HBO Documentary On NCAA/FBI Coming Soon.

#26
#26
VolGee4 said:
I don’t think I agree, but that’s ok. He has said that he thinks Kansas will get hammered. He knows Pearl has played the dirty recruiting game- even discussed Pearl “recruiting” before his show cause was officially over. His argument for Pitino is that a school should hire him because Miller, Wade, and Pearl still have jobs. He hasn’t spoken positively about Miller either, so I don’t know what you listening to.

I get your argument about the support of Penny in year two. I’m not in total agreement with him, but it does have some truth to it. Some of our fans used the loss of Lamonte Turner as a reason we struggled some, and he wasn’t even a top 5 pick. I don’t think Memphis should have lost to Tulsa, USF, and SMU this year, but not having your best player does change your team.
Click to expand...

Of course, when I brought up our 09-10 team (our Elite 8 team), he changed the goalposts. That team lost Tyler Smith for the season and Brian Williams for several weeks and they GOT BETTER unlike the Memphis team that lost to USF and by 40 to Tulsa.....
 
#27
#27
onevol74 said:
Why should these schools be punished when everyone else is cheating too? If you did not punish UNC or Memphis why should LSU be treated differently? What about Alabama and Auburn football? People keep saying on here that no program is clean, including UT. If you choose not to enforce the rules for the blue bloods then leave the other programs alone. I personally think the NCAA is more like the WWE than a credible institution.
Click to expand...
Because of the difference in the evidence of guilt. It has become just about impossible to punish anyone without there being an abundance of overwhelming incriminating evidence that major rules were violated under the direction of the head coach and discovered within a recent period of time. In the case of LSU, the violations of Will Wade (documented in an FBI audio recording) meet all of that criteria and that will make it harder to sweep under the rug, especially after this HBO documentary has been playing in heavy rotation for about a month. I understand that Mark Emmert doesn't want to act, but it will eventually become untenable for him not to. This story is about to really heat up. Like I said above, actually hearing this in Wade's voice will have it's own impact.
 
#28
#28
"Strong a** offer" can be lied about (an "offer" can be the education, housing, coaching, and other resources). Even "rookie minimum" could be explained away as a joke. But the "tilted" comments would be indefensible. But an offer is different than having evidence of a player actually being bought.

"“The problem was, I know why he (the intermediary) didn’t take it now, it was (expletive) tilted toward the family a little bit,” Wade told Dawkins. “It was tilted toward taking care of the mom, taking care of the kid. Like it was tilted towards that. Now I know for a fact he (the intermediary) didn’t explain everything to the mom. I know now, he didn’t get enough of the piece of the pie in the deal.”

"Hell of an offer (...) especially for a kid who is going to be a two- or three-year kid,” Wade said, an apparent reference to the fact that Smart — although a highly regarded prospect — was expected at the time to need at least two years in college before jumping into the NBA draft.

Wade joked to Dawkins in a separate phone call that the player would be compensated more than the “rookie minimum,” to ESPN, which said it independently confirmed the contents of the wiretapped phone call after Yahoo! Sports first reported its contents Thursday."
 
  • Like
Reactions: MinisterofDef#92
#29
#29
Thunder Good-Oil said:
"Strong a** offer" can be lied about (an "offer" can be the education, housing, coaching, and other resources). Even "rookie minimum" could be explained away as a joke. But the "tilted" comments would be indefensible. But an offer is different than having evidence of a player actually being bought.

"“The problem was, I know why he (the intermediary) didn’t take it now, it was (expletive) tilted toward the family a little bit,” Wade told Dawkins. “It was tilted toward taking care of the mom, taking care of the kid. Like it was tilted towards that. Now I know for a fact he (the intermediary) didn’t explain everything to the mom. I know now, he didn’t get enough of the piece of the pie in the deal.”

"Hell of an offer (...) especially for a kid who is going to be a two- or three-year kid,” Wade said, an apparent reference to the fact that Smart — although a highly regarded prospect — was expected at the time to need at least two years in college before jumping into the NBA draft.

Wade joked to Dawkins in a separate phone call that the player would be compensated more than the “rookie minimum,” to ESPN, which said it independently confirmed the contents of the wiretapped phone call after Yahoo! Sports first reported its contents Thursday."
Click to expand...
No, it can't. Not when the other person involved in the conversation is also providing clarity as to the context of the dialogue. Also, the offer of an illegal inducement is a major rule violation in itself, regardless of whether any money actually ever changed hands or not. There is beyond a reasonable doubt that a major NCAA rule was violated directly by LSU head coach Will Wade, and that this rule violation was committed well within the allotted statutory time period for sanctions.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: cardvolfan
#30
#30
BowlBrother85 said:
No, it can't. Not when the other person involved in the conversation is also providing clarity as to the context of the dialogue. Also, the offer of an illegal inducement is a major rule violation in itself, regardless of whether any money actually ever changed hands or not. There is beyond a reasonable doubt that a major NCAA rule was violated directly by LSU head coach Will Wade, and that this rule violation was committed well within the allotted statutory time period for sanctions.
Click to expand...

