(11-09-2019 10:55 AM)BandwagonJumper Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 10:16 AM)pkptigers07 Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 09:27 AM)roundhouse74 Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 08:55 AM)CUSA_NEWS Wrote:  NCAA claims it doesn't matter if one donates $10 or a $1M that makes you a booster. If that's the case ALL coaches are boosters. Pretty sure every coach has donated something to the school that make millions at coaching and definitely have donated to ther alma mater.

Juwan Howard (who just landed a top recruit) hasn't donated to Michigan? Yea right.

The NCAA would say that if all you are is a booster, then that's fine, but, if you're a booster and you help a recruit, then that's wrong. The defense here would have to be Penny's job when he helped Wiseman, as, clearly, he wasn't recruiting him for UofM at that point (at least not as its coach).

It would be interesting to know what would have happened if Memphis hadn't hired Penny, but still recruited Wiseman. Would they still say that Wiseman received benefits from a Memphis booster (Penny) and, therefore, couldn't sign with Memphis? I bet you could find hundreds, maybe thousands of kids helped by people who, at some point in their lives, contributed to colleges. You'd decimate college sports if you made them all ineligible.

If Memphis has not hired Penny, Wiseman would still be ineligible based on Penny being a booster.

People saying Penny wasn’t a booster because he made a million dollar donation 10 years ago are just kidding themselves. The real term the NCAA used is “representative of institutions athletics interests” and Penny met there standard by the donation, his status as a former player, and likely a fair amount of involvement with the program over the past 25+ years.

The university and Wisemans best arguments are 1. That Penny as a friend, former AAU coach, and current HS coach was just helping a family in need and would/did do similar things for others in need and 2. The NCAA inflicted serious harm on Wiseman and the university by changing courses for no apparent reason.

Argument 2 probably has the best legal footing IF the reports are true that they had all info in May and formally indicated he would be eligible and then changed their decision based on 0 new evidence. I’m not sure I buy the no new evidence deal as the NCAA doesn’t typically reopen things without some cause. I’m hoping that whatever new info they may have had turns out to be BS or insignificant to the point that a judge calls them on it and places a permanent injunction.

word on the street is the payment info wasn't disclosed until after the clearance

i know that's not what the school and lawyers are saying, just what i heard

That would make more sense...

I think that post titles like “Ballin Wins” shouldn’t be used for when you think he’ll win, but reserved for when he actually wins. It looks like breaking news, and it’s certainly not.

(11-09-2019 10:56 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 10:55 AM)BandwagonJumper Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 10:16 AM)pkptigers07 Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 09:27 AM)roundhouse74 Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 08:55 AM)CUSA_NEWS Wrote:  NCAA claims it doesn't matter if one donates $10 or a $1M that makes you a booster. If that's the case ALL coaches are boosters. Pretty sure every coach has donated something to the school that make millions at coaching and definitely have donated to ther alma mater.

Juwan Howard (who just landed a top recruit) hasn't donated to Michigan? Yea right.

The NCAA would say that if all you are is a booster, then that's fine, but, if you're a booster and you help a recruit, then that's wrong. The defense here would have to be Penny's job when he helped Wiseman, as, clearly, he wasn't recruiting him for UofM at that point (at least not as its coach).

It would be interesting to know what would have happened if Memphis hadn't hired Penny, but still recruited Wiseman. Would they still say that Wiseman received benefits from a Memphis booster (Penny) and, therefore, couldn't sign with Memphis? I bet you could find hundreds, maybe thousands of kids helped by people who, at some point in their lives, contributed to colleges. You'd decimate college sports if you made them all ineligible.

If Memphis has not hired Penny, Wiseman would still be ineligible based on Penny being a booster.

People saying Penny wasn’t a booster because he made a million dollar donation 10 years ago are just kidding themselves. The real term the NCAA used is “representative of institutions athletics interests” and Penny met there standard by the donation, his status as a former player, and likely a fair amount of involvement with the program over the past 25+ years.

The university and Wisemans best arguments are 1. That Penny as a friend, former AAU coach, and current HS coach was just helping a family in need and would/did do similar things for others in need and 2. The NCAA inflicted serious harm on Wiseman and the university by changing courses for no apparent reason.

