Bear Down Wildcats

MC1983 wrote:Exactly and if no proof of money changing hands.

Yeah, and if there was proof of money changing hands, would Quinerly be eligible for Nova next year?

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

MC1983 wrote:Exactly and if no proof of money changing hands.

Yeah, and if there was proof of money changing hands, would Quinerly be eligible for Nova next year?

Exactly

Beachcat97 wrote:After that Miller press conference, I can't believe how many are still having earnest dialogue about whether Miller did anything wrong. Are that many convinced that he's lying?

Because if you take the man at his word, as I do, this conversation is pretty immaterial at this point.

I think that every contract must have two parties - and I believe that this new clause is indicative that the university is hedging on it's commitment, not that CSM has "volunteered" $1 mil as proof of his innocence....

Even if one "believes" CSM after his news conference (I do, which was, I admit, a bit of a surprise at the moment), one must admit that there is still some element of doubt, where absolutely none existed prior to the last year.

Regardless, CSM, and the U of A program, face challenges moving forward that were unimaginable, even after an embarrassing loss to Xavier, a year ago...

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

MC1983 wrote:Exactly and if no proof of money changing hands.

Yeah, and if there was proof of money changing hands, would Quinerly be eligible for Nova next year?

I know Nova supposedly investigated Quinerly before taking the commitment but has the NCAA deemed him eligible?

EVCat wrote:No one puts up a million dollars, no matter the amount they make, if they know they are going to lose it.

He knows what is on tape.

It is absurd that people look at his wealth, which is in the tens of millions and, with expenses and lifestyles, likely in the lower tens of millions, and think it is no thing to flip $1,000,000 at a losing bet.

He makes like $5M/year, right?

Anyone else willing to give back 20% their salary to their employer right before losing that job? I’m not...

They aren't getting involved till the case is over so chances are he plays

DrWildcat wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

MC1983 wrote:Exactly and if no proof of money changing hands.

Yeah, and if there was proof of money changing hands, would Quinerly be eligible for Nova next year?

I know Nova supposedly investigated Quinerly before taking the commitment but has the NCAA deemed him eligible?

I don't think the NCAA clears prospectively, but there has never been any rumbling that he's in jeopardy.

pc in NM wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:After that Miller press conference, I can't believe how many are still having earnest dialogue about whether Miller did anything wrong. Are that many convinced that he's lying?

Because if you take the man at his word, as I do, this conversation is pretty immaterial at this point.

I think that every contract must have two parties - and I believe that this new clause is indicative that the university is hedging on it's commitment, not that CSM has "volunteered" $1 mil as proof of his innocence....

Even if one "believes" CSM after his news conference (I do, which was, I admit, a bit of a surprise at the moment), one must admit that there is still some element of doubt, where absolutely none existed prior to the last year.

Regardless, CSM, and the U of A program, face challenges moving forward that were unimaginable, even after an embarrassing loss to Xavier, a year ago...

They were doing just fine until Schlabock released that garbage. That's when the wheels started to rattle

CatHoops wrote:

pc in NM wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:After that Miller press conference, I can't believe how many are still having earnest dialogue about whether Miller did anything wrong. Are that many convinced that he's lying?

Because if you take the man at his word, as I do, this conversation is pretty immaterial at this point.

I think that every contract must have two parties - and I believe that this new clause is indicative that the university is hedging on it's commitment, not that CSM has "volunteered" $1 mil as proof of his innocence....

Even if one "believes" CSM after his news conference (I do, which was, I admit, a bit of a surprise at the moment), one must admit that there is still some element of doubt, where absolutely none existed prior to the last year.

Regardless, CSM, and the U of A program, face challenges moving forward that were unimaginable, even after an embarrassing loss to Xavier, a year ago...

They were doing just fine until Schlabock released that garbage. That's when the wheels started to rattle

Yeah. If we still had O'Neal and Williams, looking to add in Doutrive and a grad transfer big, we would be fine. It would be a bit of a rebuilding year, but it wouldn't be the feeling of desperately patching holes.

I'll take a 2nd year Ira Lee over a freshman O'Neil, but your point is well taken. Depth and rotations will be issues next season.

pc in NM wrote:Even if one "believes" CSM after his news conference (I do, which was, I admit, a bit of a surprise at the moment), one must admit that there is still some element of doubt, where absolutely none existed prior to the last year.