Post the "providing clarity as to the context of the dialogue" and you might be able to change my mind. Having a conversation about something illegal isn't evidence that something illegal has actually occurred. And the NCAA is out of money. They won't be able to put up much of a fight if they are challenged.
 
#31
#31
Thunder Good-Oil said:
Post the "providing clarity as to the context of the dialogue" and you might be able to change my mind. Having a conversation about something illegal isn't evidence that something illegal has actually occurred. And the NCAA is out of money. They won't be able to put up much of a fight if they are challenged.
Click to expand...
Having a conversation where you are describing illegal activity that you have already partaken in, certainly will sound like evidence of wrongdoing to an objective and reasonable person... and there are multiple places where Dawkins has described his conversations with both Wade and Miller. I will post what was said later.

And once again, it does not matter if money changed hands or not... the offer of money itself as an inducement, is a violation.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: GoBears
#32
#32
BowlBrother85 said:
Having a conversation where you are describing illegal activity that you have already partaken in, certainly will sound like evidence of wrongdoing to an objective and reasonable person... and there are multiple places where Dawkins has described his conversations with both Wade and Miller. I will post what was said later.

And once again, it does not matter if money changed hands or not... the offer of money itself as an inducement, is a violation.
Click to expand...

But evidence that an actual offer was made is necessary. Talking to a third party about making an offer isn't evidence that an offer was made. It would be a flimsy case and the NCAA likely couldn't afford defending themselves in a civil suit.

Can't wait to see both sides of the conversation that you'll be posting.
 
#33
#33
Thunder Good-Oil said:
Post the "providing clarity as to the context of the dialogue" and you might be able to change my mind. Having a conversation about something illegal isn't evidence that something illegal has actually occurred. And the NCAA is out of money. They won't be able to put up much of a fight if they are challenged.
Click to expand...
These are some quotes from the Pat Forde article in Sports Illustrated on the upcoming HBO documentary called "The Scheme". The title of Forde's article is "Dawkins Documentary Provides Damning Evidence Against Will Wade and Sean Miller".

Christian Dawkins on LSU Head Basketball Coach, Will Wade:

"Just the audacity, you've got to take your hat off to him, bro ... Will Wade is definitely a f****** gangster for what he did." - Christian Dawkins

"They ain't talking about a scholarship offer, bro." - Christian Dawkins on-camera interpretation of his conversation with Will Wade and specifically, the "strong a$$ offer" comment from Wade. This quote alone, runs counter to one of your built-in defenses.

This is a quote from the director of the HBO documentary, Pat Kondelis, on the content of the FBI's audio recordings:

"You listen to those calls and it's clear," said documentary director Pat Kondelis. "The schools, they would have to see this and recognize how damning it is for the coaches. I don't care who gets fired, but it was significant in regard to who got charged and who did not. Who does a majority of the talking in the calls? It's not Christian. The coaches (Miller and Wade) are asking him for help, talking about who they could make offers to."

I understand being skeptical but you are overdoing it. The evidence is there.

The article that I'm referencing is the Pat Forde article on SI.com on March 19, 2020. It goes into even more detail about what to expect from the documentary. None of it is positive for Will Wade.
 
Last edited:
#34
#34
BowlBrother85 said:
These are some quotes from the Pat Forde article in Sports Illustrated on the upcoming HBO documentary called "The Scheme". The title of Forde's article is "Dawkins Documentary Provides Damning Evidence Against Will Wade and Sean Miller".

Christian Dawkins on LSU Head Basketball Coach, Will Wade:

"Just the audacity, you've got to take your hat off to him, bro ... Will Wade is definitely a f****** gangster for what he did." - Christian Dawkins

"They ain't talking about a scholarship offer, bro." - Christian Dawkins on-camera interpretation of the conversation with Will Wade. That comment alone, runs counter to one of your built-in defenses.

This is a quote from the director of the HBO documentary, Pat Kondelis on the content of the FBI's audio recordings:

"You listen to those calls and it's clear," said documentary director Pat Kondelis. "The schools, they would have to see this and recognize how damning it is for the coaches. I don't care who gets fired, but it was significant in regard to who got charged and who did not. Who does a majority of the talking in the calls? It's not Christian. The coaches (Miller and Wade) are asking him for help, talking about who they could make offers to."

I understand being skeptical but you are overdoing it. The evidence is there.

The article that I'm referencing is the Pat Forde article on SI.com on March 19, 2020. It goes into even more detail about what to expect from the documentary. None of it is positive for Will Wade.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't trust anything coming from HBO that is promoting an upcoming, certainly highly editing, presentation of the events.

None of that is a complete 2-way dialogue. Perhaps there's a reason other than the related parties conspiracy theory as to why WW is still LSU's HBC. I'm skeptical that the NCAA has the ability to do anything other than slap any of these programs on the wrist or ask that the schools take actions.
 
#35
#35
Thunder Good-Oil said:
But evidence that an actual offer was made is necessary. Talking to a third party about making an offer isn't evidence that an offer was made. It would be a flimsy case and the NCAA likely couldn't afford defending themselves in a civil suit.