Argument 2 probably has the best legal footing IF the reports are true that they had all info in May and formally indicated he would be eligible and then changed their decision based on 0 new evidence. I’m not sure I buy the no new evidence deal as the NCAA doesn’t typically reopen things without some cause. I’m hoping that whatever new info they may have had turns out to be BS or insignificant to the point that a judge calls them on it and places a permanent injunction.

word on the street is the payment info wasn't disclosed until after the clearance

i know that's not what the school and lawyers are saying, just what i heard

That would make more sense...

In the lawsuit that was filed by Wisemans lawyers, they stated that the NCAA sent a letter stating a reinterpretation of the bylaws. Doesn’t seem like there was new additional information. Fishman stated their main argument is the NCAA is being arbitrary and capricious in their decision and wiseman is potentially losing millions based on their arbitrariness.

Ballin also likely to hurt the university if there are indeed additional facts that arose after the initial clearing

A very real possibility

(11-09-2019 11:11 AM)Mimi Wrote:  Ballin also likely to hurt the university if there are indeed additional facts that arose after the initial clearing

A very real possibility

If the only evidence is they realized that Hardaway was a Booster than that is stupid and they should be held accountable.

(11-09-2019 11:16 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 11:11 AM)Mimi Wrote:  Ballin also likely to hurt the university if there are indeed additional facts that arose after the initial clearing

A very real possibility

If the only evidence is they realized that Hardaway was a Booster than that is stupid and they should be held accountable.

Will all former athletes who have donated to their schools forever be forbidden from coaching? Better go back retroactively and vacate all wins by former players turned coach for every school just to be safe.

(11-09-2019 11:11 AM)Mimi Wrote:  Ballin also likely to hurt the university if there are indeed additional facts that arose after the initial clearing

A very real possibility

Dr Rudd and the University fully supports Wiseman and Penny in their public statement. If there was an inkling of additional information, and the NCAA would have most certainly let them know of it, then the University statement would have been very measured.

They would not be prohibited from coaching

But any kid who they gave $11,500 to would be ineligible to play for the school or them

(11-09-2019 11:18 AM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 11:16 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 11:11 AM)Mimi Wrote:  Ballin also likely to hurt the university if there are indeed additional facts that arose after the initial clearing

A very real possibility

If the only evidence is they realized that Hardaway was a Booster than that is stupid and they should be held accountable.

Will all former athletes who have donated to their schools forever be forbidden from coaching? Better go back retroactively and vacate all wins by former players turned coach for every school just to be safe.

I think this has been explained...

A booster can recruit if he is a coach...That is not an issue.

A booster not in a recruiting position cannot provide any benefits to prospective athletes or it is a violation. Penny was a booster in a non recruiting position so it would be a violation.

(11-09-2019 09:49 AM)CUSA_NEWS Wrote:  Penny helped Wiseman, A Lo, thousands of other players. Thre NCAA also claims it is acceptable so long as the help/benefit was available to others which it was.

A Lo moved in with penny for a time when his family wad unable to provide for A Lo. Penny helped other players as well just like any teacher in America does with their students. Teachers buy school supplies, allow kids to live with them etc. just like Penny and it's no big deal.

This is about politics. The same with the Strict Liability ruling which has icky been used against Memphis. UNC players were found to have taken fake courses and thre ncaa forgot about strict liability. Roy "didn't know" so no harm no foul.....

UNC made the bogus classes available to all students. That's what saved them.

It would be a violation that based on the unique history could have very possibly resulted in a short suspension and censure or the like

NOW we are all in, having played him even after the notification

Lose and it will not be a minor suspension

As much as I get the frustration the impatience could very well hurt us long term

(11-09-2019 10:55 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 10:16 AM)pkptigers07 Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 09:27 AM)roundhouse74 Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 08:55 AM)CUSA_NEWS Wrote:  NCAA claims it doesn't matter if one donates $10 or a $1M that makes you a booster. If that's the case ALL coaches are boosters. Pretty sure every coach has donated something to the school that make millions at coaching and definitely have donated to ther alma mater.

Juwan Howard (who just landed a top recruit) hasn't donated to Michigan? Yea right.

The NCAA would say that if all you are is a booster, then that's fine, but, if you're a booster and you help a recruit, then that's wrong. The defense here would have to be Penny's job when he helped Wiseman, as, clearly, he wasn't recruiting him for UofM at that point (at least not as its coach).

It would be interesting to know what would have happened if Memphis hadn't hired Penny, but still recruited Wiseman. Would they still say that Wiseman received benefits from a Memphis booster (Penny) and, therefore, couldn't sign with Memphis? I bet you could find hundreds, maybe thousands of kids helped by people who, at some point in their lives, contributed to colleges. You'd decimate college sports if you made them all ineligible.

