Bear Down Wildcats

Incredible

Alieberman wrote:

please tell me this is on location, Al?

I stole it off the facebook group "Weird Stuff You'll only See in Tucson"

They say it's currently there at Ft Lowell / Park.

props for the honesty - and i love the sign ...lol

Alieberman wrote:I stole it off the facebook group "Weird Stuff You'll only See in Tucson"

They say it's currently there at Ft Lowell / Park.

You can see it in Google Maps (as of April 2019)

The vast majority of people driving past that sign would have no idea what it refers to, which makes it even better.

97cats wrote:props for the honesty - and i love the sign ...lol

I knew this board would get a kick out of it!

Just some random questions that have been rattling around my random mind:

Any thoughts on why we haven't been served yet? Or on when we might be served?

Do you suppose the NCAA interviewed Book?

Does the NCAA interview all the UofA people who are involved? Or do they just sneak around "investigating"?

If they did interview Book, do you think he would have told them that his claims were just blowing hot air to make himself look important?

If/when the we are served with the notice, do you think the Department will just circle the wagons, ala Kansas? Or does it really depend on what the NCAA comes up with as far as violations? If the violations are minor and the resulting penalties would be minor, do we just capitulate to get this all behind us?

Again, just some random stuff that usually gets into my mind when I wake up at 3 AM.

BBQ wildcat wrote:Just some random questions that have been rattling around my random mind:

Any thoughts on why we haven't been served yet? Or on when we might be served?

Do you suppose the NCAA interviewed Book?

Does the NCAA interview all the UofA people who are involved? Or do they just sneak around "investigating"?

If they did interview Book, do you think he would have told them that his claims were just blowing hot air to make himself look important?

If/when the we are served with the notice, do you think the Department will just circle the wagons, ala Kansas? Or does it really depend on what the NCAA comes up with as far as violations? If the violations are minor and the resulting penalties would be minor, do we just capitulate to get this all behind us?

Again, just some random stuff that usually gets into my mind when I wake up at 3 AM.

We haven't been served yet, because the NCAA is still working on its case. For instance they're trying to see if there's anything serious in regards to Book's bullshit comment about paying 40k to change Rawle's transcript. Also they're looking HARD into the Mark Phelps stuff. They are seeing if they can get a lack of institutional control charge it appears and would use the two assistants doing illegal shit as their reasoning behind it. Honestly they're trying to Kansas us. If they do attempt to do so we will be in litigation hell for a LONG time. If it does get to that you can thank Dave Heeke's fucking stupid ass.

I don't know about interviewing Book, but they certainly are interviewing as many current or former employees that would have any inkling of knowledge of any activities during the said period of time.

As far as when we're served if the NCAA hits us with a postseason ban we will absolutely fight it. Any thing short of that they will likely accept the punishments.

Thanks, Choo.

Wasn't the Phelps issure complete BS? I mean the was no ineligibility problem associated with the claim agains him.

BBQ wildcat wrote:Thanks, Choo.

Wasn't the Phelps issure complete BS? I mean the was no ineligibility problem associated with the claim agains him.

I edited my original post, but Heeke jumping the gun on that entire bullshit was as good as admitting guilt in the NCAA's eyes.

I cannot imagine Book talking to the NCAA...or if he did it would be to clear Miller and UofA...

I know he's a jerk, but he's a dumb jerk who let his appetites contort his moral compass...my bet is he has mostly repented...recanted and wants to fade into the woodwork...any interview he would be docile and lowkey to avoid any more attention...which is exactly what a coward would do...

If he had ANY integrity he'd call a press conference, repent in front of the world and take full responsibility for being a fucking liar.

ChooChooCat wrote:

BBQ wildcat wrote:Thanks, Choo.

Wasn't the Phelps issure complete BS? I mean the was no ineligibility problem associated with the claim agains him.

I edited my original post, but Heeke jumping the gun on that entire bullshit was as good as admitting guilt in the NCAA's eyes.