Regardless, CSM, and the U of A program, face challenges moving forward that were unimaginable, even after an embarrassing loss to Xavier, a year ago...

I think this "doubt" you're describing is about 95% Schlabach-generated, 5% Book Richardson-generated. I think Schlabach is a two-bit hack who should've lost his job, so I put zero credence in anything that guy publishes from now on.

I get that there's a challenge moving forward, but again, our current adversity is almost wholly artificial. That week where ESPN hung Miller/AZ out to dry cost us two recruits and any sort of recruiting momentum we had. I'm not denying we've got a challenge to work through.

What I am denying, though, is that discussing whether Miller engaged in illicit activity is a worthwhile use of time/space. It isn't.

zonagrad wrote:"Discussed payment" could easily be Dawkins offering to steer Ayton and Miller laughing at him or playing along because he already signed. Technically, that's Miller discussing payment. The bottom line is that Schlabach has zero idea or context of who said what. It's like a telephone call and wrong number asking to speak to the Pipe and then claiming we discussed religion.

This is precisely why it's pointless to ponder the conversation. Schlabach's weasel wording makes impossible any substantive understanding. It's equivalent to reporting the stunning event: " In a conversation, they used words."

Welllll, Oh My Fucking God!!

And then to issue the BIG REVEAL: "Two of the words were "Ayton" and "$100,000"".

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

DrWildcat wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

MC1983 wrote:Exactly and if no proof of money changing hands.

Yeah, and if there was proof of money changing hands, would Quinerly be eligible for Nova next year?

I know Nova supposedly investigated Quinerly before taking the commitment but has the NCAA deemed him eligible?

I don't think the NCAA clears prospectively, but there has never been any rumbling that he's in jeopardy.

I just assumed that the NCAA eligibility fight hasn't finished for him yet. I would also assume that the NCAA would have to look at him a little harder than others. Right now, Nova is assuming very little risk since he hasn't played yet. So I don't see the commitment as automatic eligibility is all.

DrWildcat wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

DrWildcat wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

MC1983 wrote:Exactly and if no proof of money changing hands.

Yeah, and if there was proof of money changing hands, would Quinerly be eligible for Nova next year?

I know Nova supposedly investigated Quinerly before taking the commitment but has the NCAA deemed him eligible?

I don't think the NCAA clears prospectively, but there has never been any rumbling that he's in jeopardy.

I just assumed that the NCAA eligibility fight hasn't finished for him yet. I would also assume that the NCAA would have to look at him a little harder than others. Right now, Nova is assuming very little risk since he hasn't played yet. So I don't see the commitment as automatic eligibility is all.

I see Nova's risk more in terms of forgoing another PG recruit for Quinerly. If they thought there was trouble on the horizon, why risk it?

I mean, you never know, but I'd figure they have as much assurance as possible at this point. Nova obviously has some good recent recruiting success, so they don't need to take recruiting risks.

1. I trust Miller, and I believe what he said in his press conference.
2. I can't think of ANY reason why any Wildcat fan would think Miller was lying. He has always, tmk, been truthful and forthcoming.
3. I don't want to see Miller leave. He has work to do and big things to accomplish here.
4. I believe we are undoubtedly in for a rough couple of years.
5. I believe, when all is said and done, Miller will be vindicated.
6. I believe sanctions, if any, will be pretty light.
7. I believe Miller is a witch and he will pull us out of this in fairly short order.

That it pretty much where I am. Hank, rise and shit, and tate the grape can kiss my a$$.

BBQ wildcat wrote:1. I trust Miller, and I believe what he said in his press conference.
2. I can't think of ANY reason why any Wildcat fan would think Miller was lying. He has always, tmk, been truthful and forthcoming.
3. I don't want to see Miller leave. He has work to do and big things to accomplish here.
4. I believe we are undoubtedly in for a rough couple of years.
5. I believe, when all is said and done, Miller will be vindicated.
6. I believe sanctions, if any, will be pretty light.
7. I believe Miller is a witch and he will pull us out of this in fairly short order.