If Memphis has not hired Penny, Wiseman would still be ineligible based on Penny being a booster.

People saying Penny wasn’t a booster because he made a million dollar donation 10 years ago are just kidding themselves. The real term the NCAA used is “representative of institutions athletics interests” and Penny met there standard by the donation, his status as a former player, and likely a fair amount of involvement with the program over the past 25+ years.

The university and Wisemans best arguments are 1. That Penny as a friend, former AAU coach, and current HS coach was just helping a family in need and would/did do similar things for others in need and 2. The NCAA inflicted serious harm on Wiseman and the university by changing courses for no apparent reason.

Argument 2 probably has the best legal footing IF the reports are true that they had all info in May and formally indicated he would be eligible and then changed their decision based on 0 new evidence. I’m not sure I buy the no new evidence deal as the NCAA doesn’t typically reopen things without some cause. I’m hoping that whatever new info they may have had turns out to be BS or insignificant to the point that a judge calls them on it and places a permanent injunction.

100% agree...

If the NCAA truly didn't get any additional evidence and then in turn stated that Wiseman was declared eligible in ERROR than Wiseman should be good.

The juice is....who reopened the assessment of his eligibility, when and why? If there was no new information, get NCAA employees on the stand to explain why re-open the file. Then check their phone records and bank account statements. This smells dirty. I wrote several chapters of flash fiction in my head about this part last night when I couldn't sleep.

Also, was it a single person at the NCAA or a committee? Also, who was responsible/accountable for approving eligibility originally? Because if that person, i.e. Deputy Director made a mistake, then they should be fired. This is a scandal that goes very deep. Either way, individuals at the NCAA need to be outed in court.

(11-09-2019 11:52 AM)ShilohTiger Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 10:55 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 10:16 AM)pkptigers07 Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 09:27 AM)roundhouse74 Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 08:55 AM)CUSA_NEWS Wrote:  NCAA claims it doesn't matter if one donates $10 or a $1M that makes you a booster. If that's the case ALL coaches are boosters. Pretty sure every coach has donated something to the school that make millions at coaching and definitely have donated to ther alma mater.

Juwan Howard (who just landed a top recruit) hasn't donated to Michigan? Yea right.

The NCAA would say that if all you are is a booster, then that's fine, but, if you're a booster and you help a recruit, then that's wrong. The defense here would have to be Penny's job when he helped Wiseman, as, clearly, he wasn't recruiting him for UofM at that point (at least not as its coach).

It would be interesting to know what would have happened if Memphis hadn't hired Penny, but still recruited Wiseman. Would they still say that Wiseman received benefits from a Memphis booster (Penny) and, therefore, couldn't sign with Memphis? I bet you could find hundreds, maybe thousands of kids helped by people who, at some point in their lives, contributed to colleges. You'd decimate college sports if you made them all ineligible.

If Memphis has not hired Penny, Wiseman would still be ineligible based on Penny being a booster.

People saying Penny wasn’t a booster because he made a million dollar donation 10 years ago are just kidding themselves. The real term the NCAA used is “representative of institutions athletics interests” and Penny met there standard by the donation, his status as a former player, and likely a fair amount of involvement with the program over the past 25+ years.

The university and Wisemans best arguments are 1. That Penny as a friend, former AAU coach, and current HS coach was just helping a family in need and would/did do similar things for others in need and 2. The NCAA inflicted serious harm on Wiseman and the university by changing courses for no apparent reason.

Argument 2 probably has the best legal footing IF the reports are true that they had all info in May and formally indicated he would be eligible and then changed their decision based on 0 new evidence. I’m not sure I buy the no new evidence deal as the NCAA doesn’t typically reopen things without some cause. I’m hoping that whatever new info they may have had turns out to be BS or insignificant to the point that a judge calls them on it and places a permanent injunction.

100% agree...

If the NCAA truly didn't get any additional evidence and then in turn stated that Wiseman was declared eligible in ERROR than Wiseman should be good.

The juice is....who reopened the assessment of his eligibility, when and why? If there was no new information, get NCAA employees on the stand to explain why re-open the file. Then check their phone records and bank account statements. This smells dirty. I wrote several chapters of flash fiction in my head about this part last night when I couldn't sleep.

