XLance
Hall of Famer
Posts: 14,431
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 794
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
|
Greensboro's lead sports story
|
|
09-27-2017 07:05 AM |
|
ken d
Hall of Famer
Posts: 17,491
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1226
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
|
RE: Greensboro's lead sports story
If it turns out that there were also Duke and UNC players who got paid, will we ask the same question about those schools? Or do we give them a pass because they are more highly thought of for reasons that have nothing to do with athletics?
|
|
09-27-2017 07:23 AM |
|
Bearcats#1
Ad nauseam King
Posts: 45,310
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 1224
I Root For: Pony94
Location: In your head.
|
RE: Greensboro's lead sports story
UNC isn't highly thought of now -they printed diplomas for Pete sake
|
|
09-27-2017 07:39 AM |
|
georgia_tech_swagger
Res publica non dominetur
Posts: 51,449
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 2027
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU, WYO
Location: Upstate, SC
|
RE: Greensboro's lead sports story
It is disheartening to try to brand yourself as the academic high road in comparison to the SEC and then you have Miami, UNC, and Louisville cheat as hard as UGA or Auburn or Bama ever thought about cheating.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using CSNbbs mobile app
|
|
09-27-2017 07:46 AM |
|
XLance
Hall of Famer
Posts: 14,431
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 794
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
|
RE: Greensboro's lead sports story
(09-27-2017 07:23 AM)ken d Wrote: If it turns out that there were also Duke and UNC players who got paid, will we ask the same question about those schools? Or do we give them a pass because they are more highly thought of for reasons that have nothing to do with athletics?
Who knows, It could be an indication of the general atmosphere in which we now live or it could just be revealing an unstated bias against Louisville by the writer of the article (but some editor decided to publish it on the front page of the Sports section).
|
|
09-27-2017 07:56 AM |
|
JerryJeff
All American
Posts: 3,486
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 215
I Root For:
Location:
|
RE: Greensboro's lead sports story
Buyers remorse... Looks like the question asked a couple of years ago has been answered.
|
|
09-27-2017 08:17 AM |
|
Lenvillecards
Heisman
Posts: 6,463
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 376
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
|
Greensboro's lead sports story
(09-27-2017 07:46 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: It is disheartening to try to brand yourself as the academic high road in comparison to the SEC and then you have Miami, UNC, and Louisville cheat as hard as UGA or Auburn or Bama ever thought about cheating.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using CSNbbs mobile app
Didn't GT just sign with Adidas & pick up a commitment from a top player?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
|
|
09-27-2017 08:28 AM |
|
Dasville
Heisman
Posts: 7,796
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 246
I Root For: UofL
Location:
|
RE: Greensboro's lead sports story
These truly are great days for sports writers. I remember not long ago a writer degrading UofL about the WF situation only to find, after the self righteous indignation, that one of his schools did the same.
This truly is defining days for the "Press"
|
|
09-27-2017 08:34 AM |
|
orangefan
Heisman
Posts: 5,223
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 358
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: New England
|
RE: Greensboro's lead sports story
(09-27-2017 08:17 AM)JerryJeff Wrote: Buyers remorse... Looks like the question asked a couple of years ago has been answered.
Despite its high profile in basketball, Louisville was added for one reason: football. If it was about basketball, the ACC would have added UConn -- not because UConn is better than UL, but because UConn is similar in basketball but with much stronger academics.
(This post was last modified: 09-27-2017 08:36 AM by orangefan.)
|
|
09-27-2017 08:36 AM |
|
H.U.S.T.L.E.
Special Teams
Posts: 600
Joined: Mar 2016
Reputation: 67
I Root For: VT / JMU
Location: Northern VA
|
RE: Greensboro's lead sports story
(09-27-2017 08:36 AM)orangefan Wrote: (09-27-2017 08:17 AM)JerryJeff Wrote: Buyers remorse... Looks like the question asked a couple of years ago has been answered.
Despite its high profile in basketball, Louisville was added for one reason: football. If it was about basketball, the ACC would have added UConn -- not because UConn is better than UL, but because UConn is similar in basketball but with much stronger academics.
