lol, Lyerla, coke head.... "UO offered me car and house"

[trojanfan12]

One last thing... For now.

Be careful in white knighting your team and saying something like " we don't do this". "That program is shady."

Because most teams are doing it to different extents. I blasted Bama because I wanted to see them in trouble. Just like you are all doing now with Oregon. I knew when I blasted Bama, that Oregon probably does the same thing. Hypocritical as a booster of Oregon and a fan? Yes.

But this will fall on your porch one day, and when it does, other fans will overreact and then you also can laugh it off... Or perhaps you will get rustled and say iis "NOT TRUE DAmNIT"

Be real, it happens.

good luck y'all.

This is a story. Yes. Probably some truth to it. But the witch hunt on Oregon by a few... lol. This is nothing.

I agree with much of this. It's why I typically don't say much when players/schools get investigated or are found to have done something wrong. Sooner or later, this shit lands on your own doorstep.

I watched all off season as many players and programs around the country got themselves into some kind hot water or another. I kept thinking "Thank God we're having a quiet off season at USC". Then, BOOM.....Josh Shaw lies and Anthony Brown decides Sark is a racist.

Well, we ALMOST had a quiet off season.

 

[Brasky]

Still warrants an investigation. I don't want this shit at Oregon

I mean if it turns out to be true, you're gonna be saying "I didn't want this shit at Oregon" and your team will be watching post season from the couch.

 

[WhiteMamba]

Still warrants an investigation. I don't want this shit at Oregon

Yeo, c'mon. It's been there for years. All PAC schools are guilty of it. This isn't a fairy tale. It's cfb.

Way to much money involved to not try and get competitive for top players.

 

[WhiteMamba]

His Mother came down and stood by me and the guys I sit with at a game up in the front row. She wanted to see Colt play close up. She had her little sign and everything. She was pretty humble.

 

[WhiteMamba]

I mean if it turns out to be true, you're gonna be saying "I didn't want this shit at Oregon" and your team will be watching post season from the couch.

lol. Wishful thinking.

He didn't disclose a name and stated he didn't receive anything. It's his word. Which is tarnished.

Anybody but Colt saying this and maybe an official investigation by NCAA. Nothing will come of this.

We heard the same thing how Oregon would have to forfeit wins and get post season banned after. Lyles case.

 

[TigerBait1971]

His Mother came down and stood by me and the guys I sit with at a game up in the front row. She wanted to see Colt play close up. She had her little sign and everything. She was pretty humble.

 

[WhiteMamba]

$500 handshakes post game? No doubt. Offering houses and cars? I'd be shurprised. I don't think our donor base is anything comparable to Bama or Oregon.

Who knows? I could be wrong. At least there isn't smoke constantly circling around VT. The same can't be said about Bama or Oregon, which is why these allegations don't come as much of a shock to me or seem out of line.

Both against the rules.

We have to remember the source here as well. This guy has zero accountability. All of his mistakes and failures are someone else's fault. This is him crying "why me"

 

[WizardHawk]

There's also a difference between some putz saying you will get a house/car as some kind of empty promise, and actually giving those things to a kid.

That he isn't naming names to me means either he's making it up out of anger toward the program, or it was someone no one would believe would actually make those kinds of benefits happen.

Not sure you can discipline a school for someone making an empty promise you didn't know about (Someone outside of the school itself).

If that's all true, the worst thing that happens is they find out who the dumbass is and ban him from any access to the program and the kids.

 

[mrwallace2ku]

Who, when, why and where did Colt receive his blow?

The Car salesman/Dealer? Coaching assistant? Boosters? Ex UO President?

So many unanswered Qs here...

 

[nddulac]

If some booster wants to give the kids family something off campus. Again, not much a school can do about it.

Regarless of how difficult it is to police, it is still the responsibility of the program to police it. Being difficult does not absolve them of the responsibility to do the job. you can talk about due diligence, but in an adult world, nobody cares how hard you try to meet your obligations. People care about whether or not you meet them.