That it pretty much where I am. Hank, rise and shit, and tate the grape can kiss my a$$.

However, I value my ass too much to give Rise & Shit the privilege to kiss my ass.

zonagrad wrote:

BBQ wildcat wrote:1. I trust Miller, and I believe what he said in his press conference.
2. I can't think of ANY reason why any Wildcat fan would think Miller was lying. He has always, tmk, been truthful and forthcoming.
3. I don't want to see Miller leave. He has work to do and big things to accomplish here.
4. I believe we are undoubtedly in for a rough couple of years.
5. I believe, when all is said and done, Miller will be vindicated.
6. I believe sanctions, if any, will be pretty light.
7. I believe Miller is a witch and he will pull us out of this in fairly short order.

That it pretty much where I am. Hank, rise and shit, and tate the grape can kiss my a$$.

However, I value my ass too much to give Rise & Shit the privilege to kiss my ass.

Rise and $hit = dip Shit troll

MC1983 wrote:

zonagrad wrote:

BBQ wildcat wrote:1. I trust Miller, and I believe what he said in his press conference.
2. I can't think of ANY reason why any Wildcat fan would think Miller was lying. He has always, tmk, been truthful and forthcoming.
3. I don't want to see Miller leave. He has work to do and big things to accomplish here.
4. I believe we are undoubtedly in for a rough couple of years.
5. I believe, when all is said and done, Miller will be vindicated.
6. I believe sanctions, if any, will be pretty light.
7. I believe Miller is a witch and he will pull us out of this in fairly short order.

That it pretty much where I am. Hank, rise and shit, and tate the grape can kiss my a$$.

However, I value my ass too much to give Rise & Shit the privilege to kiss my ass.

Rise and $hit = dip Shit troll

Anyone who does not have those three blocked needs to get tested for STD's immediately.

1. Miller is full of crap or he would have filed a lawsuit by now
2. Nothing screams innocence like a guy who shut down his twitter account taking days/weeks to formulate a prepared statement to respond to simple allegations. What does being a Wildcat fan have to do with anything?
3. What big things will Miller accomplish with ZERO recruits that he couldn't with 5 straight top 5 classes and didn't do jack squat?
4. You don't say? You mean we're not going to win and vacate like this year?
5. Anyone that believes that is a fool. Again, where is the lawsuit?
6. Ok if you say so. I can't wait until the NCAA decides in 2021 what the fate of UA bball is.
7. Doesn't see the connection between Miller's "witchery" and the fact that Book (at a minimum) was handing recruits giant bags of cash. Do you realize that almost every single one and done recruit was a Book/Miller recruitment?

I'll just continue being right, and you continue being wrong.

I feel like RiseAndFail owes the mods a gift basket or something for not banning his ass as an obvious troll.

But please, no Edible Arrangements. No one can eat all that fruit and it just ends up going bad....

RiseAndFire wrote:1. Miller is full of crap or he would have filed a lawsuit by now
2. Nothing screams innocence like a guy who shut down his twitter account taking days/weeks to formulate a prepared statement to respond to simple allegations. What does being a Wildcat fan have to do with anything?
3. What big things will Miller accomplish with ZERO recruits that he couldn't with 5 straight top 5 classes and didn't do jack squat?
4. You don't say? You mean we're not going to win and vacate like this year?
5. Anyone that believes that is a fool. Again, where is the lawsuit?
6. Ok if you say so. I can't wait until the NCAA decides in 2021 what the fate of UA bball is.
7. Doesn't see the connection between Miller's "witchery" and the fact that Book (at a minimum) was handing recruits giant bags of cash. Do you realize that almost every single one and done recruit was a Book/Miller recruitment?

I'll just continue being right, and you continue being wrong.

1. Do you know how difficult it is to prove actual malice to win a lawsuit when you're a public figure? Obviously you don't, because you would've never started off this handicapped list with this if you did. MORON.
2. ......he shut his twitter account down two days after the Sweet 16 loss to Xavier, which is way out of the timeframe of all these allegations. MORON times 2.
3. Is anyone actively suggesting that Miller will lead us to a Final Four or beyond with ZERO recruits? No? Ok then. MORON times 3.
4. You're boring me. MORON times 4.
5. See #1. MORON times 5.
6. You're not wrong here, but you're still a MORON times 6.
7. One and Dones where Book wasn't the main recruiter on include Aaron Gordon, Stanley Johnson, Lauri Markkanen, & Deandre Ayton. Hell the only actual one and done that Book landed was Kobi Simmons. YOU ARE A MORON times INFINITY.

