Commission on College Basketball

[brianstl]

1 hour ago, HoosierPal said:

Did you read the report?  All of your points were discussed and answered.

One and done - report says the NBA and NBPA has to do lead this change and to improve the G League. "The NCAA lacks the legal power to change the one and done."

Punishing coaches - they are raising the bar.  The report also states that the NCAA enforcement functions were designed for a simplier time when rule violations did not put so much as stake."  The report calls for a new and improved investigative and adjudication of complex cases.  They are also calling for University Presidents to be held accountable in these cases, as well as the coach.

Regulate AAU - they call for the NCAA to establish youth basketball programs and tourneys to somewhat compete with AAU circuit.  They call for the NCAA to implement strict rules for AAU events, where they AAU event needs to be certified, or NCAA coaches cannot attend. They also call for the AAU to have an educational element in their events in order to be certified.   

There is a lot of finger pointing at the NCAA in the report.  I think the statement, “college basketball is a toxic mix of perverse incentives to cheat,” isn't very flattering to the NCAA.   Take time to read it.

This will get them sued and they will lose.

[billiken_roy]

the ncaa cannot fix this.   so the answer which i have long advocated is get those players that dont want to be college students not to even go to college.    the nba has proven they wont help they made it worse with their stupid one and done rules.  

the answer is to put all police work into academics.   if a college is stupid enough to pay kids obscenes amount of money and property and benefits, let them.  but by gosh, make the kids actually truly qualify for college academically.   make the kids truly go to class, pass honestly and be on pace at all times to graduate with a degree.   my bet is the problem would fix itself.   but academic fraud (see north carolina and duke) is not even close to being a priority for the ncaa.   hell they cheered north carolina's fake classes.   fix the academics and the problem would go away because you would end up with true student athletes playing all college sports.   

[HoosierPal]

17 minutes ago, brianstl said:

This will get them sued and they will lose.

You need to tell that to Condoleeza Rice. I guess being Sec of State she would not know this. 

[TFord and TRavs]

Does anyone care if wins are vacated or even a national championship? I don’t think Louisville fans ever say that their own wins aren’t counted. 

Post season bans barely had an effect in their recruiting 

[JMM28]

58 minutes ago, TFord and TRavs said:

Does anyone care if wins are vacated or even a national championship? I don’t think Louisville fans ever say that their own wins aren’t counted. 

Post season bans barely had an effect in their recruiting 

Probably the best post you've ever made. The NCAA punishments are a joke. Vacating wins is funny because https://www.ncaa.com/game/basketball-men/d1/2013/04/08/michigan-louisville?ncaa_mid=interactive-bracket:michigan-louisville:recap When someone asks "Who won the 2013 national championship" any NCAA fan is going to say Louisville. Even the NCAA says it with an asterisk below it. 

[billiken_roy]

1 hour ago, TFord and TRavs said:

Does anyone care if wins are vacated or even a national championship? I don’t think Louisville fans ever say that their own wins aren’t counted. 

Post season bans barely had an effect in their recruiting 

i guess if you have an unlimited bank account you are correct, but those vacated seasons resulted in money's not paid and money's the school's had to pay back out the ncaa pool correct?

[willie]

13 minutes ago, JMM28 said:

Probably the best post you've ever made. The NCAA punishments are a joke. Vacating wins is funny because https://www.ncaa.com/game/basketball-men/d1/2013/04/08/michigan-louisville?ncaa_mid=interactive-bracket:michigan-louisville:recap When someone asks "Who won the 2013 national championship" any NCAA fan is going to say Louisville. Even the NCAA says it with an asterisk below it. 

When Louisville gives all the money back I'm not sure they are going to say it's a joke. 

[TFord and TRavs]

30 minutes ago, willie said:

When Louisville gives all the money back I'm not sure they are going to say it's a joke. 

Chump change for a national championship and Mcd AA

[billiken_roy]

22 minutes ago, TFord and TRavs said:

Chump change for a national championship and Mcd AA

how much did they pay back?

[JMM28]

1 hour ago, willie said:

When Louisville gives all the money back I'm not sure they are going to say it's a joke. 

I don't know. They had to pay back $5,000,000. Out of their 112,000,000 in athletics revenue for the year. 

[Bobby Metzinger]

7 hours ago, billiken_roy said:

i like the freshmen ineligible thought.    you can bet a kid that really is only in it for basketball will not sit around a year and have to study and not play.   

Reverting back (almost) to the old Prop 48 days...not sure where I’d draw the line on that, especially with the Graduation rates now playing a role in postseason participation. Maybe the schools with the top 25 graduation rates would get a pass, as an incentive to be able to play freshman. Would it apply to all D1 programs including the non-scholarship offering Ivies?

[brianstl]

3 hours ago, HoosierPal said:

You need to tell that to Condoleeza Rice. I guess being Sec of State she would not know this. 

I am sure she knows it would be most likely found to be in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act.  That is why the whole thing is a big joke.  It would be viewed as an attempt by the NCAA to monopolize summer youth basketball leagues and tournaments.  The certification and banning coaches from attending events not certified would be viewed as exclusionary and anti-competitive.  That is a big no no when it comes to antitrust cases.  

[willie]

1 hour ago, JMM28 said:

I don't know. They had to pay back $5,000,000. Out of their 112,000,000 in athletics revenue for the year. 

What was there profit? Expenses? Five mil is not chump change. 

[Tilkowsky]

23 hours ago, billiken_roy said:

i like the freshmen ineligible thought.    you can bet a kid that really is only in it for basketball will not sit around a year and have to study and not play.   

