Eric Crawford Article - Interesting Perspective

[Knucklehank1]

http://www.wdrb.com/story/35678337/crawford-no-appeal-can-restore-louisvilles-lost-shining-moment

As always, Crawford put together a very thoughtful, insightful piece. Basically, he thinks it best for UofL to just accept and move on. Essentially, 2012 and 2013 already are tainted, so the best move is forward.

One thing I can't argue in this is that UofL decided to throw itself at the mercy of the NCAA (in stark contrast to the UNC posture). After doing that, it is tough to now say, "well we don't like what you said, so now we are gonna fight". If you are gonna fight, then you need to do that from the beginning.

Also, if you subscribe to what Crawford is saying, can you really do that with Pitino and perhaps Jurich at the helm??? It makes you wonder if a new president gets hired and they have the same thought process as Crawford that they won't say we got to rip these pages out of the book. ????

 

[REDFISTFURY3]

Screw that he a UK fan

 

[davecmc]

A few thoughts here... You can still appeal the banner removal in the 45 day window and then "move on" as Crawford suggests. I think you appeal, but then stop dragging it out with the NCAA. You can appeal based on the evidence that (a) were any of those players really ineligible based on bylaws? Russ or Chane or whomever attended parties, but to them, if they were at a party and had consensual sex, that is tough to sell as a "paid benefit" that makes them an ineligible athlete. They were just at a raucous party and didn't even view it as an institutional benefit, but just a party. And (b) if level 1 money exchanged, it was unknown to the players in question making it even harder to disqualify them.

So, while it's clearly grotesque and punishable violations regarding recruiting, it's difficult to retroactively DQ certain players who were already on campus and viewed it as parties with consensual sex where no recruiting advantage was gained or academic eligibility was retained via these actions. I would also include in the appeal something like, "we could have done more to monitor activities in the dorms overall and especially when recruits were on campus. We have instituted new policies where we have announced and unannounced spot checks in all athletic dorms. We look for any evidence of illicit activities and all members of our athletic staff now participate in monthly compliance education meetings."

I think we must change the narrative to we are a victim vs. a combative stance of were gonna fight the NCAA. I think you state - " we're appalled, but no person of influence at our university instigated, condoned or knowingly swept this under the rug. We were violated by 2 individuals. McGhee and Powell." If you're going to sue anyone, then sue them for their actions that hurt us monetarily. Get them in court, and make them speak under oath and own their actions. There's nothing to lose now and that would formally clear the air and exonerate those who did not know. Or, if someone else did know, let it come out in court

 

[Kratz]

I think it's a good idea to fight back if you think you've been wronged. I think UofL was wronged in that the punishment went way overboard.

I expected a (longer than 5 games) suspension for Pitino, a monetary fine, possible further reduction of scholarships and obviously probation. IMO that with the penalties already enacted by UofL would have been appropriate.

Stripping all the wins, the title, and paying back millions in tournament earnings took it too far.

 

[nccardfan]

First of all in order to know if our self imposed sanctions were sufficient or appropriate, I would like to hear it spelled out specifically as to what U of L did to merit the additional sanctions? For example, Player X attended 3 parties, had sex or whatever and the defining regulation of what constituted a player being declared ineligible?

 

[Cue Card]

A few thoughts here... You can still appeal the banner removal in the 45 day window and then "move on" as Crawford suggests. I think you appeal, but then stop dragging it out with the NCAA. You can appeal based on the evidence that (a) were any of those players really ineligible based on bylaws? Russ or Chane or whomever attended parties, but to them, if they were at a party and had consensual sex, that is tough to sell as a "paid benefit" that makes them an ineligible athlete. They were just at a raucous party and didn't even view it as an institutional benefit, but just a party. And (b) if level 1 money exchanged, it was unknown to the players in question making it even harder to disqualify them.

So, while it's clearly grotesque and punishable violations regarding recruiting, it's difficult to retroactively DQ certain players who were already on campus and viewed it as parties with consensual sex where no recruiting advantage was gained or academic eligibility was retained via these actions. I would also include in the appeal something like, "we could have done more to monitor activities in the dorms overall and especially when recruits were on campus. We have instituted new policies where we have announced and unannounced spot checks in all athletic dorms. We look for any evidence of illicit activities and all members of our athletic staff now participate in monthly compliance education meetings."