I disagree that it was solely about football.
It was really about bringing in a well-rounded athletics program and Louisville fit the bill moreso than anyone else. Being really good in football was a factor as was having an elite mens basketball program, but Louisville has long pumped money into sports across the board. They brought successful baseball and soccer programs (M & W) too.
|
|
09-27-2017 08:46 AM |
|
Wolfman
All American
Posts: 4,465
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 181
I Root For: The Cartel
Location: Raleigh, NC
|
RE: Greensboro's lead sports story
(09-27-2017 08:46 AM)H.U.S.T.L.E. Wrote: (09-27-2017 08:36 AM)orangefan Wrote: (09-27-2017 08:17 AM)JerryJeff Wrote: Buyers remorse... Looks like the question asked a couple of years ago has been answered.
Despite its high profile in basketball, Louisville was added for one reason: football. If it was about basketball, the ACC would have added UConn -- not because UConn is better than UL, but because UConn is similar in basketball but with much stronger academics.
I disagree that it was solely about football.
It was really about bringing in a well-rounded athletics program and Louisville fit the bill moreso than anyone else. Being really good in football was a factor as was having an elite mens basketball program, but Louisville has long pumped money into sports across the board. They brought successful baseball and soccer programs (M & W) too.
It was football. More precisely, to appease the schools like FSU and Clemson. Something along the lines of, "You got Syracuse and Pitt, we get Louisville."
|
|
09-27-2017 09:09 AM |
|
Wolfman
All American
Posts: 4,465
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 181
I Root For: The Cartel
Location: Raleigh, NC
|
RE: Greensboro's lead sports story
(09-27-2017 08:17 AM)JerryJeff Wrote: Buyers remorse... Looks like the question asked a couple of years ago has been answered.
That is an editorial in a local newspaper. No quotes or comments from anybody at any ACC school. No quotes or comments from the ACC. Well, there was the generic, Quote:An ACC spokesperson chose not to comment, saying the decision to bring Louisville into the ACC was a decision made by the school presidents. The vote was unanimous.
I'm not saying the big wigs aren't saying things behind closed doors but it is a quantum leap from that editorial to saying the ACC has buyers remorse.
|
|
09-27-2017 09:20 AM |
|
mike012779
Special Teams
Posts: 605
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 12
I Root For: Uconn
Location:
|
RE: Greensboro's lead sports story
(09-27-2017 08:46 AM)H.U.S.T.L.E. Wrote: (09-27-2017 08:36 AM)orangefan Wrote: (09-27-2017 08:17 AM)JerryJeff Wrote: Buyers remorse... Looks like the question asked a couple of years ago has been answered.
Despite its high profile in basketball, Louisville was added for one reason: football. If it was about basketball, the ACC would have added UConn -- not because UConn is better than UL, but because UConn is similar in basketball but with much stronger academics.
I disagree that it was solely about football.
It was really about bringing in a well-rounded athletics program and Louisville fit the bill moreso than anyone else. Being really good in football was a factor as was having an elite mens basketball program, but Louisville has long pumped money into sports across the board. They brought successful baseball and soccer programs (M & W) too.
They BOUGHT successful baseball and soccer programs. I fixed it for you
|
|
09-27-2017 09:23 AM |
|
Hood-rich
Smarter Than the Average Lib
Posts: 9,300
Joined: May 2016
I Root For: ECU & CSU
Location: The Hood
|
RE: Greensboro's lead sports story
(09-27-2017 08:36 AM)orangefan Wrote: (09-27-2017 08:17 AM)JerryJeff Wrote: Buyers remorse... Looks like the question asked a couple of years ago has been answered.
Despite its high profile in basketball, Louisville was added for one reason: football. If it was about basketball, the ACC would have added UConn -- not because UConn is better than UL, but because UConn is similar in basketball but with much stronger academics.
So you don't think this issue (not talking just UL or the schools mentioned) expands beyond basketball? I fully expect this thing to balloon when the coaches and adidas exec starts singing.
|
|
09-27-2017 09:35 AM |
|
georgia_tech_swagger
Res publica non dominetur
Posts: 51,449
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 2027
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU, WYO
Location: Upstate, SC
|
RE: Greensboro's lead sports story
(09-27-2017 08:28 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote: Didn't GT just sign with Adidas & pick up a commitment from a top player?
