He really does look like a rat.Creepy Duke...
Could Duke be next??
- Thread starter stoneycat_20
- Start date
Do you remember Rasheed Sulaimon? Let's say Cal knew that one of his players had been accused of raping two different women at two different times, but took no action until nearly a year later when the accusations became public? Even then, K excused releasing RS for undisclosed reasons of having “been unable to consistently live up to the standards required to be a member” of the Blue Devils. You would be here giving us **** about it to this day. Very few coaches could survive that hit, maybe just one.
Here is a nice little story if you'd like to refresh your memory, or establish one.
Duke and Kentucky have been swimming in mostly the same waters recruiting wise but there's been a few players they've gone after that we've stayed away from.
Cal was on Parker very early in the process and then backed way off.
Never messed with Duvall and gave Bagley only token attention for some reason.
I find those recruitments much more interesting now
Cal was on Parker very early in the process and then backed way off.
Never messed with Duvall and gave Bagley only token attention for some reason.
I find those recruitments much more interesting now
Not like Duke used a (should have been) ineligible player in both 1999 and 2010. Must be nice having the NCAA in your pocket.
There has been players that UK went after that Duke didn't as well. Skal comes to mind.
Bagley for sure. Then for bonus, throw in the fact he magically is cleared in record time.
Alot to look at if they dig imo. Duke, capel, the ncaa too.
I doubt there is any money trail with either Bagley or Duval.
This is the case of promises of eligibility, not promises of money.
The FBI could care less if there's no money exchanging hands.
If it's a case of academic fraud, that's an NCAA issue.
Nothing the FBI cares about and the NCAA sure isn't going to bust themselves for making kids eligible when they shouldn't be.
Finalists were Duke, USC, and UCLA.
We already know USC was dirty. Id bet money that UCLA (another adidas school) is, because i dont think for a second Lavarr would let lonzo go anywhere without getting paid.
We also know from the complaint a competing company was trying to outbid them for Bowen. Thats almost certainly Nike, given the eybl raids.
If its Nike bidding for players, then uk and duke are their top schools. UK wasnt involved with Bagley. Only Duke.
For thr ncaa - think they dont have a financial interest in players coming to college basketball instead of going overseas? Think the shoe companies paying THAT much to a player is above bribing ncaa officials to get them eligible?
Bagleys expedited rubber stamp approval despite numerous red flags is a huge red flag itself.
Last edited:
It will surprise me if top level programs like Duke, Kentucky, Kansas are involved. Calipari and Krzyzewski don't have to pay players or break rules. They get great players because the great players are lined up to play at Kentucky, Duke. Pitino was in a position of being 2nd best. He was being beaten consistently by Calipari, and his ego couldn't stand it. Person cheated because he works for Bruce Pearl, who is a cheater. USC has always been a cheater program. More schools will be outed, but they will most likely be schools that had to cheat to keep up.
The focus of the FBI should also include the NCAA. The NCAA is the like the wizard in Wizard of the Oz.
You are manufacturing this. UK fans badly wanting Bagley does not constitute evidence that Duke cheated to sign him. LOL! Duke fans could have said the same thing about UK signing Murray. But the truth is that UK and Duke don't need to cheat.
Hey other blue...there is a duke board that may even give you an offering after your sermon...
Every single fact i posted is true. The only thing speculative is the conclusion.
Right. And Skal had some baggage. But it was pretty public what his issues were. Or easy to find if you just looked around. The NCAA dug into that pretty thoroughly and never found a money trail.
I'll certainly agree with that last statement. Why would they have to cheat when the NCAA, referees, announcers, and tournament committee give them every break possible? No need to for me to list examples, it is apparent enough.
I think the things fans of all teams should be concerned about is info coming out of the EYBL sting that could indicate players or parents were given money by Nike.
What I cd see happening is lots of players being declared ineligible, impacting many programs, Duke and UK included. I don't think you are going to have any more connect the dots type revelations like Louisvilles where the head coach is directly implicated.
What I cd see happening is lots of players being declared ineligible, impacting many programs, Duke and UK included. I don't think you are going to have any more connect the dots type revelations like Louisvilles where the head coach is directly implicated.