I think we must change the narrative to we are a victim vs. a combative stance of were gonna fight the NCAA. I think you state - " we're appalled, but no person of influence at our university instigated, condoned or knowingly swept this under the rug. We were violated by 2 individuals. McGhee and Powell." If you're going to sue anyone, then sue them for their actions that hurt us monetarily. Get them in court, and make them speak under oath and own their actions. There's nothing to lose now and that would formally clear the air and exonerate those who did not know. Or, if someone else did know, let it come out in court

BEST POST I have seen thus far regarding this situation. Well done.

 

[zipp_rivals]

Knuckles, thanks for telling me the value of that article before I wasted time reading it...and I say that sincerely.

If you recall, U of L never commented after their most recent hearing a couple months ago that they were accepting whatever the committee ruled. I said at that time that was significant--as often what people DON'T say is.

This effort to fight the NCAA is no big surprise and was only intensified by yesterday's penalties. I don't think this is anywhere close to being resolved nor is U of L wearing down from the experience. Fans AND media need to prepare themselves.

The most logical outcome is for the NCAA to take notice that U of L intends to defend this to the maximum extent possible. And for the NCAA to moderate its position. That's all handled outside of court and more expediently. If both sides are resolved to fight for their principles, get your popcorn and your remote control to FF thru the commercials...

 

[TheRealVille]

Your totally right zipp. Pitino and Jurich are jumping at the bit to overturn this ruling. Afterall, it's their reputation on the line. Fair or not.

 

[zipp_rivals]

Your totally right zipp. Pitino and Jurich are jumping at the bit to overturn this ruling. Afterall, it's their reputation on the line. Fair or not.

It looked like it was taking all the restraint possible for them to keep from saying "the NCAA sucks" on Thursday in front of the cameras. This has gotten personal...

 

[gocds]

I've always liked Eric Crawford but he's dead wrong on this issue. He is entitled to his opinion and I'm entitled to mine.

GO CARDS - BEAT EVERYBODY!!! God Bless America!!!

 

[nookam]

Punishment is hard to argue by their silly laws. By rule, ineligible players played in those games.

 

[CardsFirst]

I'm certainly glad Crawford isn't our president . I for one want this thing to end up in the real courts. I don't think the NCAA wins there. But I'm not one to take things like this lying down. Good post Zipp.

 

[Cardinals4Ever]

I personally never liked Eric Crawford or his buddy Rick Bozo. They are both biased cayut fans.

Stopped reading his article after this subtle jab he made..."No. The deal is done. The verdict is in. Today, the brand of U of L basketball is strippers and hookers"

Sorry, I am also happy he is not the President of the University.

 

[ShortCreek]

Crawford grew up in Bagdad, KY (Shelby County). I believe he graduated from the University of Louisville. But, I find it hard to believe he was ever a Cards fan.

The vast majority of residents in Shelby County grew up worshiping Mike Casey, Charles Hurt, UK & Cawood Ledford. I'd bet my wallet that was Eric's preference then and today, you cannot convince me otherwise.

The day the news broke he was saying the banner was coming down while Forde, ESPN, and other media searched for clarification. That convinced me Eric's allegiances are coated in blue.

 

[REDFISTFURY3]

Crawford grew up in Bagdad, KY (Shelby County). I believe he graduated from the University of Louisville. But, I find it hard to believe he was ever a Cards fan.

The vast majority of residents in Shelby County grew up worshiping Mike Casey, Charles Hurt, UK & Cawood Ledford. I'd bet my wallet that was Eric's preference then and today, you cannot convince me otherwise.

The day the news broke he was saying the banner was coming down while Forde, ESPN, and other media searched for clarification. That convinced me Eric's allegiances are coated in blue.

I wonder how he feels now considering Russ Smith letter to the fans about the situation.Players sure think diffrent

 

[Knucklehank1]

I personally never liked Eric Crawford or his buddy Rick Bozo. They are both biased cayut fans.

Stopped reading his article after this subtle jab he made..."No. The deal is done. The verdict is in. Today, the brand of U of L basketball is strippers and hookers"

Sorry, I am also happy he is not the President of the University.

Crawford is not a U.K. fan. He is a journalist. Just because someone has an opinion that doesn't bow at the UofL altar it doesn't mean they worship U.K.

 

[ShortCreek]

Crawford is a journalist and in my opinion a damn good one. But everyone that grows up in this area that's a sports fan picks a team - either red or blue.