I remember thinking that immediately. It was so perplexing that he pulled the trigger so fast when there was so much more time and so much more ability to mitigate consequences.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:

BBQ wildcat wrote:Thanks, Choo.

Wasn't the Phelps issure complete BS? I mean the was no ineligibility problem associated with the claim agains him.

I edited my original post, but Heeke jumping the gun on that entire bullshit was as good as admitting guilt in the NCAA's eyes.

I remember thinking that immediately. It was so perplexing that he pulled the trigger so fast when there was so much more time and so much more ability to mitigate consequences.

Yeah it was beyond fucking stupid for countless reasons and it may be the one thing that ruins the program ultimately.

ChooChooCat wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:

BBQ wildcat wrote:Thanks, Choo.

Wasn't the Phelps issure complete BS? I mean the was no ineligibility problem associated with the claim agains him.

I edited my original post, but Heeke jumping the gun on that entire bullshit was as good as admitting guilt in the NCAA's eyes.

I remember thinking that immediately. It was so perplexing that he pulled the trigger so fast when there was so much more time and so much more ability to mitigate consequences.

Yeah it was beyond fucking stupid for countless reasons and it may be the one thing that ruins the program ultimately.

help me out here - even if it was a "quick trigger pull", doesn't it exhibit the admin's unwillingness to tolerate even the appearance of impropriety, and therefore, reinforce the idea of "institutional control"?

Shyte will happen (minor infractions) but charges against the coach or "lack of institutional control" are the killers. correct?

Has Miller been arrested yet? Asking for enfuego.

When does Heeke get shitcanned?

pc in NM wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:

BBQ wildcat wrote:Thanks, Choo.

Wasn't the Phelps issure complete BS? I mean the was no ineligibility problem associated with the claim agains him.

I edited my original post, but Heeke jumping the gun on that entire bullshit was as good as admitting guilt in the NCAA's eyes.

I remember thinking that immediately. It was so perplexing that he pulled the trigger so fast when there was so much more time and so much more ability to mitigate consequences.

Yeah it was beyond fucking stupid for countless reasons and it may be the one thing that ruins the program ultimately.

help me out here - even if it was a "quick trigger pull", doesn't it exhibit the admin's unwillingness to tolerate even the appearance of impropriety, and therefore, reinforce the idea of "institutional control"?

Shyte will happen (minor infractions) but charges against the coach or "lack of institutional control" are the killers. correct?

I agree with this, PC. But what I'm wondering is whether the NCAA considers "lack of institutional control" in the sense that something intolerable happened in the first place, even if it was emphatically not tolerated. I understand that would be an illogical understanding of institutional control, but it would be consist with the NCAA's illogical policy of holding a coach responsible for anything an assistant coach does.

pc in NM wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:

BBQ wildcat wrote:Thanks, Choo.

Wasn't the Phelps issure complete BS? I mean the was no ineligibility problem associated with the claim agains him.

I edited my original post, but Heeke jumping the gun on that entire bullshit was as good as admitting guilt in the NCAA's eyes.

I remember thinking that immediately. It was so perplexing that he pulled the trigger so fast when there was so much more time and so much more ability to mitigate consequences.

Yeah it was beyond fucking stupid for countless reasons and it may be the one thing that ruins the program ultimately.

help me out here - even if it was a "quick trigger pull", doesn't it exhibit the admin's unwillingness to tolerate even the appearance of impropriety, and therefore, reinforce the idea of "institutional control"?

Shyte will happen (minor infractions) but charges against the coach or "lack of institutional control" are the killers. correct?

The NCAA doesn't give a damn about a school trying to do the right thing. Georgia Tech literally turned their own boosters in and got a tourney suspension.

Heeke's actions totally reek of a confession of wrongdoing. The NCAA can easily flip that into a failure to supervise Phelps. The far better tack would have been a more cautious approach towards whether wrongdoing exists.

That's where the NCAA has a hard time, showing the actual wrongdoing. Their investigative procedures aren't exactly shaming Sherlock Holmes, which is why they love it when programs admit.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:
The NCAA doesn't give a damn about a school trying to do the right thing. Georgia Tech literally turned their own boosters in and got a tourney suspension.