Hey, he hasn't signed a LOI!
And GT isn't wearing Adidas for another year. And GT doesn't engage in this sort of behavior. If you see a flood of 5* neanderthals who can't write an essay paper suddenly committing to GT left and right we can re-evaluate.
|
|
09-27-2017 09:40 AM |
|
Hood-rich
Smarter Than the Average Lib
Posts: 9,300
Joined: May 2016
I Root For: ECU & CSU
Location: The Hood
|
RE: Greensboro's lead sports story
NC State is an adidas school. They recruited a lot better under Gottfried. New coach (who worked under Pitino) now so who knows? It won't be limited to the adidas schools though.
(This post was last modified: 09-27-2017 09:44 AM by Hood-rich.)
|
|
09-27-2017 09:41 AM |
|
KNIGHTTIME
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13,511
Joined: May 2002
Reputation: 308
I Root For: '17 Natty Champ
Location:
|
RE: Greensboro's lead sports story
And I thought Pitino was a honest guy. I'm shocked by the news today.
|
|
09-27-2017 09:47 AM |
|
TexanMark
Legend
Posts: 25,722
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation: 1334
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: St. Augustine, FL
|
RE: Greensboro's lead sports story
(09-27-2017 08:17 AM)JerryJeff Wrote: Buyers remorse... Looks like the question asked a couple of years ago has been answered.
Humble Brag by Mr. Walker
|
|
09-27-2017 09:55 AM |
|
TexanMark
Legend
Posts: 25,722
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation: 1334
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: St. Augustine, FL
|
RE: Greensboro's lead sports story
(09-27-2017 09:40 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: (09-27-2017 08:28 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote: Didn't GT just sign with Adidas & pick up a commitment from a top player?
Hey, he hasn't signed a LOI!
And GT isn't wearing Adidas for another year. And GT doesn't engage in this sort of behavior. If you see a flood of 5* neanderthals who can't write an essay paper suddenly committing to GT left and right we can re-evaluate.
GTech you aren't doing it right.
We all need to learn from UK and the $EC in general how to do this the correct way.
|
|
09-27-2017 09:58 AM |
|
OrangeDude
Special Teams
Posts: 870
Joined: Jun 2017
Reputation: 123
I Root For: Syracuse
Location:
|
RE: Greensboro's lead sports story
I am going to try and avoid the stone throwing here mainly because "those in the know" have been saying this happens all the time to a certain extent and in varying degrees/methods (not necessarily this specific method the FBI focused on), especially in what is now known as the P5 grouping, and has probably been heightened by the fact that the NBA stopped taking kids directly out of high school.
I saw one poster on another board sum it up along these lines (again for the P5 and including other methods such as hiring the kid's parent as a college employee *wink**wink*):
about 1% - don't do this at all
about 69% - have done it infrequently, maybe once every 5-6 years
about 29% - do it frequently, at least twice every 3-4 years
about 1% - do it virtually annually but do it so well they will likely never get caught doing it
Where does your school fall or where do you think they fall?
I am not naive enough to believe that SU is in the 1% that don't do it all. I hope we are at worse in the 69% that have only done it infrequently.
I suspect the fact that we were under a sustained 10-year NCAA investigation may have kept us from doing this particular issue during this specific FBI investigation. One might say it didn't prevent Louisville from getting their hands caught in the cookie jar, but then I suspect the Cards, at least in terms of CBB, falls in the 29% based upon what has been revealed so far.
I don't think this is particularly stone-throwing since the Cards, again as I see it, are in a unique situation from SU. After all the Orange aren't competing directly against an in-state rival that in my mind falls in the latter 1% category of doing it so well they will likely never get caught on any of the various methods they have developed over time. Not saying that excuses the behavior, it just helps to explain why they might feel the pressure more so than others.
Just my thoughts, could be proven totally wrong.
Cheers,
Neil
|
|
09-27-2017 10:17 AM |
|