Avenatti on Duke
- Thread starter Chalmers15
- Start date
I don't think any of it is okay. I just think people are trying too hard to pin this on certain programs instead of source of the scandals.
Mike says over 100 players? Hmm, not all of them went to Duke, so, umm yeah. I’m interested. Let’s see what he’s got!
I don’t care about the UK/Duke reverse circle jerk ITT.
I’m just fascinated by the developments. Unfortunately for duke, whether they knew or not doesn’t matter. If Zion’s parents took money from Nike, regardless of why, Duke played an ineligible player. Now, if that is the case, what the NCAA does with that situation is anyone’s guess. But with their new hard line takes on stuff these days, might not be good.
According to Avanatti, there are 100 ineligible players. Duke gets the headlines, but no other Nike school should feel safe (if true).
There needs to be a penalty for players/family members that knowingly accept improper benefits and lie to schools. They should have to sign a waiver that makes them financially responsible if their deception costs schools wins/money.
What was she consulting about? Does she have a background in consulting? Legitimate questions that I don't know the answer to, but are probably fairly pertinent.
Whether Duke knew he was ineligible or not might be irrelevant, depending on how the NCAA wants to interpret its own rules. If it's strict liability, like every case before 2001 or so, then the games are vacated and money has to be paid back. If it's not strict liability and the ineligible player is no longer at the university, the NCAA might just shrug its shoulders and say "what can we do?"
So you 1) make an inaccurate assessment of what I understand (I understand just fine, thanks) and 2) throw in an insult? You seem like a reactionary twat, but since even your screen name is trolling I shouldn't be surprised.
Totally agree. That’s why i said I’m fascinated by the developments. I meant the whole thing, not just duke. I want to see where it all goes, if anywhere at all.
It is definitely intriguing. I have said from the beginning when the FBI cases came to light that I was nervously intrigued. I just can't see programs being punished if it can't be proven to be involved. Though, as you alluded to, it would be at their discretion. With the scope of the scandals, it would almost be financial suicide for the NCAA to punish the schools for something (allegedly) outside of their knowledge and not financed by the institutions. But we'll see.
The questions you ask about Camby show you don't have an accurate assessment of the situation.
I’m not sure ncaa enforcement vacates games as a punishment. It’s just something they do. Punishments are probation, reduced scholarships, suspensions, post season bans.
They could rule Zion retroactively ineligible, vacate the games he played in and not do anything to duke really.
And honestly why would you even care if you’re a duke fan? What’s an E8 and another ACC title to you?
For Kansas, UK and UNC fans that are separated by what...30 wins for the all time wins lead?, vacated games are a bigger deal.
Losing a banner would suck too imo.
They could rule Zion retroactively ineligible, vacate the games he played in and not do anything to duke really.
And honestly why would you even care if you’re a duke fan? What’s an E8 and another ACC title to you?
For Kansas, UK and UNC fans that are separated by what...30 wins for the all time wins lead?, vacated games are a bigger deal.
Losing a banner would suck too imo.
Not really. Nike can pay anyone they want a consulting fee. None of your business or my business or the NCAA's business.
Not really. If they are consulting fees and she got a 1099 or W2 it is legal. If it is cash under the table, then a problem maybe.
If nothing on tape or emails or evidence then it is nothing.
It has nothing to do with guilt. The NCAA has ruled before that it doesn't matter if the university didn't know. A player and/or their family getting paid to steer them makes them ineligible.
The NCAA has never been consistent with their punishment though so I'd be stunned if they did anything here. At worst they take the ACC title and E8 appearance away. Who cares.
It doesn't have to be steering him towards Duke. If they took money to steer him to a Nike school he by rule is ineligible. Stop being dense and playing strawman for one second please.
Yes it's me person waiting on Duke getting hammered. If you could read you would have seen my first post (that you quoted) I said this was nothing. But keep on trucking bud.
I am definitely beginning to think that the creepy porn lawyer is a Kentucky fan. Put up or shut up.
Wow! Creepy Porn Lawyer going all in! Too bad, he is Liberal, and a creepy porn lawyer
I’m not for that... maybe I’m the only one, but I doubt it.
Also, wouldn’t be happy with Nike steering them to UK either, especially since I’m not a fan of the OAD.
Your team doesn't have to worry about Higgins in the NCAA tourney because you have to make the tourney to worry about the officials.
Similar threads