Why didn't Miller immediately refute the ESPN report and demand a retraction if it's all BS? We might have avoided decommits if that happened. And by the way, despite the lazy reporting, Schlabach has not backed off from his assertion that there was a recorded conversation between Miller and Dawkins regarding money for Ayton. Time will tell.

TatetheGreat wrote: 1 Why didn't Miller immediately refute the ESPN report and demand a retraction if it's all BS? 2 We might have avoided decommits if that happened. 3 And by the way, despite the lazy reporting, Schlabach has not backed off from his assertion that there was a recorded conversation between Miller and Dawkins regarding money for Ayton. 4 Time will tell.

1 It was less than a week and there was a game to prep for as well as legal discussions and it takes time to go over statements with Lawyers to make sure things are worded appropriately
2 Shaq's son always wanted UCLA and this would have happened regardless
3 ESPN won't let Mark stop down and Mark won't stop down because he needs his sources. But let's see, one person says 1 thing and 30 plus people including ESPN employees say another. Who should I believe?
4 True but time has already told us a few things about you a d a few others

RiseAndFire wrote:1. Miller is full of crap or he would have filed a lawsuit by now

I'll just continue being right, and you continue being wrong.

Except you are wrong almost totally here. First, the lawsuit would be a folly if he is on tape saying the words "you don't talk to Book, you talk to me" in any tone. The reporter can claim he couldn't determine tone by the words given to him. Without malice, or reckless error, you cannot win such a lawsuit. It would be a waste of his time.

Never mind that it would be a waste of time to file a lawsuit before the proof (remember the federal case and seal on the wiretaps? I am sure you do but conveniently glossed over that) was available. I mean, that's the biggest flaw of what you try to claim as logic, but is really only trolling.

The only reason I respond is in case someone else with limited knowledge finds their way here and reads your inaccurate bullshit and has doubts. You cannot file a lawsuit and get it accepted when the proof you need is not available for months.

Just a big time lurker on this board, but I just want to say that I'm glad that Rise and Fire posts here. He's a good counterpoint to those who just worship Miller and refuse to acknowledge that his assistant coach, working in the program Miller is responsible for, had an FBI agent show up at his door with a federal warrant. A lot bigger than just an NCAA investigation. Sports programs are supposed to promote our university and Miller is culpable for just this part of this mess if nothing else.

Regardless of how it goes, It's a legit argument that he should be let go.

TatetheGreat wrote:Why didn't Miller immediately refute the ESPN report and demand a retraction if it's all BS? We might have avoided decommits if that happened. And by the way, despite the lazy reporting, Schlabach has not backed off from his assertion that there was a recorded conversation between Miller and Dawkins regarding money for Ayton. Time will tell.

He did refute the ESPN report and what good would demanding a retraction do? I demand Jessica Alba sit on my groin region daily, yet I have yet to have my demands met. I should sue her right?

One of our commits decommitted nearly immediately after the story broke and he already knew where he was going and committed to that school shortly after (hint: it had been in the works for awhile) and the other commitment decommitted exactly a day after Miller refuted the ESPN report and Arizona publicly backed him. OOOOOPS! There goes your narrative.

Would you seriously expect Schlabach to retract his story and lose his job? Good luck with that. Let's just say there's a reason that Schlabach has to be the guy on ESPN to write a Sean Miller story now. The rest of the ESPN guys (namely basketball guys) don't want to touch this story with a ten foot pole, because they know it's absolute bullshit. They can't come out and say it because it would make their employer look bad and you certainly can't do that.

There is a recorded conversation between Miller and Dawkins, which had absolutely NOTHING to do with Deandre Ayton. The guy was fed bad information from one source or he was told it involved a recruit and since Schlabach's a SEC football guy and has not the slightest iota of a clue about college basketball he just looked at Arizona's roster and assumed it was their best freshman. In Miller's statement he blatantly said there was a conversation in regards to a recruit and money and in which that recruit never ended up at Arizona and he said no in regards to paying him. Why do you think he said that? Do you think it's because he knows that's the conversation that took place between him and Dawkins that was recorded or do you think he just threw that nugget out there for shits and giggles?