Given where he grew up the odds are he grew up blue. Whatever team he pulled for when he was a kid he still pulls for as an adult. Can he still be a journalist? Yes he can, does he still have biases as a human being? No doubt.

 

[zipp_rivals]

In the end, none of these guys differ much from one another. They thirst for relevancy and internet clicks if they want to keep a job.

Except for the U of L version most of whom I hold in high regard, the rest can move away and I'll never miss 'em...

 

[nccardfan]

While I think the letter is very commendable and I'm sure he put a lot of thought in it, I can see where the NCAA just sees this as an admission of guilt and leaves a lot of questions unanswered. He really thought these girls were students?

 

[Kratz]

I personally never liked Eric Crawford or his buddy Rick Bozo. They are both biased cayut fans.

Stopped reading his article after this subtle jab he made..."No. The deal is done. The verdict is in. Today, the brand of U of L basketball is strippers and hookers"

Sorry, I am also happy he is not the President of the University.

Actually, that is true. I travel with my job. Been from one end of the country to the other and even out of the country to Canada a few times. When sports comes up and I say I'm a Louisville fan, I immediately hear about strippers. Last time was in Vegas just this past March from some Michigan fans. That is our perception with a lot of people across the nation right now.

 

[Strongtino]

A few thoughts that sort of swing both ways here...in favor of UL and against UL.

1. I said it at the time it happened and I'll say it again - UL should have NEVER laid ALL of their trust in the NCAA and they did so from the jump. Its basically impossible to cooperate any more or say more nice and supportive things about the NCAA as UL has these last 2 years so its tough for their argument now to be like "well, we disagree with how you handled this." Having said that, I never for even a second thought the NCAA would touch the banner - I'm sure the UL administration felt the same but as we know now that was a dangerous assumption as we should have learned by now that the NCAA can not be trusted.

2. UL has little to no chance to fight this in the actual courts. Full stop.

3. UL will get reductions on things (scholarships, probation length reduced, etc) because this punishment is overkill.

4. The NCAA basically levied "failure to monitor/lack of institutional control" level penalties without finding that their was enough evidence to charge the school with either of those. Which is basically like saying "we can't charge you with murder because we don't have the evidence, but we're still going to give you the death penalty." I personally think that's significant and I hope thats brought up in the appeal.

5. If this penalty sticks - it sets a dangerous precedent for the NCAA. UL bent over backwards to aid in this investigation from day 1 and got absolutely roasted alive for their efforts. I have absolutely zero doubt that the penalties would be exactly the same if the school hadn't taken the post season ban because they basically couldn't be more severe because the only thing more severe than this is the death penalty and that was never a realistic option. Now schools have ZERO motivation to help with their investigation.

 

[nccardfan]

A few thoughts that sort of swing both ways here...in favor of UL and against UL.

1. I said it at the time it happened and I'll say it again - UL should have NEVER laid ALL of their trust in the NCAA and they did so from the jump. Its basically impossible to cooperate any more or say more nice and supportive things about the NCAA as UL has these last 2 years so its tough for their argument now to be like "well, we disagree with how you handled this." Having said that, I never for even a second thought the NCAA would touch the banner - I'm sure the UL administration felt the same but as we know now that was a dangerous assumption as we should have learned by now that the NCAA can not be trusted.

2. UL has little to no chance to fight this in the actual courts. Full stop.

3. UL will get reductions on things (scholarships, probation length reduced, etc) because this punishment is overkill.

4. The NCAA basically levied "failure to monitor/lack of institutional control" level penalties without finding that their was enough evidence to charge the school with either of those. Which is basically like saying "we can't charge you with murder because we don't have the evidence, but we're still going to give you the death penalty." I personally think that's significant and I hope thats brought up in the appeal.

5. If this penalty sticks - it sets a dangerous precedent for the NCAA. UL bent over backwards to aid in this investigation from day 1 and got absolutely roasted alive for their efforts. I have absolutely zero doubt that the penalties would be exactly the same if the school hadn't taken the post season ban because they basically couldn't be more severe because the only thing more severe than this is the death penalty and that was never a realistic option. Now schools have ZERO motivation to help with their investigation.

