Author Topic: UofL hoops under investigation for alleged use of escorts in recruiting  (Read 3585 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Run49er

  • Moderator
  • Chancellor
  • *****
  • Posts: 12087
« Last Edit: October 03, 2015, 02:39:50 pm by Run49er »


JB

  • Sophomore
  • *
  • Posts: 619
I am shocked that a good, moral man such as Rick Pitino would let this happen.
"Frankly I'm not going to deal with head cases.  Life is too short." - Mark Price


d-roc49

  • Walk On
  • *
  • Posts: 30
When I hear these types of stories coming from college athletics, it always makes me wonder how many other "traditional powers" get away with this stuff.  The University of Colorado football program got caught for similar actions a couple of years ago.


Gassman

  • Junior
  • *
  • Posts: 1362
If there is an investigation and this stuff is proven and any of the involved players were minors at the time of the incident it's going to be a lot worse than losing your job. Somebody will be looking at prison.


TRLeader

  • Senior
  • **
  • Posts: 1723
  • #1 TWill fan
I am shocked that a good, moral man such as Rick Pitino would let this happen.

I laughed.

Kinda like when I hear people rave about how good of a coach Calipari is. 
So good he can't win a National Championship with 4 1st rd picks on the roster.
CLEAN SLATE for 49er Basketball

:49ers:


stonecoldken

  • Chancellor
  • ******
  • Posts: 12845
Dude, who cares.  None of my business if they get a little somethin', somethin'.

Gassman the age of consent in KY is 16.  I doubt anyone under 16 is going on recruiting visits.


& since when are ho's supposed to tell?
« Last Edit: October 05, 2015, 08:47:21 am by stonecoldken »
CHP sold out.  I declare Nick McEntyre our Chancellor-In-Exile!

JFelt quote about CHP.  "Stake your claim.  As long as UNC-CH doesn't want it first."

Taylor Swift, Jewel, Katy Perry, SE Cupp, Jennifer Garner, Gwen Stefani, Jessica Alba, & Eva Mendes are my Baby Mama's.


Run49er

  • Moderator
  • Chancellor
  • *****
  • Posts: 12087


cltniners

  • Guest


Run49er

  • Moderator
  • Chancellor
  • *****
  • Posts: 12087




ghostofclt

  • Walk On
  • *
  • Posts: 130
clt says the acc is very classy.


4ever niner

  • Assistant Coach
  • ***
  • Posts: 4456
Banners in the Dean Dome getting a bit nervous?


Run49er

  • Moderator
  • Chancellor
  • *****
  • Posts: 12087
Banners in the Dean Dome getting a bit nervous?
Mike Decourcy thinks so!
Quote
There have been ten instances of teams that reached the Final Four having those appearances stricken from the record. That included 2008, when Memphis’ Derrick Rose missed a free throw with 10.8 seconds left that might have clinched the title for the Tigers; a year later, the NCAA removed that Final Four appearance because Rose’s qualifying admissions test score subsequently was vacated by the testing service.

The disparity in the NCAA’s handling of Arthur’s and Rose’s circumstances suggested the result of the game played a part in their dispensations.

Which is why many of us assumed for years that whatever transpires with North Carolina’s academic case would not involve the removal of championships won during the time period the NCAA is investigating.

We can’t say for certain that the Tar Heels are in jeopardy now, but surely they’re sweating more than they might have been Wednesday.
Sportingnews.com: NCAA STRIPPING LOUISVILLE'S 2013 CHAMPIONSHIP BANNER HAS RICK PITINO, CARDINALS FURIOUS




49r9r

  • Head Coach
  • ****
  • Posts: 5447
Charlotte 49er Campus Beer Drinking Contest Runner Up 1974, 1975, 1976


NinerAdvocate

  • MemberPF
  • Chancellor
  • ******
  • Posts: 14832
    • http://ansonw.bol.ucla.edu/games/MiniPutt3.html
What would UNCheat say if they had been accused of what UL has been accused of:

1. Regular students had access to hookers too. Therefore, it is not an NCAA violation;

2. NCAA bylaws do not mention hookers or escorts. Therefore, the NCAA has no jurisdiction or capability to punish us;

3. They weren't hookers. They were "anomalous girlfriends" or "irregular dates";

4. "Were they hookers? By any normal person's standards, yes. But they aren't the kind of hookers the NCAA can punish us for...."

5. "The hookers were rigorous and met all university standards";

6. The hookers were not fake. They were easy. And the NCAA doesn't care about easy hookers;

7. Every school has easy hookers. If the NCAA starts punishing for that, you might as well shut down all of college athletics;

8. The hookers worked on the academic side of the university and not for the athletic department. So its all good;

9. The coaches were not themselves the pimps for the hookers and didn't know about them. Therefore, not an athletic or NCAA issue;

10. The hookers were not special favors for athletes. They were provided for struggling students who, we felt, could not get a hooker on their own;

11. The NCAA doesn't want to get into the business of deciding "who is a hooker and who is not a hooker." That is an accreditation issue, not an NCAA issue;

12. The students did the hookers that were assigned to them;

13. The hookers didn't do anything wrong and were not a violation. However, we have fired all the powerless underlings involved and instituted over 70 reforms to make sure the hookers don't come back.

14. The hookers were customized educational opportunities.
Charlotte 49ers - TITLE IX CHAMPIONS, July 1, 1990- Present!

Official 49ers AD Moto: Minimum Necessarium Esse, Nihil Magis

https://i.imgur.com/74Mcl1t.jpg


ghostofclt

  • Walk On
  • *
  • Posts: 130
What would UNCheat say if they had been accused of what UL has been accused of:

1. Regular students had access to hookers too. Therefore, it is not an NCAA violation;

2. NCAA bylaws do not mention hookers or escorts. Therefore, the NCAA has no jurisdiction or capability to punish us;

3. They weren't hookers. They were "anomalous girlfriends" or "irregular dates";

4. "Were they hookers? By any normal person's standards, yes. But they aren't the kind of hookers the NCAA can punish us for...."