Look I've already come out and said I think Arizona and Miller need to split. I'm no Sean Miller apologist at the moment, but you are seriously dense on this topic to say the least and you should sit this one out. The Schlabach report is so ridiculously wrong it's pathetic.

PHXCATS wrote:

TatetheGreat wrote: 1 Why didn't Miller immediately refute the ESPN report and demand a retraction if it's all BS? 2 We might have avoided decommits if that happened. 3 And by the way, despite the lazy reporting, Schlabach has not backed off from his assertion that there was a recorded conversation between Miller and Dawkins regarding money for Ayton. 4 Time will tell.

1 It was less than a week and there was a game to prep for as well as legal discussions and it takes time to go over statements with Lawyers to make sure things are worded appropriately
2 Shaq's son always wanted UCLA and this would have happened regardless
3 ESPN won't let Mark stop down and Mark won't stop down because he needs his sources. But let's see, one person says 1 thing and 30 plus people including ESPN employees say another. Who should I believe?
4 True but time has already told us a few things about you a d a few others

1. Why do you need a lawyer in order to say "the story is completely false and it needs to be retracted"?
2. If you say so. No one here mentioned that until he decommitted.
3. Mark's being pressured to keep fabricating a story about Sean Miller? Maybe you should break that story.
4. Pass

carcassdragger wrote:Just a big time lurker on this board, but I just want to say that I'm glad that Rise and Fire posts here. He's a good counterpoint to those who just worship Miller and refuse to acknowledge that his assistant coach, working in the program Miller is responsible for, had an FBI agent show up at his door with a federal warrant. A lot bigger than just an NCAA investigation. Sports programs are supposed to promote our university and Miller is culpable for just this part of this mess if nothing else.

Regardless of how it goes, It's a legit argument that he should be let go.

Miller is responsible for the FBI investigation you are right. If Miller fired Book at the appropriate time years ago this doesn't happen. But Miller is the best man to fix this for now and while he is responsible he didn't do too much wrong so there is a case to keep him. If Heeke and Robbins fired him I wouldn't like it but I wouldn't be mad at them, I would understand why they felt they had to.

TatetheGreat wrote:

PHXCATS wrote:

TatetheGreat wrote: 1 Why didn't Miller immediately refute the ESPN report and demand a retraction if it's all BS? 2 We might have avoided decommits if that happened. 3 And by the way, despite the lazy reporting, Schlabach has not backed off from his assertion that there was a recorded conversation between Miller and Dawkins regarding money for Ayton. 4 Time will tell.

1 It was less than a week and there was a game to prep for as well as legal discussions and it takes time to go over statements with Lawyers to make sure things are worded appropriately
2 Shaq's son always wanted UCLA and this would have happened regardless
3 ESPN won't let Mark stop down and Mark won't stop down because he needs his sources. But let's see, one person says 1 thing and 30 plus people including ESPN employees say another. Who should I believe?
4 True but time has already told us a few things about you a d a few others

1. Why do you need a lawyer in order to say "the story is completely false and it needs to be retracted"?
2. If you say so. No one here mentioned that until he decommitted.
3. Mark's being pressured to keep fabricating a story about Sean Miller? Maybe you should break that story.
4. Pass

1 totally smart to do and say legal things without lawyer right? Real life isn't judge Judy. Can't wait to see you in court without a lawyer one day
2 it want mentioned for obvious reasons but many insiders have said this
3 The issue with Mark isn't that he made stuff up. You get that right? The issue is he was fed stuff from a source without double checking anything else or doing a smell test on it and just published it. Do you know how important sources are to reporters?
4 Bye Felicia

TatetheGreat wrote: 1. Why do you need a lawyer in order to say "the story is completely false and it needs to be retracted"?

He did that in his presser, with quite a bit of detail. He cannot tell ESPN what to do, but he refuted the story and even went as far as to characterize the conversation he did have with Christian Dawkins, not denying that conversation took place at all. But he made clear he has never arranged for payment for a player to attend the University of Arizona or any other school.