I could easily excuse Notre Dame for not being on top of their current academics issue and letting it fester. But I'm unwilling to take "it's a hard job to do" as an excuse. When you make excuses and let bad behavior slide, you enable that bad behavior. And ultimately, it is detrimental to the very people being served by your program - the student athletes.

And in terms of student athletes accepting kickbacks - they are part of the program and are just as responsible for protecting its integrity as coaches and administrators. And if they incapable being held to high standards, they shouldn't be recruited. Having been recruited, repsonsibility for inviting such cancers into the programs fall on the shoulders of those responsible for recruiting them in the first place.

 

[trojanfan12]

Regarless of how difficult it is to police, it is still the responsibility of the program to police it. Being difficult does not absolve them of the responsibility to do the job. you can talk about due diligence, but in an adult world, nobody cares how hard you try to meet your obligations. People care about whether or not you meet them.

I could easily excuse Notre Dame for not being on top of their current academics issue and letting it fester. But I'm unwilling to take "it's a hard job to do" as an excuse. When you make excuses and let bad behavior slide, you enable that bad behavior. And ultimately, it is detrimental to the very people being served by your program - the student athletes.

And in terms of student athletes accepting kickbacks - they are part of the program and are just as responsible for protecting its integrity as coaches and administrators. And if they incapable being held to high standards, they shouldn't be recruited. Having been recruited, repsonsibility for inviting such cancers into the programs fall on the shoulders of those responsible for recruiting them in the first place.

Climb down off the high horse there Domer.

I never said that any of this shouldn't be policed nor that schools don't have responsibility to police it.

However, I think we can agree that when it comes to what the schools have to monitor, some things are much easier to monitor than others. For example, it is far easier to monitor athletes on campus than off. It's also much easier to monitor the player than it is the players family and friends. These are things that need to be considered by the NCAA when they are investigating issues and handing out punishment.

I'm not all that familiar with what's happened at Notre Dame. Believe it or not, I don't pay a great deal of attention to scandals at other programs (even ND and UCLA) because I think the way the NCAA handles it's investigations and punishment is hypocritical bullshit. Having said that, it would seem that an academic issue would be easier to police than a player and/or his family receiving some improper benefit away from campus.

 

[trojanfan12]

Climb down off the high horse there Domer.

I never said that any of this shouldn't be policed nor that schools don't have responsibility to police it.

However, I think we can agree that when it comes to what the schools have to monitor, some things are much easier to monitor than others. For example, it is far easier to monitor athletes on campus than off. It's also much easier to monitor the player than it is the players family and friends. These are things that need to be considered by the NCAA when they are investigating issues and handing out punishment.

I'm not all that familiar with what's happened at Notre Dame. Believe it or not, I don't pay a great deal of attention to scandals at other programs (even ND and UCLA) because I think the way the NCAA handles it's investigations and punishment is hypocritical bullshit. Having said that, it would seem that an academic issue would be easier to police than a player and/or his family receiving some improper benefit away from campus.

To be clear on my point. I also consider things given/offered during the recruiting process to be different and worse than things given or offered after the player is already signed and on the team. I also consider these things to be much worse if they are offered/given by the school vs. some booster.

For example, in the Lyerla case, if he was offered a house and a car by one of Oregon's coaches as part of the recruiting process, that is far worse than some booster offering or giving him something during the recruiting process. I would also consider a "hundred dollar handshake" from a coach to be far worse than from some booster.

 

[occupant]

Phil Knight gets THE BEST booger sugar you've ever tooted up yer snoot!

 

[4down20]

Even if it is true I don't think Oregon will get in trouble. What would bring Oregon down are the words: lack of institutional control.

Which means the university either knew about it, or should have known about it. At which point they get in trouble for not suspending the guilty at the time and removing them from games. Isn't sounding like that is the case.

 

[4down20]

Regarless of how difficult it is to police, it is still the responsibility of the program to police it. Being difficult does not absolve them of the responsibility to do the job. you can talk about due diligence, but in an adult world, nobody cares how hard you try to meet your obligations. People care about whether or not you meet them.