Heeke's actions totally reek of a confession of wrongdoing. The NCAA can easily flip that into a failure to supervise Phelps. The far better tack would have been a more cautious approach towards whether wrongdoing exists.

That's where the NCAA has a hard time, showing the actual wrongdoing. Their investigative procedures aren't exactly shaming Sherlock Holmes, which is why they love it when programs admit.

A billion times, this. They're mall cops, not cop cops. They don't have the ability to do real investigative work - they just know how to jump down your throat when you're caught on camera.

If Book had gone to a party at Star Pass with some players, gotten wasted, jumped behind the wheel of his car, and then run over some poor old lady, would the NCAA have investigated the program and Miller for a lack of institutional control?

This seems entirely similar.

ChooChooCat wrote:

BBQ wildcat wrote:Thanks, Choo.

Wasn't the Phelps issure complete BS? I mean the was no ineligibility problem associated with the claim agains him.

I edited my original post, but Heeke jumping the gun on that entire bullshit was as good as admitting guilt in the NCAA's eyes.

Back when that happened, I thought the whole purpose he did that was to be able to get Miller out for cause, while simultaneously sacrificing the program.

YoDeFoe wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:
The NCAA doesn't give a damn about a school trying to do the right thing. Georgia Tech literally turned their own boosters in and got a tourney suspension.

Heeke's actions totally reek of a confession of wrongdoing. The NCAA can easily flip that into a failure to supervise Phelps. The far better tack would have been a more cautious approach towards whether wrongdoing exists.

That's where the NCAA has a hard time, showing the actual wrongdoing. Their investigative procedures aren't exactly shaming Sherlock Holmes, which is why they love it when programs admit.

A billion times, this. They're mall cops, not cop cops. They don't have the ability to do real investigative work - they just know how to jump down your throat when you're caught on camera.

They're also seriously outgunned by real lawyers. UNC and PSU backed them down by taking a hard line.

The NCAA thrives on programs admitting stuff and accepting sanctions. You should never lie to them or be outwardly disrespectful, but it does not pay to admit anything or give unnecessary ground.

Heeke gave a lot of ground voluntarily on Phelps.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

YoDeFoe wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:
The NCAA doesn't give a damn about a school trying to do the right thing. Georgia Tech literally turned their own boosters in and got a tourney suspension.

Heeke's actions totally reek of a confession of wrongdoing. The NCAA can easily flip that into a failure to supervise Phelps. The far better tack would have been a more cautious approach towards whether wrongdoing exists.

That's where the NCAA has a hard time, showing the actual wrongdoing. Their investigative procedures aren't exactly shaming Sherlock Holmes, which is why they love it when programs admit.

A billion times, this. They're mall cops, not cop cops. They don't have the ability to do real investigative work - they just know how to jump down your throat when you're caught on camera.

They're also seriously outgunned by real lawyers. UNC and PSU backed them down by taking a hard line.

The NCAA thrives on programs admitting stuff and accepting sanctions. You should never lie to them or be outwardly disrespectful, but it does not pay to admit anything or give unnecessary ground.

Heeke gave a lot of ground voluntarily on Phelps.

Heeke is that guy who gets pulled over and when the Officer ask him if he knows why he confesses "Is it the body in the trunk?"

prh wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:

BBQ wildcat wrote:Thanks, Choo.

Wasn't the Phelps issure complete BS? I mean the was no ineligibility problem associated with the claim agains him.

I edited my original post, but Heeke jumping the gun on that entire bullshit was as good as admitting guilt in the NCAA's eyes.

Back when that happened, I thought the whole purpose he did that was to be able to get Miller out for cause, while simultaneously sacrificing the program.

Which is why he is absolutely powerless now when it comes to the basketball program. You play rough with your expensive toys for no reason your parents will take them away from you.

And from another source close to UofA they are saying No Post Season Ban. So yeah who really knows, that is the question?