I don't know how much more clear he could be without actually having the wiretap available.

PHXCATS wrote:

TatetheGreat wrote:

PHXCATS wrote:

TatetheGreat wrote: 1 Why didn't Miller immediately refute the ESPN report and demand a retraction if it's all BS? 2 We might have avoided decommits if that happened. 3 And by the way, despite the lazy reporting, Schlabach has not backed off from his assertion that there was a recorded conversation between Miller and Dawkins regarding money for Ayton. 4 Time will tell.

1 It was less than a week and there was a game to prep for as well as legal discussions and it takes time to go over statements with Lawyers to make sure things are worded appropriately
2 Shaq's son always wanted UCLA and this would have happened regardless
3 ESPN won't let Mark stop down and Mark won't stop down because he needs his sources. But let's see, one person says 1 thing and 30 plus people including ESPN employees say another. Who should I believe?
4 True but time has already told us a few things about you a d a few others

1. Why do you need a lawyer in order to say "the story is completely false and it needs to be retracted"?
2. If you say so. No one here mentioned that until he decommitted.
3. Mark's being pressured to keep fabricating a story about Sean Miller? Maybe you should break that story.
4. Pass

1 totally smart to do and say legal things without lawyer right? Real life isn't judge Judy. Can't wait to see you in court without a lawyer one day
2 it want mentioned for obvious reasons but many insiders have said this
3 The issue with Mark isn't that he made stuff up. You get that right? The issue is he was fed stuff from a source without double checking anything else or doing a smell test on it and just published it. Do you know how important sources are to reporters?
4 Bye Felicia

Hold on, let me me reach out to my lawyer. I can't answer you without a well-crafted legal rebuttal. It will take a week or more, and I will take no questions. Thank you.

EVCat wrote:

TatetheGreat wrote: 1. Why do you need a lawyer in order to say "the story is completely false and it needs to be retracted"?

He did that in his presser, with quite a bit of detail. He cannot tell ESPN what to do, but he refuted the story and even went as far as to characterize the conversation he did have with Christian Dawkins, not denying that conversation took place at all. But he made clear he has never arranged for payment for a player to attend the University of Arizona or any other school.

I don't know how much more clear he could be without actually having the wiretap available.

It's honestly quite amazing how people just ignore what actually happened and instead invent their own reality.

TatetheGreat wrote:

PHXCATS wrote:

TatetheGreat wrote: 1 Why didn't Miller immediately refute the ESPN report and demand a retraction if it's all BS? 2 We might have avoided decommits if that happened. 3 And by the way, despite the lazy reporting, Schlabach has not backed off from his assertion that there was a recorded conversation between Miller and Dawkins regarding money for Ayton. 4 Time will tell.

1 It was less than a week and there was a game to prep for as well as legal discussions and it takes time to go over statements with Lawyers to make sure things are worded appropriately
2 Shaq's son always wanted UCLA and this would have happened regardless
3 ESPN won't let Mark stop down and Mark won't stop down because he needs his sources. But let's see, one person says 1 thing and 30 plus people including ESPN employees say another. Who should I believe?
4 True but time has already told us a few things about you a d a few others

1. Why do you need a lawyer in order to say "the story is completely false and it needs to be retracted"?
2. If you say so. No one here mentioned that until he decommitted.
3. Mark's being pressured to keep fabricating a story about Sean Miller? Maybe you should break that story.
4. Pass

1. The delay was to have a joint announcement where Arizona was on the same page. Arizona is going to want to investigate the ESPN story and Miller's response before it commits to him. I understand why Miller would agree to work with Arizona's timetable if he wanted to remain a coach here.
2. The damage was done by the story. It's silly to think a quicker denial would have meaningfully affected the situation. Hell, we're still struggling to get out of that report recruiting wise and it's months later.
3. Schlabach is backed into a place where he has to keep defending the story. There's no real chance he says that the story wasn't correct now.

This really isn't rocket science, and you have to twist the narrative really hard to avoid the obvious things.

