We should've played Kanter
- Thread starter Raptureme
- Start date
Nah, that's not how you handle the hypocrisy the NCAA has against UNC.
You gotta play by the rules no matter what the decision is. This is something UNC is not privy to. They think they make the rules.
You think they stood by quiet when the 35 second shot clock came into play?
The pressure is on Emmert to look legit in his role after he could realistically hand a trophy to the last standing cheater at UNC.
You gotta play by the rules no matter what the decision is. This is something UNC is not privy to. They think they make the rules.
You think they stood by quiet when the 35 second shot clock came into play?
The pressure is on Emmert to look legit in his role after he could realistically hand a trophy to the last standing cheater at UNC.
If UL and UNC get nothing(which sounds about right)I can't see any school taking any punishment without a law suit.
It is ashamed that certain teams are under the microscope while others get wiped off the slide in hopes of destroying the evidence.
UK learned the right way or safe way (whatever) from 1989 and they handled the Kanter incident with dignity.
No Way with Cal's supposed baggage, coupled by playing Kanter, would they have taken such a chance.
The NCAA would have burned UK to the ground. Would have taken years to rebuild the program considering the clout of the social media nowadays.JMO.
Last edited:
Which I agree with. Every win would have been forfeited at the least. The title, if we'd won it would have been vacated. We can say it was wrong for him to be declared ineligible, but once a guy is you just can't play him.
At the time, it would have been #8. Wrong move, but I kinda agree with your sentiment.
We're like the puppy in the window. All eyes are on us. Or perhaps the mouse or rat that the snakes can't wait to sink their fangs into.
While I agree with your feelings, there was no way this even could have happened. No opposing coach would have allowed his team to take the court and I also don't think the officials would have allowed him to take the court.
I ran in college and I recall our coach refusing to allow a dual meet to begin until there was an official ruling on the eligibility of an opposing runner. Both coaches left the meet for an hour to resolve the issue. The other runner was cleared to run.
Not how it works. When wins get vacated, the other team does not get credited with the win.
I don't know what the REAL difference would be, but would it be a forfeit or a vacated win? With a forfeit, I do believe the other team does get a W.
Meh, We didn't cheat. Still beat the over #1 seed, UNC and ended our Final Four drought.
I get your frustration OP, but we're running a top notch program here and don't need to do things to spite others. Don't need to think of others at all.
I get your frustration OP, but we're running a top notch program here and don't need to do things to spite others. Don't need to think of others at all.