MC1983 wrote:And from another source close to UofA they are saying No Post Season Ban. So yeah who really knows, that is the question?

I know what the NCAA wants to do. I don't know what they ultimately will do. Just remember they feel they don't need concrete proof to pass judgment.

If Phelps didn’t break a rule than I don’t see how the NCAA can use that angle. “ We are going to punish you because you thought you might of broken a rule but you didn’t”. Hmmmm no

MC1983 wrote:If Phelps didn’t break a rule than I don’t see how the NCAA can use that angle. “ We are going to punish you because you thought you might of broken a rule but you didn’t”. Hmmmm no

Arizona responded as if he did break a rule and pretty much admitted guilt in the eyes of the NCAA. They are a kangaroo court. That's all they need.

What is it that they want to do Choo?

ChooChooCat wrote:

MC1983 wrote:If Phelps didn’t break a rule than I don’t see how the NCAA can use that angle. “ We are going to punish you because you thought you might of broken a rule but you didn’t”. Hmmmm no

Arizona responded as if he did break a rule and pretty much admitted guilt in the eyes of the NCAA. They are a kangaroo court. That's all they need.

There’s zero chance that holds up in a court of law.

I’m looking forward to the lawsuit.

NCAA: “Foster a culture of compliance or else.
Arizona: Fires coach maybe involved in something, no wrongdoing found, player cleared by NCAA
NCAA: “You fired a coach trying while to be in compliance and therefore admit guilt, suffer.”

Zero chance a court of law allows that to stand.

JMarkJohns wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:

MC1983 wrote:If Phelps didn’t break a rule than I don’t see how the NCAA can use that angle. “ We are going to punish you because you thought you might of broken a rule but you didn’t”. Hmmmm no

Arizona responded as if he did break a rule and pretty much admitted guilt in the eyes of the NCAA. They are a kangaroo court. That's all they need.

There’s zero chance that holds up in a court of law.

I’m looking forward to the lawsuit.

NCAA: “Foster a culture of compliance or else.
Arizona: Fires coach maybe involved in something, no wrongdoing found, player cleared by NCAA
NCAA: “You fired a coach trying while to be in compliance and therefore admit guilt, suffer.”

Zero chance a court of law allows that to stand.

Won't find any disagreements here.

azcat49 wrote:What is it that they want to do Choo?

Lack of institutional control.

ChooChooCat wrote:

azcat49 wrote:What is it that they want to do Choo?

Lack of institutional control.

I mean, if the NCAA is about to drop a stinking turd on Tucson either right before or during the 2019-20 season, it's going to feel both expected and outrageous. While it feels unlikely they're going to fuck with our 2020 NCAA tourney eligibility, I wouldn't put it past them. If they want to stick it to us in the most painful way possible, they'll blast us with penalties that affect this season's team, arguably the best Miller has had for some time.

The FBI-driven scandal that ultimately led to Book getting fired badly impact the 2017-18 season. It was our only shot to do something special with Deandre Ayton (not to mention Trier and Alkins), and while we did win Pac reg season and tourney titles, we crapped out in the tourney vs. a team that lost by 20 in the next round. I mean, we began the season #3 in the AP poll. Had the shit storm of the scandal not hit us when it did, I wonder how things might've been different.

It's not like the NCAA is looking to do us any favors, so all we can do is *hope* that whatever bad news is coming does not land between now and late March. Sorta think it's coming sooner.

Technically Phelps wasn’t fired.

Given that, the fact the NCAA cleared the player at question with no penalty, and the fact no evidence of wrongdoing was found, there’s zero there for any sort of legitimate charge.

I get there’s still a superficial whiff, but any attempt to make this a thing will be met with challenge and result in an NCAA defeat in court, which I doubt they want.

I don’t doubt they want to trump up their notice of allegations, but Arizona is in compliance on everything else and has only worked with the Feds and NCAA along the way, and hasn’t done any action to thumb its nose at anything.