TatetheGreat wrote:

PHXCATS wrote:

TatetheGreat wrote:

PHXCATS wrote:

TatetheGreat wrote: 1 Why didn't Miller immediately refute the ESPN report and demand a retraction if it's all BS? 2 We might have avoided decommits if that happened. 3 And by the way, despite the lazy reporting, Schlabach has not backed off from his assertion that there was a recorded conversation between Miller and Dawkins regarding money for Ayton. 4 Time will tell.

1 It was less than a week and there was a game to prep for as well as legal discussions and it takes time to go over statements with Lawyers to make sure things are worded appropriately
2 Shaq's son always wanted UCLA and this would have happened regardless
3 ESPN won't let Mark stop down and Mark won't stop down because he needs his sources. But let's see, one person says 1 thing and 30 plus people including ESPN employees say another. Who should I believe?
4 True but time has already told us a few things about you a d a few others

1. Why do you need a lawyer in order to say "the story is completely false and it needs to be retracted"?
2. If you say so. No one here mentioned that until he decommitted.
3. Mark's being pressured to keep fabricating a story about Sean Miller? Maybe you should break that story.
4. Pass

1 totally smart to do and say legal things without lawyer right? Real life isn't judge Judy. Can't wait to see you in court without a lawyer one day
2 it want mentioned for obvious reasons but many insiders have said this
3 The issue with Mark isn't that he made stuff up. You get that right? The issue is he was fed stuff from a source without double checking anything else or doing a smell test on it and just published it. Do you know how important sources are to reporters?
4 Bye Felicia

Hold on, let me me reach out to my lawyer. I can't answer you without a well-crafted legal rebuttal. It will take a week or more, and I will take no questions. Thank you.

Well it's obvious you're not here for actual honest debate or to even learn something, otherwise you would respond to the absolute ass lashings that EVcat and myself have given you about your ignorance on this topic. You have been weighed, you have been measured, and you have been found wanting.

ChooChooCat wrote:Well it's obvious you're not here for actual honest debate or to even learn something, otherwise you would respond to the absolute ass lashings that EVcat and myself have given you about your ignorance on this topic. You have been weighed, you have been measured, and you have been found wanting.

There's nothing you said above that warrants a response.

TatetheGreat wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:Well it's obvious you're not here for actual honest debate or to even learn something, otherwise you would respond to the absolute ass lashings that EVcat and myself have given you about your ignorance on this topic. You have been weighed, you have been measured, and you have been found wanting.

There's nothing you said above that warrants a response.

Fair enough. You recognize you're an idiot. My work here is done.

Yes...let's file lawsuits without the wiretaps available.

EVCat wrote:Yes...let's file lawsuits without the wiretaps available.

And stomp your feet and demand a retraction. That always works.

It’s funny that Miller-haters always point to the timing of his first denial, but refuse to mention that that denial came on Arizona letterhead with the backing of the university. Does anyone think that would have been the case if he had denied immediately and prior to the university doing their own due diligence? Miller would have been out there on his own and none of you would have believed him. So what exactly does that accomplish?

By the way, it was like 36 hours between Schlabach’s piece of shit article and the statement from Miller on the UA letterhead. I know it felt like an eternity, but less than two days is a pretty good crisis communication timeline. If Sean had come out with a statement in the first few hours and there was no backing from the school, everyone would have pointed to the lack of support from his employer as evidence of guilt. And you Miller bashers would have been leading the charge. In fact, many of you were even AFTER the first statement.

Chicat wrote:It’s funny that Miller-haters always point to the timing of his first denial, but refuse to mention that that denial came on Arizona letterhead with the backing of the university. Does anyone think that would have been the case if he had denied immediately and prior to the university doing their own due diligence? Miller would have been out there on his own and none of you would have believed him. So what exactly does that accomplish?

By the way, it was like 36 hours between Schlabach’s piece of shit article and the statement from Miller on the UA letterhead. I know it felt like an eternity, but less than two days is a pretty good crisis communication timeline. If Sean had come out with a statement in the first few hours and there was no backing from the school, everyone would have pointed to the lack of support from his employer as evidence of guilt. And you Miller bashers would have been leading the charge. In fact, many of you were even AFTER the first statement.

