Cuse under investigation

[UConn76]

As the father of kids who graduated from both UConn and SU, I don't take any special satisifaction in any of SU's trangressions.Iin the end you're dealing with 18-20 year olds and you never really know what you're going to end up with from a decision making standpt. You only hope that your school's adminstration has all of the right programs in place to keep these kids on a path to a degree and make them productive citizens.

What I do take satisfaction in though is the comupance for large portions of the SU board who continually exhibit the holier-than-thou attitudes that the Orange are somehow above all of this.

 

[BugsyCT]

What did Francesca say? Hopefully along the lines of: "With or without, they are by far the better program."

Francesa basically shrugged off the caller's hissy-fit, saying that he wasn't going to ask JC about any of that during the interview - it was all about discussing the history of the Big East and the team & coaching accomplishments, not about off-the-court stuff.

Francesa and Calhoun got off to a bad start years ago during the Rod Sellers incident, but they've been on much better terms since.

 

[prankster]

I understand that Bilas thinks it is a witch hunt. So that means upstater thinks it is a witch hunt too...

Personally, I like witch hunts. We need to conduct lots and lots of them.

Not because they turn up actual witches, but because they showcase the process of why and how we go about defining and hunting witches.

When you apply these NCAA rules, occassionally instead of broadly, people will complain that they were unfairly targeted under a bad, or badly applied, rule.

But the press reports and the PR will be all about how you have a dirty program that finally got what was coming to it. And you take your consequences. And the rule stays on the books. And the process lies dormant for a while, until they spring the trap on someone else.

Catch 40 or so folks under the APR, for instance, and listen to all the squealing! Then watch the swiftness with which the APR is modified or recinded.

Swift, evenly applied justice! Nothing gets bad laws taken off the books faster than that.

 

[HobokenHusky]

I have a right now.

Pretty sure Andy Katz had to consult a physician yesterday

 

[nomar]

Gotta think Andy Katz has an even bigger permagrin than the rest of us right now.

Marc Schwartz, too.

 

[freescooter]

Personally, I like witch hunts. We need to conduct lots and lots of them.

Not because they turn up actual witches, but because they showcase the process of why and how we go about defining and hunting witches.

When you apply these NCAA rules, occassionally instead of broadly, people will complain that they were unfairly targeted under a bad, or badly applied, rule.

But the press reports and the PR will be all about how you have a dirty program that finally got what was coming to it. And you take your consequences. And the rule stays on the books. And the process lies dormant for a while, until they spring the trap on someone else.

Catch 40 or so folks under the APR, for instance, and listen to all the squealing! Then watch the swiftness with which the APR is modified or recinded.

Swift, evenly applied justice! Nothing gets bad laws taken off the books faster than that.

APR is a bad example, because everyone submits the data every year. Unless 40 people actually do miss it, and I don't see that happening, it is here to stay, at least until there is some different scandal. A better example might be phone calls. My hunch is that if you actually dug into it, most schools would get burned. Problem is that the NCAA lacks the manpower to monitor everyone in any depth. So they react to news stroies and complaints of various types. But you do not want the NCAA to have that manpower, either. Just like you don't want a cop at every stop sign. Most people roll through most of them. Including the cops by the way...