5. "The hookers were rigorous and met all university standards";

6. The hookers were not fake. They were easy. And the NCAA doesn't care about easy hookers;

7. Every school has easy hookers. If the NCAA starts punishing for that, you might as well shut down all of college athletics;

8. The hookers worked on the academic side of the university and not for the athletic department. So its all good;

9. The coaches were not themselves the pimps for the hookers and didn't know about them. Therefore, not an athletic or NCAA issue;

10. The hookers were not special favors for athletes. They were provided for struggling students who, we felt, could not get a hooker on their own;

11. The NCAA doesn't want to get into the business of deciding "who is a hooker and who is not a hooker." That is an accreditation issue, not an NCAA issue;

12. The students did the hookers that were assigned to them;

13. The hookers didn't do anything wrong and were not a violation. However, we have fired all the powerless underlings involved and instituted over 70 reforms to make sure the hookers don't come back.

14. The hookers were customized educational opportunities.

clt says this is great work. and adds Good Ol Roy knows nothing about any hookers. Good ol Roy thinks a hooker is where he hangs his fancy jackets.


TRLeader

  • Senior
  • **
  • Posts: 1723
  • #1 TWill fan
What would UNCheat say if they had been accused of what UL has been accused of:

1. Regular students had access to hookers too. Therefore, it is not an NCAA violation;

2. NCAA bylaws do not mention hookers or escorts. Therefore, the NCAA has no jurisdiction or capability to punish us;

3. They weren't hookers. They were "anomalous girlfriends" or "irregular dates";

4. "Were they hookers? By any normal person's standards, yes. But they aren't the kind of hookers the NCAA can punish us for...."

5. "The hookers were rigorous and met all university standards";

6. The hookers were not fake. They were easy. And the NCAA doesn't care about easy hookers;

7. Every school has easy hookers. If the NCAA starts punishing for that, you might as well shut down all of college athletics;

8. The hookers worked on the academic side of the university and not for the athletic department. So its all good;

9. The coaches were not themselves the pimps for the hookers and didn't know about them. Therefore, not an athletic or NCAA issue;

10. The hookers were not special favors for athletes. They were provided for struggling students who, we felt, could not get a hooker on their own;

11. The NCAA doesn't want to get into the business of deciding "who is a hooker and who is not a hooker." That is an accreditation issue, not an NCAA issue;

12. The students did the hookers that were assigned to them;

13. The hookers didn't do anything wrong and were not a violation. However, we have fired all the powerless underlings involved and instituted over 70 reforms to make sure the hookers don't come back.

14. The hookers were customized educational opportunities.


Awesome!!


I wish Twitter allowed enough characters that you could throw that out on the Twitter machine!
CLEAN SLATE for 49er Basketball

:49ers:


TRLeader

  • Senior
  • **
  • Posts: 1723
  • #1 TWill fan
What would UNCheat say if they had been accused of what UL has been accused of:

1. Regular students had access to hookers too. Therefore, it is not an NCAA violation;

2. NCAA bylaws do not mention hookers or escorts. Therefore, the NCAA has no jurisdiction or capability to punish us;

3. They weren't hookers. They were "anomalous girlfriends" or "irregular dates";

4. "Were they hookers? By any normal person's standards, yes. But they aren't the kind of hookers the NCAA can punish us for...."

5. "The hookers were rigorous and met all university standards";

6. The hookers were not fake. They were easy. And the NCAA doesn't care about easy hookers;

7. Every school has easy hookers. If the NCAA starts punishing for that, you might as well shut down all of college athletics;

8. The hookers worked on the academic side of the university and not for the athletic department. So its all good;

9. The coaches were not themselves the pimps for the hookers and didn't know about them. Therefore, not an athletic or NCAA issue;

10. The hookers were not special favors for athletes. They were provided for struggling students who, we felt, could not get a hooker on their own;

11. The NCAA doesn't want to get into the business of deciding "who is a hooker and who is not a hooker." That is an accreditation issue, not an NCAA issue;

12. The students did the hookers that were assigned to them;

13. The hookers didn't do anything wrong and were not a violation. However, we have fired all the powerless underlings involved and instituted over 70 reforms to make sure the hookers don't come back.

14. The hookers were customized educational opportunities.


Awesome!!


I wish Twitter allowed enough characters that you could throw that out on the Twitter machine!


NVM...done!


https://twitter.com/bakerta49er/status/875810250468753409
CLEAN SLATE for 49er Basketball

:49ers:


Run49er

  • Moderator
  • Chancellor
  • *****
  • Posts: 12087
Mike Decourcy not overly impressed with  the outcome.

Sportingnews.com: NCAA INFRACTIONS COMMITTEE LETS LOUISVILLE OFF EASY FOR ITS WORST OFFENSES
« Last Edit: June 16, 2017, 08:06:56 pm by Run49er »


Nugget

  • Assistant Coach
  • ***
  • Posts: 4447
Dear Norm-

I work with two Carolina grads that are as nice as they come. Smart enough to be somewhat quiet on the academic fraud topic, and supportive of the Niners as long as we are not playing each other. My question is, will it be inappropriate to bring them black cupcakes and do the Carlton Dance if they​ have to vacate a National Championship?

Sincerely,

Shallow and Happy
Hey 49er undergrads, you are bigger than UNC-CH.  Start acting like it!


 

* Charlotte 49ers News

* State of Charlotte

* Videos