I think as all of this unfolds there will be more Barry Bonds then Ken Griffey Jrs. in college basketball. If in fact UK, Duke, UNC, UCLA and blue blood/top programs are involved in this scandal, will we put an * by the name of the programs and coaches and move on?

 

Will we live with the mantra "Well everyone else was doing it"?

 

Who might be some of the successful coaches who didn't fall victim and continued to win despite the cheating around them?

 

If Rick Pitino is Bary Bonds who will be Ken Griffey Jr?

This implies coaches cheating by paying players (and/or agent runners) didn't happen before this era?

Paying players dates back to the Wooden era at UCLA. It's more like business as usual.

This implies coaches cheating by paying players (and/or agent runners) didn't happen before this era?

 

Not really. Players were taking performance enhancers long before the steroid era in baseball.

If this does in fact lead to literally almost every program in the Power 5 conferences the NCAA can't afford to punish them all. It'll lead to them changing the rules to allow a payment up to a certain amount, or change the rule to back to where they can go to the NBA straight from high school and if you do go to college you have to stay for two years. Possibly even a combination of all 3 put together.

I think as all of this unfolds there will be more Barry Bonds then Ken Griffey Jrs. in college basketball. If in fact UK, Duke, UNC, UCLA and blue blood/top programs are involved in this scandal, will we put an * by the name of the programs and coaches and move on?

 

Will we live with the mantra "Well everyone else was doing it"?

 

Who might be some of the successful coaches who didn't fall victim and continued to win despite the cheating around them?

 

If Rick Pitino is Bary Bonds who will be Ken Griffey Jr?

 

To be honest I've already put an * by three UNC titles in my mind. Whether the NCAA does or not is above my pay grade. :thumb:

I don't think this is worse than the point-shaving scandal circa late 40s/early 50s, although it is probably considerably more pervasive. The story goes that Adolph Rupp refused to play any more games in New York City after players on his team were caught shaving points in complicity with NYC gamblers. I don't know how wide-spread this was but I don't think it involved too many teams. To me point shaving is worse than steroids or pay-for-play.

I don't think this is worse than the point-shaving scandal circa late 40s/early 50s, although it is probably considerably more pervasive. The story goes that Adolph Rupp refused to play any more games in New York City after players on his team were caught shaving points in complicity with NYC gamblers. I don't know how wide-spread this was but I don't think it involved too many teams. To me point shaving is worse than steroids or pay-for-play.

 

It involved a lot of the NY area teams. In fact the 1950 NIT and NCAA Champs (only time one team accomplished both feats) was involved. CCNY had their program ruined and never heard from again.

 

UK never, ever played again in the Garden until the 1976 NIT Tournament.

 

There were innocent victims as well. UK's Bill Spivey was banned for life despite not a shred of evidence he was involved. Sad article about it from some years ago.

 

For the 1951 point-shavers, a life lived in infamy

 

Here is a more detailed article showing the scope of the scandal.

 

ESPN Classic - Explosion: 1951 scandals threaten college hoops

 

Bill Spivey was the Greek tragic figure in these events.

There isn't a Ken Griffey Jr. of college basketball plain and simple. Anyone who has done it straight by the book at a top notch university is out of a job. Tom Izzo may be the closest thing we have, but would it just completely surprise anyone if Michigan State is involved either? Probably not. They would be far down the list, but its not surprising anyone by any means.

This implies coaches cheating by paying players (and/or agent runners) didn't happen before this era?

 

Not really. Players were taking performance enhancers long before the steroid era in baseball.

 

Great question and great answer. I think it's fair to say it's best to view it in degrees.

 

Back in the day, it was used to get over hangovers in MLB (see. Mantle, Mickey and Martin, Billy, etc.), but going forward, it was used to turn 340-foot cans of corn into 400-foot bombs.

 

Back in the day in college hoops, it was a tractor or $5-10K or whatever else, plus $100 handshakes. The money is much bigger these days.

Great question and great answer. I think it's fair to say it's best to view it in degrees.

 

Back in the day, it was used to get over hangovers in MLB (see. Mantle, Mickey and Martin, Billy, etc.), but going forward, it was used to turn 340-foot cans of corn into 400-foot bombs.

 

Back in the day in college hoops, it was a tractor or $5-10K or whatever else, plus $100 handshakes. The money is much bigger these days.

 

A. Those were called "flu-like symptoms" back in the day.

 

2. I got caught up in the home-run frenzy. It probably wasn't until Brady Anderson hit 50 homers in a season that I discounted the juiced-up ball theory and went with the juiced-up player theory.

 

D. Inflation.