Can't wait to see both sides of the conversation that you'll be posting.
Click to expand...
No, it's not. You have a person talking on a secret recording, who is describing an offer in the past tense. Any objective person would conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that such an offer had already been made. It's not flimsy at all. You are setting an unreasonably high bar for evidence. That isn't reality.
 
Last edited:
#36
#36
Thunder Good-Oil said:
I wouldn't trust anything coming from HBO that is promoting an upcoming, certainly highly editing, presentation of the events.

None of that is a complete 2-way dialogue. Perhaps there's a reason other than the related parties conspiracy theory as to why WW is still LSU's HBC. I'm skeptical that the NCAA has the ability to do anything other than slap any of these programs on the wrist or ask that the schools take actions.
Click to expand...
HBO has produced some very compelling documentaries involving scandalous behavior. You are expressing skepticism of them in order to give Will Wade the benefit of the doubt? That makes no sense. Will Wade is on an FBI audio recording. HBO is not going to skew anything in the editorial process.
 
#37
#37
BowlBrother85 said:
HBO has produced some very compelling documentaries involving scandalous behavior. You are expressing skepticism of them in order to give Will Wade the benefit of the doubt? That makes no sense. Will Wade is on an FBI audio recording. HBO is not going to skew anything in the editorial process.
Click to expand...

It's an open case, correct? Is the FBI leaking information to HBO?
 
#38
#38
BowlBrother85 said:
Because of the difference in the evidence of guilt. It has become just about impossible to punish anyone without there being an abundance of overwhelming incriminating evidence that major rules were violated under the direction of the head coach and discovered within a recent period of time. In the case of LSU, the violations of Will Wade (documented in an FBI audio recording) meet all of that criteria and that will make it harder to sweep under the rug, especially after this HBO documentary has been playing in heavy rotation for about a month. I understand that Mark Emmert doesn't want to act, but it will eventually become untenable for him not to. This story is about to really heat up. Like I said above, actually hearing this in Wade's voice will have it's own impact.
Click to expand...
Difference in evidence of guilt?
Would the national documentation of the UNC academic fraud at UNC not be qualifying evidence?
What about the evidence of Dodge Chargers in Tuscaloosa?
What about a certain tailor in Tuscaloosa giving suits to athletes. Alabama themselves turned Mississippi State in during the early 1970’s for giving a player clothing. If I remember correctly MSU said it was for the athlete to attend a funeral.
 
#39
#39
NCAA has their hands full with coronavirus, eligibility & legal payments to players. I think Wade & LSU have slipped by on this one. Emmert will likely be fired soon due to massive underinsured NCAA tourney.
 
#40
#40
wmcovol said:
NCAA has their hands full with coronavirus, eligibility & legal payments to players. I think Wade & LSU have slipped by on this one. Emmert will likely be fired soon due to massive underinsured NCAA tourney.
Click to expand...
There is no way that this is over. Kansas, who is an actual blue blood basketball program, received their notice of allegations from the NCAA back in September. There were 3 Level 1 violations tied to recruiting and a lack of institutional control cited. You guys are underestimating the amount of renewed interest in this matter that the HBO documentary will create and how compelling an audio recording of corruption can be. I understand skepticism of the NCAA but the evidence is substantial and its not going away.
 
Last edited:
#42
#42
BowlBrother85 said:
There is no way that this is over. Kansas, who is an actual blue blood basketball program, received their notice of allegations from the NCAA back in September. There were 3 Level 1 violations tied to recruiting and a lack of institutional control cited. You guys are underestimating the amount of renewed interest in this matter that the HBO documentary will create and how compelling an audio recording of corruption can be. I understand skepticism of the NCAA but the evidence is substantial and its not going away.
Click to expand...

You may be right but a hell of a lot has been placed on the NCAA plate since the Kansas LOA came out 3 weeks ago. And now they find out they’re underinsured by $750 MILLION on the Tourney? Emmert will be gone, they’ll have to find a new leader, deal with the revenue shortfall from his incompetence along with all the other issues. I’m a patient man thou. I’ll wait to see.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gainesvol82
#43
#43
savannahfan said:
"Everyone does it" no they don't.. However many programs likely do trying to keep up with the programs that do; or the really great programs that over time don't have to resort to really serious "crimes". Just bend the rules a little now and then.
Click to expand...

So you think LSU is paying tens of thousands of dollars to land 4 star players while the elite one and done guys consistently choose Duke, UK, UNC, and KU without getting paid? I’m not buying that.
 
#47
#47
highspeed said:
So you think LSU is paying tens of thousands of dollars to land 4 star players while the elite one and done guys consistently choose Duke, UK, UNC, and KU without getting paid? I’m not buying that.
Click to expand...

I feel like Duke/UK/etc have gotten to the point where they've had such success doing it in the past that they don't really have to do it now because kids are going there for the one and done profile of getting drafted. I'd say there's still $ available but I doubt it was nearly what Cal had to do early at Memphis, etc.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top