wmcovol
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2012
- Messages
- 18,511
- Likes
- 33,320
Running a brothel on university property is pretty serious. A hell of a lot more serious than lying about a cookout, giving a kid $200 to go to the prom or even helping a kid get a car.
Of course, he knows nothing, like Sgt Schultz.
Watching ESPN, you wonder what their analysts think should happen.
Some say - poor kids they shouldn't be punished for transgressions of former player
Others say - Rick pitino didn't know - what's he supposed to do, check in on players every night?
Is it even feasible to "punish" former players? Can the university sue them? Should pitino be fired in order to make up for the transgressions of the program? Or should current players face repercussions for choosing to play at a shady program?
This is ultimately on Pitino. It doesn't matter if he didn't know. In the real world, an executive or manager is responsible for their teams. He needs to make it his business to know what's going on in his program. Based on his personal past this isn't that surprising. If the university really cared, they could can him.
We will see if there is any consistency in how the NCAA's committee on infractions applies it's new "lack of coach control" citation which is supposed to eliminate the ignorance excuse. They had no problem citing Larry Brown of SMU for it and that just had to do with academic misconduct involving an assistant coach and a basketball secretary giving improper assistance to one player. Both the NCAA and ESPN's announcers seem to have more sympathy for coaches of elite programs than they do for everyone else when it comes to playing dumb.