As long as no rules are broken in the process then I see nothing wrong with the type of athletes he brings in.

 

Did you read the thread? Did you hear about UMass? Rules were broken.

 

IMO, it's the old "lack of institutional control". He brought them in, he's responsible for showing them how to do things the right way. Once is an exception, multiple times???

 

On a side note, I'm sure none of these UK fans have ever bashed the Bengals for bringing in guys with questionable character.

What I don't get is, the NCAA cleared Rose to play, what is their (the NCAA) punishment for clearing an ineligible player? Why would Memphis even look in to the academic background of a kid if the NCAA has cleared them?

I know some of the people in this forum will disagree with me...but I'm totally on board with this. If a player does something completely outside the realm of the university AND the NCAA clears this player, I struggle to see why the university should be punished.

I am finding this punishment of Memphis interesting.

 

It begs some questions from me if the NCAA strips Memphis of their banner.

 

 

WHY did the NCAA not do the same for Kansas from the same game? Were there not similar accusations against one or two players on that team? :idunno:

 

WHY did the NCAA not do the same for Duke in '99 when it was later discovered that Maggette had taken money from an AAU coach prior to his Duke enrollment? :confused:

 

 

What a double standard IMO. :puke:

I'm not very familiar with the two cases you mention but I definitely agree that there seems to be a double standard.

If a student doesn't have valid entrance qualifications he would be ineligible to participate in extracurriculars. Thus, Memphis played an ineligible player. Any time an ineligible player plays, wins are vacated.

Did you read the thread? Did you hear about UMass? Rules were broken.

 

IMO, it's the old "lack of institutional control". He brought them in, he's responsible for showing them how to do things the right way. Once is an exception, multiple times???

 

On a side note, I'm sure none of these UK fans have ever bashed the Bengals for bringing in guys with questionable character.

 

Apparently you didn't read it though, Calipari has never been charged with breaking any sort of NCAA rules. Yes, I know there is skepticism wherever he goes but until he is proven guilty he is innocent in the eyes of the NCAA.

Apparently you didn't read it though, Calipari has never been charged with breaking any sort of NCAA rules. Yes, I know there is skepticism wherever he goes but until he is proven guilty he is innocent in the eyes of the NCAA.

 

I understand that he wasn't charged. That was my initial point; and where I knew UK fans would go.

 

Are you okay with him bringing in players that DO break the rules, multiple times?

Here is what they said after it was revealed that Corey Magette had accepted money before playing for Duke:

 

The standard for that (punishment) is whether the institution knew or should have known that Maggette was ineligible or if Maggette himself knew or should have known that he was ineligible.

 

The way I read this; it's Duke, so it's okay.

 

Also, Kansas player Darrel Arthur, who played for Kansas in the championship game against Rose and Memphis, was found to have cheated on some of his exams, but the NCAA said there was no way for Kansas to have known about that. What's the difference?

If a student doesn't have valid entrance qualifications he would be ineligible to participate in extracurriculars. Thus, Memphis played an ineligible player. Any time an ineligible player plays, wins are vacated.

According to the NCAA, the student had valid entrance qualifications, therefore he was eligible at the time.

I understand that he wasn't charged. That was my initial point; and where I knew UK fans would go.

 

Are you okay with him bringing in players that DO break the rules, multiple times?

 

Answer me this. Rose was breaking the rules by allegedly having someone else take his ACT for him. Now how does Calipari know any different than what the score shows, and him saying yes I took the test. I mean if the people supervising the ACT didn't do or say anything then how is a coach at a university supposed to think any different?

 

I'm saying, Calipari recruits hard and aggressive and he may push the limits, but in some of these cases it's not really on the coach because, in some instances, I'm sure the player hides grade information so that he can play college basketball because that is his ticket to the NBA.

According to the NCAA, the student had valid entrance qualifications, therefore he was eligible at the time.

 

:thumb:

Recruited players that were cheaters and thugs just like at Memphis.

 

Thugs? What a biased statement...

 

This thread has done nothing for you except not allow anyone during the UK season to take any argument you present seriously. Coach Calipari is cleared of any wrongdoings and his work ethic while at UK already is second to none. Jealousy usually follows.

Thugs? What a biased statement...

 

This thread has done nothing for you except not allow anyone during the UK season to take any argument you present seriously. Coach Calipari is cleared of any wrongdoings and his work ethic while at UK already is second to none. Jealousy usually follows.

 

:thumb::thumb::thumb:

I harbor a grudge that just won't go away and I like to laugh when things are going downhill.

 

Prayers for you. For something to bother you this much is not healthy.

Thugs? What a biased statement...

 

This thread has done nothing for you except not allow anyone during the UK season to take any argument you present seriously. Coach Calipari is cleared of any wrongdoings and his work ethic while at UK already is second to none. Jealousy usually follows.

 

Well he had players beat up their girlfriends on multiple occassions at Memphis and run in to the law for many other reasons.

Prayers for you. For something to bother you this much is not healthy.

 

:thumb: