Where is the thread on Cal and peps making up false stories on him again......this has happened numerous times and he always is in denial......I think he did it and agree with lots of other so called "make up stories" on Cal.....has happened much too many times for the truth not to be there

Where is the thread on Cal and peps making up false stories on him again......this has happened numerous times and he always is in denial......I think he did it and agree with lots of other so called "make up stories" on Cal.....has happened much too many times for the truth not to be there

 

So Cal was paying a guy to pay Bamba money in your eyes? And that guy didn't come to Kentucky? Please, that's ridiculous.

 

If Cal was paying the kid, which he wasn't, you can be sure that kid would end up at the school Cal was at.

Where is the thread on Cal and peps making up false stories on him again......this has happened numerous times and he always is in denial......I think he did it and agree with lots of other so called "make up stories" on Cal.....has happened much too many times for the truth not to be there

 

I'm not sure I'm following you, but from what I am...what does the Cal/Knicks story have to do at all with Bamba? There is no correlation.

I'm not sure I'm following you, but from what I am...what does the Cal/Knicks story have to do at all with Bamba? There is no correlation.

Just thought there might be a thread on the Cal/Knicks issue started on here

Just thought there might be a thread on the Cal/Knicks issue started on here

 

And that has what to do with Bamba?

So Cal was paying a guy to pay Bamba money in your eyes? And that guy didn't come to Kentucky? Please, that's ridiculous.

 

If Cal was paying the kid, which he wasn't, you can be sure that kid would end up at the school Cal was at.

 

Hey... Louisville recruits got sex and went elsewhere... :lol2:

Hey... Louisville recruits got sex and went elsewhere... :lol2:

 

Yeah, but I think a second-rate basketball program would hire second-rate "campus guides."

Just thought there might be a thread on the Cal/Knicks issue started on here

There is.

Just thought there might be a thread on the Cal/Knicks issue started on here

 

Hmmmm you may want to know what you are talking about first before you say something. There is already a thread about it. It's in a NBA thread since it's about an NBA team.

Gary Parrish tells the full story here:

 

Mohamed Bamba's brother says the Texas 5-star freshman accepted cash and gifts - CBSSports.com

 

So basically a non story.

FWIW, Mohammed Bamba has been cleared by the NCAA and is eligible to play.

FWIW, Mohammed Bamba has been cleared by the NCAA and is eligible to play.

 

Which doesn't mean much. Not saying he has anything to worry about cause I have no idea, but so was Derrick Rose at one point. That's one thing I hate about the NCAA. Your cleared and eligible until your not.

He's lucky he didn't go to Kentucky

Which doesn't mean much. Not saying he has anything to worry about cause I have no idea, but so was Derrick Rose at one point. That's one thing I hate about the NCAA. Your cleared and eligible until your not.

 

I thought in the Derrick Rose case he was cleared and then after the season the evidence came out that he didn't take the test. Or did they know when they cleared him that they didn't take the test?

 

In Bamba's case the NCAA made it clear that they investigated what he received and in their words, "after evaluating all available information, the NCAA determined that the assistance Greer Love provides to Mohammed Bamba does not violate NCAA rules. Bamba remains certified by the NCAA Eligibility Center." I'd imagine if they received new evidence saying otherwise then they can change their ruling.

 

And that's not to defend the NCAA because I think they have plenty of issues but at the same time you can't rule someone ineligible in July when July's evidence clears them. If new evidence comes up in January then I would think that things would change.

I thought in the Derrick Rose case he was cleared and then after the season the evidence came out that he didn't take the test. Or did they know when they cleared him that they didn't take the test?

 

In Bamba's case the NCAA made it clear that they investigated what he received and in their words, "after evaluating all available information, the NCAA determined that the assistance Greer Love provides to Mohammed Bamba does not violate NCAA rules. Bamba remains certified by the NCAA Eligibility Center." I'd imagine if they received new evidence saying otherwise then they can change their ruling.

 

And that's not to defend the NCAA because I think they have plenty of issues but at the same time you can't rule someone ineligible in July when July's evidence clears them. If new evidence comes up in January then I would think that things would change.

 

I don't really know the details. I just hate how a school can be punished for playing a player who was cleared at the time that later becomes uncleared. To me if the NCAA says a player is cleared than the school should be able to play them without worry of any retroactive punishment if he / she is later found to be ineligible. IMO, a school has to accept the NCAA decisions on eligiblity so if the NCAA says they are eligible why punish a school for playing a kid that they were told is eligible. If something changes than sit them from that point forward. It would be like your employeer changing policy and then punishing you for not following the new policy in your past actions.