Given everything else with the Book case, the NCAA beat go by letter of the law vs Arizona, because if they don’t, they’ll face a significant embarrassment in court.

Draymond Green wrote a nice column in the Washington Post supporting the California bill allowing of NCAA players to be paid:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html" target="_blank

So does NCAA have the moxey to rule any CA school ineligible if their players are no longer amateurs?

Postmaster wrote:So does NCAA have the moxey to rule any CA school ineligible if their players are no longer amateurs?

I hope they do, I want to see a poo storm here. The ting is if they do cali, there will be at least 5 other states with these rules in place by then I bet, so they'd have to come down on them also. So in my fantasy world of 2 to 3 years of realignments, new governing bodies, competing tourneys, maybe the nit returning to predominance, boycots... Before this all settled out.

Oh my gosh if this goes down like that, Disney might own the national championship game and so it would be the Mickey mouse tournament and that sounds hilarious.

So no, I don't think the NCAA has the stones to do it and allow there to be a Mickey mouse championship.

But I still kind of want to see it.

Postmaster wrote:So does NCAA have the moxey to rule any CA school ineligible if their players are no longer amateurs?

There's a reason the law doesn't go into effect to 2023....

pc in NM wrote:

Postmaster wrote:So does NCAA have the moxey to rule any CA school ineligible if their players are no longer amateurs?

There's a reason the law doesn't go into effect to 2023....

The law will start having an affect next year for football recruits and year after for basketball (less if HS to NBA goes into effect) . Even now, If you are a top QB as a junior, when you step on campus you it will be 2020-2021 and most QB redshirt or don't play Freshman year so 2021-2022 then the law goes into effect. So these top QBs will be Sophomores or Juniors or any top recruit really.

I was talking to a parent I work with whose kid is a top recruit/players at Notre Dame about this and they hate it. He plays on OLine and he just said its going to cause rifts in the locker room. Hypothetically, a QB gets $100,000 in endorsement deals etc, and the Oline who is giving him all kinds of protections and allowing him time to throw etc. doesn't see any money come their way. Whose to say they won't start missing a block or two. Especially if the player is not well liked.

Same goes for basketball, if you're a top player and seeing decent money coming your way by putting up 25 ppg, whose to say you will play team ball. It's going t be tough on coaches, they will want to play talent, but kids will have different motivations.

I guess collective tip jar distributed among all parties won’t work.

Good points Jajoyce

jajoyce wrote: He plays on OLine and he just said its going to cause rifts in the locker room. Hypothetically, a QB gets $100,000 in endorsement deals etc, and the Oline who is giving him all kinds of protections and allowing him time to throw etc. doesn't see any money come their way. Whose to say they won't start missing a block or two.

I imagine college QBs can't throw parties and buy fancy dinners for their OL like NFL QBs do.

Going to be all kinds of problems trying to share the wealth.

But then again, due to modern Olympic rules, amateurs can make unlimited money from the Olympic games, and still keep their amateur status.

Some Stanford swimmer received over $350,000 from the last Olympics.

Remember when UA QB Keith Smith was an aspiring MLB player? When he quit baseball to play football for the UA he had to pay all that money back.

That is no longer the case. As long as you were a professional athlete in a sport that you don't play in college, then you can keep the money.

Has not been fair for quite some time.

Is the supposition here that QBs already don’t get (impermissible) benefits that the o-line doesn’t have access to?

jajoyce wrote:

pc in NM wrote:

Postmaster wrote:So does NCAA have the moxey to rule any CA school ineligible if their players are no longer amateurs?

There's a reason the law doesn't go into effect to 2023....

The law will start having an affect next year for football recruits and year after for basketball (less if HS to NBA goes into effect) . Even now, If you are a top QB as a junior, when you step on campus you it will be 2020-2021 and most QB redshirt or don't play Freshman year so 2021-2022 then the law goes into effect. So these top QBs will be Sophomores or Juniors or any top recruit really.