Also, was it a single person at the NCAA or a committee? Also, who was responsible/accountable for approving eligibility originally? Because if that person, i.e. Deputy Director made a mistake, then they should be fired. This is a scandal that goes very deep. Either way, individuals at the NCAA need to be outed in court.

If the NCAA knew of the payment before he was cleared then the NCAA is screwed...

Wiseman may remain ineligible but it is likely that the NCAA could very well be punished heavily financially. It is up to the NCAA how much this is worth to them.

(11-09-2019 11:40 AM)Mimi Wrote:  It would be a violation that based on the unique history could have very possibly resulted in a short suspension and censure or the like

NOW we are all in, having played him even after the notification

Lose and it will not be a minor suspension

As much as I get the frustration the impatience could very well hurt us long term

The university is not all in. The way this was handled is brilliant. The Uof M is a defendant just like the NCAA. The judge basically said he is allowed to play. Memphis can no longer withhold him, even if they wanted to.

I can't find the post but supposedly a new ncaa eligibility official who specialized in enforcements was hired after the ncaa cleared James. Instead of focusing on coaches caught on FBI tapes, it's Memphis in the cross hairs....

I feel like we're missing some info here. The statement from the school implies that the benefit was discovered after the initial review in May. The statement from the attorney seems to contradict that.

Why not just repay the money and take a suspension for a few games? Precedence has already been set on this. There has to be more to the story.

Ballin is awesome. Over 30 years ago he got me out of a speeding ticket. It was pretty cool.

(11-09-2019 12:07 PM)RekeHavoc Wrote:  I feel like we're missing some info here. The statement from the school implies that the benefit was discovered after the initial review in May. The statement from the attorney seems to contradict that.

Why not just repay the money and take a suspension for a few games? Precedence has already been set on this. There has to be more to the story.

Yep. And therein lies the rub

(11-09-2019 10:27 AM)JCraft Wrote:  I'm of the opinion that Da' Rat or one of his evil minions is behind pushing the NCAA to go this route. He's butthurt over Wiseman and others that crippled his chances at a NC this season because they didn't sign with him, pure evil is all that is.

Calipari probably has a letter from the NCAA stating that he is not under investigation in this matter.

(11-09-2019 09:53 AM)tigerderek Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 09:46 AM)GermantownTiger Wrote:  Interesting thoughts in this thread.

The outcome of this situation will likely depend on how far down the rabbit hole the respective attorneys for Wiseman, Penny and the University want to go as all three factions fight the NCAA thugs.

I know that Wiseman will be fine financially effective next year regardless of his eligibility for the remainder of the season...it just takes the wind out of what could've a magical year for the program if he is indeed ruled ineligible.

Penny will be just fine as well, even if he is placed on some sort of probationary status by the NCAA, but I really think he's good in regards to remaining as head coach of the Tigers.

The University itself is the big question. Do they want to fight this thing to the bitter end and really test the NCAA to it's limits and finally get some redemption on overturning the organization's routine overturning of players' eligibility at the drop of a hat when they have ruled the same player eligible just a few months prior? Taking this type of thing to court could take years to battle it out, and I wonder if the U wants to spend the resources and possible damage to it's reputation should they lose such a potentially high profile case?

The university isn’t And imo won’t...I think if Memphis wasn’t listed in that restraining order they prob would have sat him.

I didn’t realize they listed U of M in the TRO. That is brilliant for Wiseman since they would have not played him yesterday otherwise. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out. They are claiming Wiseman did not know about the money. I’m sure they are going through every text message looking for a thank you from him. If he legitimately didn’t, then he has every right to do what he is doing.

This season is essential for him to showcase his skills. Imagine last year if Zion hadn’t got to play for whatever reason. He wouldn’t have generated all the buzz around him. He was the center of a bidding war by shoe companies. It is reasonable that Wiseman could be in the same situation - if he is given the opportunity to play. There are very real financial consequences for him.

The case is incredibly complicated, because who are you actually punishing in this situation? If James didn’t know about the money, then he shouldn’t be punished. If you want to punish Memphis or Penny, then you directly punish James also. The NCAA talks so much about their commitment to the student athletes - so prove it.

On one hand, it sucks, because they’ve tainted this season regardless of how it is resolved. I almost wish they had done the typical thing of ruling him ineligible after the season was over retroactively.

On the other hand, I’m glad they did it now so that James has forced the University into it and the NCAA will be tested. If they ruled him ineligible after the season, then it would have never gone to court.