Yes he was i. Read the articles where Cal first got involved with Carter he backed off after Carter was clear he had no leader and who knows where Thomas got his money? I don't do u? I know how Chris Duhons mom got her job. But oh no duke isnt dirty ok
Not until very recently though.
If you remember, Shabazz Muhammad's recruitment was dirty and it pretty publicly had to do with adidas and his dad and sisters ties to them. They gave him all kinds of money
Exactly. Just switched. Adidas literally bought Shabazz with a payment to his sister.
Id wager good money the Balls were paid.
So yes, every fact i referenced was 100% true. The only thing unknown is my conclusion that Bagley was paid to play, and that the ncaa is also involved in regards to his unusually expedited clearance.
When asked the NCAA said academic clearing house takes about ten days to perform if they have all the documentation. It took Bagley nine. The ones that take longer are where players have issues with amateurism eligibility. You could make a case he was cleared quickly based in that regard but if there was no evidence to him being suspected of anything then they probably wouldn't hold him up.
I can make the case? I did.
Bagley has tons of question marks in his academic background. Hes a high profile player which always takes longer to clear. Nick Richards isnt even a top recruit and took months to clear.
We arent talking about a d3 player with a pristine academic record at one high school. Even when i went through the clearing house (much lower level) it took forever. And i was nothing.
The him being cleared almost immediately was unprecedented. To be cleared that fast with that many red flags, is a red flag itself.
None that anyone knew at the time. Just like several others, all of whom were under a more thorough review due to being high profile. They take months to clear.
Except Bagley.
Look theres really no debate he recieved HIGHLY preferential treatment from the ncaa. The only question is: did money or other favors change hands.
If there were no red flags then how was it highly preferential. When did the NCAA start reviewing his amateurism?
I just told you. You wont concede facts. So youre not wasting anymore of my time.
Are you that blubber bastard capel?
Come on, come clean.
Puke fans denying that splinter gets preferential treatment from the NCAA is a waste to talk to.
You are brainwashed by your head rat.
Why even come over here to this board?
We should start a poll for everyone to guess which game this year splinter will pretend to pass out against. I believe his original ultimate flop came against GT.
Only a Duke lover would post this ********. Go back to you're dick board.
Um, ok. You can assume all you want. You made my point about Thomas. I have no clue where he got the money but I'm not just going to assume it came from Coach K or the staff like you are doing. You're just assuming but it could've came from anywhere. You're doing exactly what other fans do and say about us. They hear that AD got money, so....."Oh, Cal and UK cheat cause I heard Davis got money". Whatever. If you want to play that game, so ahead but Im not buying that at all. Nothing is fact, just a bunch a hearsay ********. They very well may be dirty. The point is that you, nor I, don't have a clue if they are or are not. You can believe that if you want, that's your right but don't talk like it's a fact cause you don't know. Like I said in my earlier post, a player taking more doesn't make the school or the staff dirty. If you believe otherwise then you'd have to say that Cal is dirty too cause a few of his players have been caught doing some things.
About Carter, if you believe everything a kid says in an interview, you've got some issues to work out. How many kids do you ever hear actually say that they have a leader? Not many, although most probably do. So, you can choose to believe that also but that pretty naive. I never said that Cal didn't recruit Carter at all. I just said that we were never really an option for Carter and from what I've heard, that is true. He was always considered to be a heavy Duke lean.
If you know Coach K is dirty, do us all a favor and call the NCAA. Otherwise, it's all hearsay and assumptions.
Last edited:
It wasn't unprecedented and red flags don't mean anything. You act as though it had never happened that fast. At that point of the year, it's not like they had thousands and thousands of basketball players to clear. It just logical that there weren't many players to look into at that point. He was a very high profile player and possibly got through quickly because of that reason. I'm not saying that was the reason but just a possibility. You choose to look at it the opposite way and say there must be something dirty going on when there are other possibilities. My point is that you're just choosing to to call someone a cheater. Even if there were something fishy going on, that doesn't make Duke dirty. It would make the NCAA dirty. Again, anything is possible but you label Duke as dirty from a bunch of hearsay BS, not facts.
Nick Richards was cleared just a few weeks before. Not even in the same realm.
And he disnt even go to 4 different highschools, with numerous academic questions.