I was talking to a parent I work with whose kid is a top recruit/players at Notre Dame about this and they hate it. He plays on OLine and he just said its going to cause rifts in the locker room. Hypothetically, a QB gets $100,000 in endorsement deals etc, and the Oline who is giving him all kinds of protections and allowing him time to throw etc. doesn't see any money come their way. Whose to say they won't start missing a block or two. Especially if the player is not well liked.

Same goes for basketball, if you're a top player and seeing decent money coming your way by putting up 25 ppg, whose to say you will play team ball. It's going t be tough on coaches, they will want to play talent, but kids will have different motivations.

Players are already getting paid. Why would that change when the NCAA stops stepping in and disallowing compensation in the open air? Good luck getting to the next level when you stop competing because sponsors pay some players more than you. And it's still true in the NFL, where there aren't many linemen raking in the advertising dollars QB's get. Maybe you actually agree that the NCAA shouldn't prohibit players from sharing in the opportunity to take in revenue for the labor that makes Larry Scott and all the other jackasses rich. But if not, and this is your argument in favor of amateurism, I don't understand how this concern for equal pay should prevent standouts from making money off their own images and their own accomplishments.

Quinerly has to sit out a year at Byrnabama. NCAA denied his eligibility

Jefe wrote:Quinerly has to sit out a year at Byrnabama. NCAA denied his eligibility

For the FBI thing or the normal year for a transfer?

Just another big F U to Jay Bilas and ESPIN for the comments and the cupcake handling of Bill Self to kick off the State Farm Classic against Duke

dmjcat wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

dmjcat wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:BYU self-sanctioned, the NCAA sanctioned more.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/n ... /38459199/" target="_blank

Ole Miss self-sanctioned, the NCAA sanctioned more.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... tions-ncaa" target="_blank

Hell Arizona self-sanctioned for buying Jamelle Horne a slice of pizza and the NCAA sanctioned us more.

It's what they do. You're either willfully ignorant to this process or you're trolling dmj. I really hope it's the latter.

And the VAST majority of schools that self sanction DON't get hit with additional sanctions. If you don't know that (or are unwilling to admit it) then you shouldn't be posting on message boards.

That's the wrong argument. The correct point you need to make to support your argument is a school that got MORE sanctions from the NCAA because they didn't self sanction.

But that isn't really a thing. The NCAA takes self sactioning as a baseline and sees if they have to work up. If you don't confess anything and make them actually prove a case against you, 78.3% of the time they can't even do that.

If this were a One-Off situation involving only the UA I would agree Spiff. Unfortunately, its not. The horrific press we have received, coupled with the pressure on the NCAA to come down hard on the cheaters, is almost certain to get us clobbered regardless whether or not the NCAA can "prove" the allegations.

Again, I will cheerfully admit I am wrong if the NCAA lets us slide, our recruiting doesn't suffer, and the press gets off our back............I just think thats highly, highly unlikely.

What intense pressure on the NCAA? Where is that pressure coming from? To my knowledge the NCAA truly answers to no one, so who could be intensely pressuring it?

As for the horrific press we’ve received, have you noticed that it’s largely gone? Book got out of prison the other day and you’d think that would be another opportunity for the jackals to descend demanding blood but instead no one even mentioned it. I only knew because someone retweeted Book. Where’s that press you’re so scared of? Not writing pieces about how UofA should have self-sanctioned to avoid the wrath of the NCAA...

My god. People are still worried cause of negative tweets and stories that nobody outside of the fan base cares about?

Cal has been dirty for decades and who the fuck cares. Win.

Also, if anyone has an idea what the NCAA does then they are fucking Nostradamus...it's the most disorganized and bat shit crazy entity in all of sports that has no rhyme or reason for doing what it does.

I'll wait for the example where self-sanctioning was a positive for the University/program. People are clutching their pearls when we had a FB program that was looking the other way on sexually abusing children, while current coaches in the PAC look the other way when multiple players--in multiple years--rape co-ed's.

Spare me the "we shoudla self sanctioned" bullshit about someone dropping bags to secure recruits. Arizona should put their lawyers to good use and tell the NCAA to fuck itself.