I could easily excuse Notre Dame for not being on top of their current academics issue and letting it fester. But I'm unwilling to take "it's a hard job to do" as an excuse. When you make excuses and let bad behavior slide, you enable that bad behavior. And ultimately, it is detrimental to the very people being served by your program - the student athletes.

And in terms of student athletes accepting kickbacks - they are part of the program and are just as responsible for protecting its integrity as coaches and administrators. And if they incapable being held to high standards, they shouldn't be recruited. Having been recruited, repsonsibility for inviting such cancers into the programs fall on the shoulders of those responsible for recruiting them in the first place.

First, Notre Dame academic issues and booster things are no where near the same.

However, Notre Dame is self reporting, is suspending/expelling the guilty as they find out, and is dealing with the situation. That is what will keep Notre Dame out of trouble with the NCAA, not the severity of the matter which for Notre Dame is way way worse.

They just aren't close to the same. What the NCAA will judge is how the university deals with things. And that is why Oregon will also do it's own investigation, self report anything it finds and then deal out the punishment for such as best it can. That shows institutional control.

Alabama didn't have our starting LB - and the guy who is like a QB on defense for the WVU game. I don't know exactly why, other than he was suspended from the game for a minor NCAA violation. That is how it's handled. Alabama self reports, suspends the player for the appropriate amount of time and that will be the end of it.

Ohio St a few years ago is another example. Tressel and Ohio St got in trouble for lying to the NCAA. Total lack of institutional control when the head coach is covering things up. So they got slapped pretty hard.

Oregon got in some trouble, but it was mostly targeted at the people who screwed up in it's case, and I don't believe they covered anything up. Some called it a slap on the wrist, but I thought it was pretty good. Now, if they totally steamroll the next team for something similiar/smaller, then I'll agree slap on wrist. But one of my biggest complaints about the NCAA is that it punished the people who weren't responsible and not the people who were. That didn't happen this time.

That is how it gets policed. Overall, I think the NCAA has greatly improved in recent history and I like the new way things are being done. People will claim it's the opposite in many cases, but I see nothing that supports it.

 

[nddulac]

Climb down off the high horse there Domer.

I never said that any of this shouldn't be policed nor that schools don't have responsibility to police it.

Perhaps I misunderstood the following:

Like 4d20, I don't really have a problem with this as long as schools aren't using it as a recruiting tool.

Forgive me if I thought that not having a problem with the practice implied that there was no need to police it. Imagine my embarrassment.

 

[TigerBait1971]

nobody currs

 

[trojanfan12]

Perhaps I misunderstood the following:

Forgive me if I thought that not having a problem with the practice implied that there was no need to police it. Imagine my embarrassment.

Understandable mistake given my wording. I don't care about kids getting stuff like the "hundred dollar handshakes" and/or some restaurant owner giving them a nice meal, but only charging for a soda. However, I also think that the school should not be involved in any way. If the owner of Joe's Pizzeria wants to let players eat all they want and only charge them for a soda. I don't have a problem with that. It's off campus and is between the player and the owner of the restaurant. However, if anyone affiliated with the program is telling players "Hey, go to Joe's Pizzeria. He'll hook you up". I have a big problem with that.

If the NCAA was more even handed and actually had guidelines for the way they mete out punishment, I might care more. As of now, however, the way the NCAA runs these investigations is tantamount to a politician telling people they shouldn't lie.

 

[WhiteMamba]

Can I go to Joe's Pizzaria? I could go for a mess of pizza on the house.

 

[nddulac]

However, I also think that the school should not be involved in any way.

Okay - I know what you mean, but I disagree. There is a difference between students and faculty/coaches/administrators. But I am uncomfortable with a definition of "School" that excludes the students as part of the definition. Thus, if students are taking stuff, then the school is involved because the students are part of the school.

I'm not naive enough to believe that these $100 handshakes are happening everywhere. In fact, SB Nation published a very interesting story on the subject over the summer entitles "Mee the Bagman". And perhaps I am too polyanna-ish in my wish that the practice would stop. But I also believe that this is exactly the kind of action that makes athletes feel that they are not answerable to rules (or laws) and thus enables some really bad behavior.