First of all I am a diehard Cardinal fan. In these topics though I try to take off my Card hat and try to see it from other perspectives. In regards to #5 you really have to ask yourself if we did bend over backwards or did we only provide them with the information we felt was necessary? Not once in all our responses did I hear that we had ineligible players or even the possibility that at least 3 players were going to be ruled ineligible? We consistently stated that players were innocent but provided no backup that these things didn't happen. It appears that they did. The defense that it didn't happen doesn't wash anymore which leads you to believe we did know more but we didn't disclose. Hence more penalties and scholarship reductions. Maybe we didn't fall deep enough on the sword?

 

[Cue Card]

Maybe we didn't fall deep enough on the sword?

That is the $64,000 question. Was there more the athletic department could have done to avoid such a backlash from the NCAA? The only way to answer that is to wait for the outcome of the appeal. If the Cards get a favorable ruling on the appeal, then we'll know they fell just deep enough on the sword.

 

[jwheat]

I always viewed Crawford as a UL leaning guy. I'm pretty sure he is an alum

 

[Cue Card]

I always viewed Crawford as a UL leaning guy. I'm pretty sure he is an alum

It should not matter if he leans sideways. He has a job to do, and I think overall he does it very well. I like Crawford. I liked his Dad's work too.

I just finished reading his latest article. I thought it was very well written and vetted. He got all the facts and provided them in writing in a fair and balanced view.

http://www.wdrb.com/story/35690189/crawford-looking-at-louisvilles-avenues-for-appeal-to-the-ncaa

 

[nccardfan]

It should not matter if he leans sideways. He has a job to do, and I think overall he does it very well. I like Crawford. I liked his Dad's work too.

I just finished reading his latest article. I thought it was very well written and vetted. He got all the facts and provided them in writing in a fair and balanced view.

http://www.wdrb.com/story/35690189/crawford-looking-at-louisvilles-avenues-for-appeal-to-the-ncaa

I agree Cue. Thanks for posting. At least it sheds some light as to what and how we may approach the appeal.

 

[Ipartiedwithhopgood_rivals307205]

Louisville's reputation was soiled, will take a lifetime to get away from it. So if you care about that sort of thing, sorry to break it to you, but that's the reputation the rest of your life.

I argue reputation is for the weak anyway. Oh no, what does the rest world think of the team I support? I will be so mad when I meet the next random in my life that finds out what team I pull for.

In some fantasy land there's a positive perception about college sports. Our coach loves our guys, loves our fans, loves our university. They try to make you see that when they're running all of their NCAA commercials, having their trophy raising moments, etc. We're all going pro in something. We're #1, we do it the right way. Everybody that works for us does too.

Journalists do what they are paid to do. Cover relevant topics. This was a big one, fire away.

I just find myself not caring now, or prior to this... about what writers think about Louisville.

They love us! Oh boy!

Oh no they hate us. Darn.

They laugh at us. Now I'm mad.

No, I'm not.

 

[Cue Card]

Hop, I honestly don't care what people think about UofL athletics. People who are THAT weak minded who actually care what others think of them are just weak minded people that I prefer not to be associated with. We all have choices in life, and I stand by my choice to support the team I grew up loving until I die. It's just freaking sports.

 

[zipp_rivals]

On various points in this thread...

I understand that Crawford's still busy writing. But I've pretty much relegated him to my list of must-read journalism headed by the CJ. So you guys are gonna have to tell me and others like me what he says if it's important that we know. Don't just link it.

Like Cue, I don't much care what other people and esp. the typical naysayers think. (Yes, that's a big surprise!...) There's no point telling me what they think. I also am a firm believer that there's no such thing as bad publicity, and I have the utmost confidence going forward in America's 15-second attention span. Millions of people won't remember in a few months why or how they know the University of Louisville--only that they know us.

Falling further on a sword or getting up and falling on it again is seldom the solution to anything. I realize the self flagellators among us will disagree.

I've heard enough lawyers and experts speak the last few days to recognize that no one really knows how this will turn out. So we can all dispense with those predictions. I fully support U of L's effort to spend whatever time and money is needed to seek what they consider to be justice.

And for those who just can't get the message, it still doesn't matter at all what a slapd!ck thinks on the subject...

 

[jwheat]

It should not matter if he leans sideways. He has a job to do, and I think overall he does it very well. I like Crawford. I liked his Dad's work too.