So what do you know Billikens Roy and I agree on something.

The only thing is that means Gordon doesn't play for SLU next year. Are you willing to sacrifice that?

I am sure this post will get hidden as Billikens.com goes to rules that President XI would blush at.

[cgeldmacher]

5 hours ago, Tilkowsky said:

Blah, blah, blah, SLU sucks.  Blah, blah, blah, I'm not biased, just speaking the truth.  Blah, blah, blah, you're an idiot for disagreeing with me.  Blah, blah, blah.

Just summing up for everyone who misses arguing with him.

[Tilkowsky]

20 hours ago, cgeldmacher said:

Just summing up for everyone who misses arguing with him.

Can you show me where I said that because you didn't quote me which means you lied.

I never said SLU sucks - I asked billikenroy if he truly was interested in having freshman not compete because that would mean Gordon wouldn't be able to play for SLU next year.

I know you won't respond because you are a coward like the rest of the posters on this site.

Instead of trying to engage and prove me wrong you make little posts as a troll (even though you don't point that out) - you want the members to police the board which is an extremely bad idea by the way.

That is a good way to foster groupthink.

 

 

[billikenfan05]

Asked questions, didn’t provide an actual argument. Called names. Saved you all a click. 

[cgeldmacher]

3 hours ago, Tilkowsky said:

 

I didn't even look at the argument you were having above to know what you were posting about.  I still haven't looked at it, because I'm not interested.  I just wanted to point out that all of your posts are exactly the same.  You then responded to my post by denying that this is the case.  Except in your response, you followed the exact same formula that you always use and that I predicted.  The only difference is that when you got the name calling part, you called me a "coward" instead of an "idiot."

If you want, I can draft up a response to this post.  We all know what it will look like.  You're a one trick pony.

[Quality Is Job 1]

6 minutes ago, cgeldmacher said:

I didn't even look at the argument you were having above to know what you were posting about.  I still haven't looked at it, because I'm not interested.  I just wanted to point out that all of your posts are exactly the same.  You then responded to my post by denying that this is the case.  Except in your response, you followed the exact same formula that you always use and that I predicted.  The only difference is that when you got the name calling part, you called me a "coward" instead of an "idiot."

If you want, I can draft up a response to this post.  We all know what it will look like.  You're a one trick pony.

Eh, please stop responding to this joker.  He'll just report the post to the moderators; I'm getting weary seeing his reports only to find little or nothing to justify a report.  And I'm sure it makes his day each morning to see that people are talking about him and/or his content.

I do appreciate, though, that you deleted his content from the quote!

[Tilkowsky]

23 hours ago, cgeldmacher said:

I didn't even look at the argument you were having above to know what you were posting about.  I still haven't looked at it, because I'm not interested.  I just wanted to point out that all of your posts are exactly the same.  You then responded to my post by denying that this is the case.  Except in your response, you followed the exact same formula that you always use and that I predicted.  The only difference is that when you got the name calling part, you called me a "coward" instead of an "idiot."

If you want, I can draft up a response to this post.  We all know what it will look like.  You're a one trick pony.

Unfortunately you are wrong.

i have never called anyone an idiot. I dare you to find a post where I have called anyone an idiot.

You won’t though because you can’t - you are a coward.

[HoosierPal]

NCAA DI Council adopts proposal that allows student-athletes to transfer and receive a scholarship without asking their school for permission. The rule change goes into effect October 15.

https://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/new-transfer-rule-eliminates-permission-contact-process

[Pistol]

Noteworthy:

-Student-athletes no longer need a permission to contact letter. They inform the school of their intent and the school has 2 days to enter them into a national transfer database. Once they're on the database, other schools can contact them.

-Coaches and schools can no longer block or restrict transfers. Conferences, however, can be more strict than the national rule.

-"The proposal adds tampering with a current student-athlete at another school to the list of potential Level 2 violations, considered a significant breach of conduct."

I like the change. I'm curious to see how conferences respond to it, whether they move to block in-conference transfers or whether they just go with the national rules so as not to look more restrictive to potential recruits.

[Billiken Rich]

52 minutes ago, Pistol said:

Noteworthy:

-Student-athletes no longer need a permission to contact letter. They inform the school of their intent and the school has 2 days to enter them into a national transfer database. Once they're on the database, other schools can contact them.

-Coaches and schools can no longer block or restrict transfers. Conferences, however, can be more strict than the national rule.

-"The proposal adds tampering with a current student-athlete at another school to the list of potential Level 2 violations, considered a significant breach of conduct."

I like the change. I'm curious to see how conferences respond to it, whether they move to block in-conference transfers or whether they just go with the national rules so as not to look more restrictive to potential recruits.

I still think it's spooky for non power 5 teams.....

[cgeldmacher]

I see a situation where every kid, every year, asks to be put on the database to gauge interest.  If they don't like the interest they get, they just stay at their current school.  Seems dangerous to me.

[Cowboy]

2 hours ago, Pistol said:

Noteworthy:

-Student-athletes no longer need a permission to contact letter. They inform the school of their intent and the school has 2 days to enter them into a national transfer database. Once they're on the database, other schools can contact them.

-Coaches and schools can no longer block or restrict transfers. Conferences, however, can be more strict than the national rule.

-"The proposal adds tampering with a current student-athlete at another school to the list of potential Level 2 violations, considered a significant breach of conduct."

I like the change. I'm curious to see how conferences respond to it, whether they move to block in-conference transfers or whether they just go with the national rules so as not to look more restrictive to potential recruits.

-I did not read anything that involves the one-year sit out period after transferring for football and basketball, so guessing that is still in place