UofL hoops under investigation for alleged use of escorts in recruiting

ESPN.com: Louisville investigating claims of escort use in recruiting

CBSSports.com: What Louisville coach Rick Pitino didn’t say about escorts said a lot

I am shocked that a good, moral man such as Rick Pitino would let this happen.

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.

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.

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.

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?

Latest repercussion…

CBSSports.com: Louisville president James Ramsey resigns amid leadership questions

[quote=“Run49er, post:7, topic:29869”]Latest repercussion…

CBSSports.com: Louisville president James Ramsey resigns amid leadership questions[/quote]

clt says the acc is pure class.

Now official.

ESPN.com: James Ramsey to resign immediately as Louisville president

CBSSports.com: NCAA suspends Rick Pitino for 5 games; Louisville will appeal to save 2013 title

clt says the acc is very classy.

Banners in the Dean Dome getting a bit nervous?

Mike Decourcy thinks so!

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.

[b]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.[/b]


Sportingnews.com: NCAA STRIPPING LOUISVILLE’S 2013 CHAMPIONSHIP BANNER HAS RICK PITINO, CARDINALS FURIOUS

CBSSports.com: Count on it: NCAA is taking down Louisville’s 2013 title banner; is UNC next?

Reading that is a great way to start the day.

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.

[quote=“NinerAdvocate, post:16, topic:29869”]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.[/quote]

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.

[quote=“NinerAdvocate, post:16, topic:29869”]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.[/quote]

Awesome!!

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

[quote=“TRLeader, post:18, topic:29869”][quote=“NinerAdvocate, post:16, topic:29869”]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.[/quote]

Awesome!!

I wish Twitter allowed enough characters that you could throw that out on the Twitter machine![/quote]

NVM…done!

Mike Decourcy not overly impressed with the outcome.

Sportingnews.com: NCAA INFRACTIONS COMMITTEE LETS LOUISVILLE OFF EASY FOR ITS WORST OFFENSES