Lets weigh in on this hypothetical...


UC begins "shady" recruiting in basketball.

It results in five top 10 recruiting classes in a row.
Over a five year span they go to three final fours, two elite eights, and win a national championship.

A year or two after this run the shady recruiting is uncovered. UC is slapped with whatever penalties (loss of two
scholarships and banners come down) does a self ncaa ban for one year to ease sanctions. Mick is fired. Program is left with a full cupboard of players, having to hire a new coach, and a black eye. They remain relevant nationally and continue doing well despite the black eye.


Was it worth it?

(02-20-2015 09:23 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Lets weigh in on this hypothetical...


UC begins "shady" recruiting in basketball.

It results in five top 10 recruiting classes in a row.
Over a five year span they go to three final fours, two elite eights, and win a national championship.

A year or two after this run the shady recruiting is uncovered. UC is slapped with whatever penalties (loss of two
scholarships and banners come down) does a self ncaa ban for one year to ease sanctions. Mick is fired. Program is left with a full cupboard of players, having to hire a new coach, and a black eye.


Was it worth it?

Id sacrifice my first born child for any of my teams to win a championship at this rate

(02-20-2015 09:23 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Lets weigh in on this hypothetical...


UC begins "shady" recruiting in basketball.

It results in five top 10 recruiting classes in a row.
Over a five year span they go to three final fours, two elite eights, and win a national championship.

A year or two after this run the shady recruiting is uncovered. UC is slapped with whatever penalties (loss of two
scholarships and banners come down) does a self ncaa ban for one year to ease sanctions. Mick is fired. Program is left with a full cupboard of players, having to hire a new coach, and a black eye. They remain relevant nationally and continue doing well despite the black eye.


Was it worth it?

Ask a Kentucky fan.

If the wins are vacated and banners come down, then no. While you did get to enjoy the celebration, down the road, it's as if they never won.

(02-20-2015 09:23 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Lets weigh in on this hypothetical...


UC begins "shady" recruiting in basketball.

It results in five top 10 recruiting classes in a row.
Over a five year span they go to three final fours, two elite eights, and win a national championship.

A year or two after this run the shady recruiting is uncovered. UC is slapped with whatever penalties (loss of two
scholarships and banners come down) does a self ncaa ban for one year to ease sanctions. Mick is fired. Program is left with a full cupboard of players, having to hire a new coach, and a black eye. They remain relevant nationally and continue doing well despite the black eye.


Was it worth it?

Yes, the SEC would roll out the red carpet for us.

Nobody cares about "shady recruiting" (within reason, of course), but taking players with off-court issues devalues everyone's degree. I don't care for the way Mick has run the program, but he deserves credit for putting an end to the Thug U. image.

As for your hypothetical, I don't really agree with the premise. Sanctions really set programs back for years, as we at UC know all to well.

(02-20-2015 09:23 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Lets weigh in on this hypothetical...


UC begins "shady" recruiting in basketball.

It results in five top 10 recruiting classes in a row.
Over a five year span they go to three final fours, two elite eights, and win a national championship.

A year or two after this run the shady recruiting is uncovered. UC is slapped with whatever penalties (loss of two
scholarships and banners come down) does a self ncaa ban for one year to ease sanctions. Mick is fired. Program is left with a full cupboard of players, having to hire a new coach, and a black eye. They remain relevant nationally and continue doing well despite the black eye.


Was it worth it?

Nope.

I'm an alumnus, and I don't want anything "shady" regarding how my program is run. I do favor second chances, so I can split the difference with you. I am (and always have been) completely fine with taking on "sketchy" kids. I draw the line with any association to truly bad crimes like sexual assault, but if a potential stud has some possession charges and/or B&E convictions. I'll roll the dice.

I do like the edge/intimidation some questionable players can bring to the court. We won a great number of games, before the ball was ever tipped. To go all in, it must be understood that there is on a short leash, and you can't be afraid to discipline them. However, get some kids in a controlled environment that is focused on basketball and school, and you can actually turn their life around.