I just finished reading his latest article. I thought it was very well written and vetted. He got all the facts and provided them in writing in a fair and balanced view.

http://www.wdrb.com/story/35690189/crawford-looking-at-louisvilles-avenues-for-appeal-to-the-ncaa

I agree with everything you said and didn't mean to make it seem like I think he isn't good at his job because I think he is. I just always thought he took the UL side of the rivalry

 

[zipp_rivals]

I agree with everything you said and didn't mean to make it seem like I think he isn't good at his job because I think he is. I just always thought he took the UL side of the rivalry

Well of course you did. But why stop at Eric Crawford?

"Elite program," my a$$...

 

[nccardfan]

I agree with everything you said and didn't mean to make it seem like I think he isn't good at his job because I think he is. I just always thought he took the UL side of the rivalry

Just like most of us feel that Rick Bozo is a UK homer and I'll always believe that. But their business was to sell newspapers and present different perspectives. If they all had the same POV, they would only need 1 sportswriter.

 

[MikesMarbles]

Everyone's seen the arrest lists from just the SEC conference alone. Penn State is still in business, and back to winning Big Ten titles. The beat goes on.

College sports is dirty.

Making an example of Louisville is like putting a band aid on a cut when the patient is bleeding to death out of their chest.

The NCAA's only accomplishment in our case is ensuring no other school will help them with self-investigating. Small consolation to us, but they just made all their future investigations much harder.

Their punishment did zero to change the infrastructure everyone operates in. It was our turn, next time it will be someone else, but the beat goes on.

 

[JohnKBA]

Everyone's seen the arrest lists from just the SEC conference alone. Penn State is still in business, and back to winning Big Ten titles. The beat goes on.

College sports is dirty.

Making an example of Louisville is like putting a band aid on a cut when the patient is bleeding to death out of their chest.

The NCAA's only accomplishment in our case is ensuring no other school will help them with self-investigating. Small consolation to us, but they just made all their future investigations much harder.

Their punishment did zero to change the infrastructure everyone operates in. It was our turn, next time it will be someone else, but the beat goes on.

/thread

 

[Morgantown Card]

http://www.wdrb.com/story/35678337/crawford-no-appeal-can-restore-louisvilles-lost-shining-moment

As always, Crawford put together a very thoughtful, insightful piece. Basically, he thinks it best for UofL to just accept and move on. Essentially, 2012 and 2013 already are tainted, so the best move is forward.

As much as common sense tells me these were in no way "benefits" and in no way were a recruiting advantage (it had the opposite effect, we have found out):

I'd hate to be the attorney saying "We were penalized too much for having an assistant coaching paying for underage hookers to have sex with underage recruits."

 

[zipp_rivals]

...I'd hate to be the attorney saying "We were penalized too much for having an assistant coaching paying for underage hookers to have sex with underage recruits."

That's what the NCAA attorney says. Ours says something like...

"We were penalized for an 'impermissible benefit' that was, in reality, not a benefit, unsupported by conclusive evidence, not provided for in NCAA regulations, and unprecedented in terms of its severity."

 

[Strongtino]

The NCAA has contradicted themselves a few times in their findings....

- They say that the strippers/sex was an unfair recruiting advantage while at the same time saying that recruits didn't come to Louisville because of the strippers/sex.

- The levee "lack of institutional control" level penalties while at the same time not being able to charge UL with lack of institutional control.

- They suspend Pitino 5 games and claim he should have known about the incidents while at the same time not providing one single instance of something he could have or should have done differently.

- The repeatedly used moral grounds for their punishment when in reality in their eyes this is an "impressible benefits case" and nothing more.

 

[Crankdatmustard_rivals66299]

The COI has the ability to enhance Level's of violations if the circumstances are aggravating. They consider the sexual acts paid for by a staff member just that.

And whether the recruits decided to come or not the intent by McGee was to create a recruiting advantage.

 

[zipp_rivals]

The COI has the ability to enhance Level's of violations if the circumstances are aggravating. They consider the sexual acts paid for by a staff member just that.

And whether the recruits decided to come or not the intent by McGee was to create a recruiting advantage.

The penalty is unprecedented regardless of what their NCAA policies say they can do. They will have to account for that.

And civil court--where this likely ends up--has no provisions for "intent" even if it can be proven, which any lawyer will tell you is difficult...

 

[Rupp'sRunt]

Sheesh a lot of talk about Louisville media. I literally listen to 0 local sports shows. Shows limited perspective on things