension of Miller (probably with pay) pending a thorough investigation. To even discuss the possibility of a bribe is an odfense, and unacceptable (unless immediately reported to compliance staff.
As for players, the information is far more vague - there u s no alleged information, in these reports, that payments were in fact made. Unless and until such information is surfaced, maybe they do not need to be suspended.
If any players are revealed to have accepted money, then they were ineligible to have played, and forfeits would be a likely consequence. If the university determines that self-sanction should include forfeits, then suspending post-season play would be a potential self-sanction....
This is how Arizona, or another team might "be out"....
You have an ESPN report that has ZERO attribution. ZERO!!!! Schlabach cites a "source." What source? If you can't qualify the source, then what good is it? And I'd say right now the FBI has a pretty shitty track record when it comes to integrity. I don't want to get too political, but an entire government agency (or at least the people at the top) just engineered a blind eye to Hillary Clinton and is hellbent on taking down a sitting President. But that's for another board. The point is you can't float a story like this without better attribution. And what is the U of A supposed to do? Fire a coach over an ESPN report that cites an unnamed source that Sean Miller discussed paying a player? Please? Even if the ESPN report is accurate, it's terrible journalism. And Arizona would be stupid to fire a coach based on the information available at this time. If the information changes, then ok.
... and, the last place I'd want to be in responding to this is aligned with the Trump fake news machine's tactics or attacking the integrity or motives of the FBI....
Yep. Which is why it's best not to rush to judge. Until Miller goes on record or something official comes out from the FBI that isn't a leak, then I'm withholding judgement.Postmaster wrote:Didn't 97 intimate back in October that CSM was in the know about the investigation?
My first trip to vegas for the pac-12 - just might be looking for something to do instead of going to basketball games....Olsondogg wrote:Who wants to talk over a beer in Vegas in 2 weeks?
I will grasp at that straw. I’m a desperate man who doesn’t want one of the few things I enjoy in this life to go away.RichardCranium wrote:Just a thought I'd like to inject...
I have an acquaintance who used to be closely connected to several west coast Athletic Departments. Not specifically UA however, but he ran in the same circles. He has been spot on about several things he couldn't possibly have been spot on about unless he knew what was what (but he has made a few misses too). Anyway he was mostly dealing with football and is retired now, but he is getting hints from his old contacts that the phone call 'wiretap' that 'caught' Miller saying talk to me about the money, was made with FBI agents in the room with Miller, and that Miller is on the front foot about the whole damn thing.
Now I don't know how much of a grain of salt to take with that. 'My Guy' has been right a heckuva lot more than he has been wrong and usually doesn't say anything unless he is pretty much sure of what he is talking about. Having said that, I am just not sure that he is really close enough to his old contacts or who they are or what their motives are. They might just be playing him, I don't know.
If Miller leaves the UA, might it be for the Witness Protection Program?
There’s no accusation that Miller got Lauri or Rawle paid. They’re mentioned as being steered to agents.TatetheGreat wrote:Miller facilitated payment to Lauri, Rawle, and Ayton in cooperation with the FBI? Seems far-fetched, but we'll find out soon enough. Ayton has played in every game so the season will be vacated if he did accept money.
Exactly. That's what I don't get. Who cares if somebody got money for playing basketball? I mean, I understand the NCAA's need to enforce rules to keep the Golden Goose/ATM machine going for themselves. But I don't see why people are upset when a kid & his family are willing to take payment in exchange for their kids' services as an elite talent that will make millions for a university and the coach and athletic department.Olsondogg wrote:Why don’t I care about any of this shit? Play basketbsll. #AllIn
Syphers was her name I believe. It's 2am on the East Coast. I suppose I could've written the same.Postmaster wrote:Banging chicks on the table of a restaurant
Got it, I'll have to read more thoroughly tomorrow. S/O to the fans and this community. I'm gonna try to get some sleep now.Chicat wrote:There’s no accusation that Miller got Lauri or Rawle paid. They’re mentioned as being steered to agents.TatetheGreat wrote:Miller facilitated payment to Lauri, Rawle, and Ayton in cooperation with the FBI? Seems far-fetched, but we'll find out soon enough. Ayton has played in every game so the season will be vacated if he did accept money.
zonagrad wrote:Syphers was her name I believe. It's 2am on the East Coast. I suppose I could've written the same.Postmaster wrote:Banging chicks on the table of a restaurant![]()
Who needs reality TV. Arizona basketball has had some crazy shit for the last 30 years. Kerr's father assassinated. Byrdsong murdered. Brian Williams/Bison Dele murdered. Michael Wright murdered. Bobbi's cancer. Damon Stoudamire's suspension. Ben Davis. Lute's strokes. Kevin O'Neal's bar incident at the Pac 12 tourney in LA. AJ Bramlett's fight with Eddie House in Oregon. The games are secondary when you think about all the shit that's happened. And that's the stuff that's public knowledge.
Here's a better question to ask....CalStateTempe wrote:Then why would the fbi leak evidence to the media ruining millers reputation and career?
lol u serious?
Probably wrong. But why wasn't he indicted if he's on tape. Weirdly enough I think being a FBI informant could be more damaging to Miller's reputation (if true).RichardCranium wrote:Just a thought I'd like to inject...
I have an acquaintance who used to be closely connected to several west coast Athletic Departments. Not specifically UA however, but he ran in the same circles. He has been spot on about several things he couldn't possibly have been spot on about unless he knew what was what (but he has made a few misses too). Anyway he was mostly dealing with football and is retired now, but he is getting hints from his old contacts that the phone call 'wiretap' that 'caught' Miller saying talk to me about the money, was made with FBI agents in the room with Miller, and that Miller is on the front foot about the whole damn thing.
Now I don't know how much of a grain of salt to take with that. 'My Guy' has been right a heckuva lot more than he has been wrong and usually doesn't say anything unless he is pretty much sure of what he is talking about. Having said that, I am just not sure that he is really close enough to his old contacts or who they are or what their motives are. They might just be playing him, I don't know.
If Miller leaves the UA, might it be for the Witness Protection Program?
WildHolcs wrote:lol u serious?
I'm always the last to find out stuff..NYCat wrote:We're going to find out if people at and around (alumni) actually like Miller or if they just like him winning. Former players seem to be leaning to the former.
WildHolcs wrote:lol u serious?![]()
Hicat always seems comes in and posts an article late after there's been ongoing discussions on the board. Have you heard the news"
Harvey Specter wrote: Your post above could read like a Nixon administration narrative commenting on Deepthroat.
Miller wasn’t indicted because (from all appearances) he didn’t commit a crime. No bribery, wire fraud, tax evasion, or money laundering. Talking about paying players is not against the law ........ but it is against NCAA rules. Which sucks. Because we now have this in the hands of people who think some free pizza and a few grains of not a fucking thing are reason enough to fuck us in the butthole (no lube).EastCoastCat wrote:I went to bed early and this is what I woke up to...I'm like the rest of you shocked and devastated.
Still don't understand why Miller wasn't indicted along with Book and the other assistants when this whole scandal broke. If they had the evidence then why not then? Why would they be holding back? I mean Pitino was cited originally so why not include Miller?
Something isn't right. Oh well maybe I'm just delusional as well as heartbroken.
SIGH......
I think there is a pretty good chance of it actually... Well maybe not trier. But it would be a classic FU if Arizona rolled tired out there without being cleared.CatHoops wrote:Any chance we just roll the entire team out tonight?