Sure, you'll get some Johnny Carsons (RIP), but you'll also end up with some Eric Hicks...again, I roll the dice and give 'em a chance to succeed/fail.

Has a national championship banner been taken down in recent history? Final Four I can remember, but if can't recall anyone having a title stripped.

I have always said two years of probation for every national championship feels about right, as long as you are not stripped of the championship.

(02-20-2015 10:14 AM)Dannyboy Wrote:  Has a national championship banner been taken down in recent history? Final Four I can remember, but if can't recall anyone having a title stripped.

USC was stripped of its 2004 national championship for the Reggie Bush scandal. Of course, being stripped of a national title is pretty worthless IMO. Everyone still knows they won it all that year.

I wouldn't sell my soul for a national championship by cheating. As a degree holding alum from UC I don't want to see the UC basketball program sanctioned for knowingly cheating as it does reflect on the overall institution. In the 1990s I loved Bob and the teams but I did get tired of the backhanded jokes about horse punching, thugs, etc. We could use some of those team's swagger, attitude and muscle.

UK has signed a deal with the devil. It is just a matter of time before Cal high-tails it out of Lexington just like every program he's been at and leaves UK holding the bag. Just ask Memphis and UMass.
http://www.masslive.com/sports/index.ssf...all_a.html
It's not a coincidence that both schools were sanctioned for the same violations. It is how Calipari operates.

A good percentage of UK fans are bball fans only. They didn't attend UK and don't care now and won't care when the scandal breaks and sanctions are imposed if the bball program relfects badly on the university. They only care about UK bball and winning. It's their defacto pro team.

Not worth it.

And not going to happen.

Cronin's recruting philosophy is to take kids that generally are "underrecruited". If a kid has along list, according to Cronin, he's not a UC prospect. So how in the world would
UC EVER have a top 10 class? Your thesis must have been manufactured over heavy alcohol consumption

Or you could just win it fair and square. You don't need "shady" recruiting to win a national title.

Relax folks...this isnt anything other than a hypothetical talking point to see where many of us stand. Im not speaking for or against this scenario.

I like that we're not a mill.

I like that were not a basketball factory.

I like that kids now graduate when they come here.

I like that kids don't end up in the police blotter all the time.

I like how these guys generally represent the University off the court.

I'd also like to win.

I don't think winning and doing it right are mutually exclusive.

(02-20-2015 11:06 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  I like that we're not a mill.

I like that were not a basketball factory.

I like that kids now graduate when they come here.

I like that kids don't end up in the police blotter all the time.

I like how these guys generally represent the University off the court.

I'd also like to win.

I don't think winning and doing it right are mutually exclusive.

Well said

(02-20-2015 10:50 AM)BearcatBeta Wrote:  Cronin's recruting philosophy is to take kids that generally are "underrecruited".

This isn't Cronin's philosophy, its his ceiling. If Mick could consistently land top recruits that were heavily recruited, he absolutely would.

IF it happened and IF it worked, I wouldn't really care about the punishment I don't think.

The problem is that lots try and fail. What are you left with then? A program that is known for cheating and losing and it can really set you back in every way. I don't think we have to look that hard to find schools *cough StJohns SMU* that are trying it or schools *cough UNC USC* that have failed and are currently dealing with it.

When you actually sit down and look at how much the University has changed over the last 30 years it's insane.

Cincinnati programs should be recruiting at a higher level now because of campus environment, conference affiliation and so on.

I really hate to say this, but is it possible that this is the apex of Mick Cronin, have we seen or is this now the best Mick can do ? Losing in the Sweet Sixteen is as far as he has ever taken a team and that was two years ago, first round NCAA or second round maybe all Mick can accomplish. I am not a Mick hater, this is just a question, is this it while Mick is in charge ?