When I saw that first statement from Miller on the UofA letter head I know that was a good sign from both the University and him. That was his first statement and those Miller haters act like it never happened.

move on, i dont give a fuck anymore about the FBI and ESPN bullshit till there is something to worry about -- the university and its biggest boosters backed him, so be it.

the man (Miller) needs to get his shit together/house in order and get a fucking PG who isnt division II level and some guards with nuts, thats what the fuck im focused on - i hope he is too.

if he isnt, he will be let go for something other than the mess created over the last year.

personally, my rope is short with him.

double digit loses to double digit seeds while getting bitch-slapped in the NCAA Tournament is far more concerning to me at this point than when a denial or response was given, and/or if he reacted in a way some feel was inappropriate.

improve the players and the god-damn on the floor product and performance for fuck sake.

97cats wrote: improve the god-damn product for fuck sake.

Lord knows the mountain is steep as shit for this to occur. I give it two years honestly man.

ChooChooCat wrote:
Lord knows the mountain is steep as shit for this to occur. I give it two years honestly man.

if he lands a competent and capable PG you watch how much things will change immediately -- hes close and looks like he will, thats the silver lining.

folks have buried their head(s) in the sand about Cartwright and his overall drowning effect on the entire team.

his replacement alone will be a massive swing as to the look and feel of the product on the floor -- yes he was that fucking god awful.

97cats wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:
Lord knows the mountain is steep as shit for this to occur. I give it two years honestly man.

if he lands a competent and capable PG you watch how much things will change immediately -- hes close and looks like he will, thats the silver lining.

folks have buried their head(s) in the sand about Cartwright and his overall drowning effect on the entire team.

his replacement alone will be a massive swing as to the look and feel of the product on the floor -- yes he was that fucking god awful.

Hey 97
Who are u hearing for pg? Akinjo or bwill? I hope it's not a transfer.

97cats wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:
Lord knows the mountain is steep as shit for this to occur. I give it two years honestly man.

if he lands a competent and capable PG you watch how much things will change immediately -- hes close and looks like he will, thats the silver lining.

folks have buried their head(s) in the sand about Cartwright and his overall drowning effect on the entire team.

his replacement alone will be a massive swing as to the look and feel of the product on the floor -- yes he was that fucking god awful.

Ultimately I think fans, myself included, wanted to look the other way on Cartwright so bad and say well we have this piece, this piece, and this piece and that's enough as long as Parker doesn't get in the way. 21 point loss to a fucking 13 seed later...

I'm with you. Land Williams and it's a totally different team and program. Land Akinjo and he can't be any worse than what we just had that's for certain.

97cats wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:
Lord knows the mountain is steep as shit for this to occur. I give it two years honestly man.

if he lands a competent and capable PG you watch how much things will change immediately -- hes close and looks like he will, thats the silver lining.

folks have buried their head(s) in the sand about Cartwright and his overall drowning effect on the entire team.

his replacement alone will be a massive swing as to the look and feel of the product on the floor -- yes he was that fucking god awful.

PJC or other, we were less than the sum of our parts this year. We need to be the sum of our parts or more and then things change.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

97cats wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:
Lord knows the mountain is steep as shit for this to occur. I give it two years honestly man.

if he lands a competent and capable PG you watch how much things will change immediately -- hes close and looks like he will, thats the silver lining.

folks have buried their head(s) in the sand about Cartwright and his overall drowning effect on the entire team.

his replacement alone will be a massive swing as to the look and feel of the product on the floor -- yes he was that fucking god awful.

PJC or other, we were less than the sum of our parts this year. We need to be the sum of our parts or more and then things change.

Exactly. A tough, smart, hard working, coach-able team is what is needed. PJC was supposed to be the leader in those categories and clearly he was not. As a result the team did not play well together and as a result you lose to three double digit seeds the last three years.

Im interested to see, should Miller land Williams, if he actually gives him the ball and control of the offense. By control of the offense, I mean letting a freshman go to work on ball like Trier.

I sure as hell hope so.

TucsonClip wrote:Im interested to see, should Miller land Williams, if he actually gives him the ball and control of the offense. By control of the offense, I mean letting a freshman go to work on ball like Trier.

I sure as hell hope so.

lol, we all know that's not happening. Williams will have to look over to the sidelines every possession -wasting 5+ seconds every time- so he can run a set play Miller wants.