Poor Silvio
-
Soooo, the NCAA told us about a month ago that the only way they would consider reinstating DeSouza is if we declared him ineligible, and also we “declare” the Adidas rep T.J. Gassnola a “booster”. And like complete idiots, we did that. That way, the NCAA could ban DeSouza for 2 years, and they could come after our wins, conference title, and Final Four appearance because a KU “booster” gave a guardian money. So, we were misled into screwing ourselves to the wall. This was a despicable act by the guardian, and the NCAA, and might be the most egregious act on the part of the NCAA since it’s inception. Somebody has the knives out for us, and stuck it in deep. Here is our brilliant Athletic Director explaining his complete ignorance of what bastards he was dealing with:
If our conference title, wins and Final Four get set aside, I think Jeff Long should be shown the door.
-
This is so very confusing to me. Surely we had legal help and this is in writing. Why would this be legal and can they go back on their word, legally? They are admitting it isn’t true.
-
KUSTEVE said:
If our conference title, wins and Final Four get set aside, I think Jeff Long should be shown the door.
Dude calm down. Long isn’t going anywhere and he shouldn’t. The NCAA doesn’t need KU to admit Gassnola was a booster to come down on the school. They have plenty of evidence to make that conclusion on their own, regardless of KU’s actions through Silvio’s reinstatement process.
-
Can u imagine going thru this w/sz?
-
To put any of this on Long is Ludicrous to put it nicely. He was likely doing what was recommended by our legal team. He also has in his contract he cant be fired from findings of this FBI probe.
-
Yup. As i was saying earlier, something wasn’t making sense about the punishment and statements. we were missing facts. That new fact about the “booster” designation adds some clarity. The punishment starts making sense.
I was dumbfounded at first that KU would admit to such a thing (Gassnola was a booster), but if you think about it some more, maybe it was intentional. Maybe that simply focuses the punishment to one person (Silvio), and not the institution (Kansas – vacated wins, etc).
I sense that our AD is spewing some subtle B.S. as well. Who the eff knows.
What i do know is that we should now disappear Silvio from the program to wrap this up. the longer it lingers, the fewer potential recruits consider KU.
Nothing about this smells right still…
-
@kjayhawks I’m not going to get into a back and forth with you on this- if you want to shift the blame to the “attorneys” instead of the person who is in charge of the athletic department, then that is your right. But, the fact remains that by declaring Silvio ineligible, and falsely declaring the Adidas rep as a “booster”, the NCAA can now set aside every win we had when Silvio played, including our conference title, and our Final Four Appearance. Furthermore, they can come after our program with both barrels, and they most certainly will. I wouldn’t be surprised if they don’t put us on probation… and probably will ban us from post season play. I don’t think many fans have quite grasped how profound this will affect our program, including you. If you’re fine with what’s certainly going to come, more power to you. But I’m not. If Long had done nothing, we would still have Silvio on the bench. What is ludicrous, imo, is the terrible position he has put our program in.
-
@KUSTEVE I’ve been worried about this all along, I agree with all if your statement except that this is on Long. I highly doubt Long did that without input from dozens of folks including Bill Self.
-
They had to keep this from self and Silvio. Crazy. I still think the legal dept took care of this.
-
@Crimsonorblue22 “part of it in the dark” from Self and SDS. Is interesting
-
@kjayhawks that’s why I’m so confused. I was why are we talking a booster, Maryland booster? It seemed like it was one in the same person, but I couldn’t understand it. So weird.
-
@KUSTEVE Did you know that our AD actually benefits from KU going on probation? Here’s the provision -
“Should the University be placed under any federal, state, NCAA, or Conference investigation leading to restrictions or probation for its football, men’s basketball, women’s basketball or women’s volleyball athletic programs for matters occurring prior to the Effective Date of the Executive, the term of the contract shall be extended equal to the length of the penalties.”
-
@HighEliteMajor which is what I was getting at, Long inherited this mess. He had zip to with it and I’m okay with saying maybe he shouldn’t have done this or that I’m sure there are a gods plenty on his team both interally and out sourced that are telling him just what the hell to do. Not get this really interesting on here but I’ve heard a ton of rumors of Pop retiring and Self to San Antonio as early as at this seasons end.
-
-
@KUSTEVE @kjayhawks Not to interrupt a blood feud…but there may be a subtle point you guys are missing…and it certainly needs more interpretation:
It could be that the “booster” designation as described was for purposes of Silvio’s eligibility this year only, and may have no outcome on past KU games, etc.
I’m no expert of course, but it reads that way. that could mean the NCAA will not go back and punish KU for past wins, championships, etc.
-
@jayhawkcsg Let’s hope your right, no Blood fued here, I get along with @KUSTEVE fine. We just disagree.
-
@HighEliteMajor I’m really at a loss to wrap my head around it once I heard Long’s explanation. I thought it was really weird when we all of a sudden decided to declare Silvio ineligible. And the Adidas rep suddenly becomes a “booster”. And that’s what Long thought would get Silvio declared able to play? What that did was allow the NCAA to take away our victories from last year for using an “ineligible” player, and it will allow them to put us on probation because a 'booster" gave Silvio’s “guardian” money. So, we now will be blamed and held accountable for the 60,000 that our “booster” paid to get Silvio to play Maryland. As crazy as it might seem, the only person that comes out smelling like a rose is Jeff Long. You might be on to something.
-
@kjayhawks Ha. good. Yep, let’s hope nothing else comes of this crap. doubtful, but fingers crossed.
-
@jayhawkcsg but if it’s just like a hypothetical, not a true statement, and all parties know it isn’t true, why do we have to do it.
-
@Crimsonorblue22 No clue. Stupid lawyer crap most likely. It’s either that or our AD is the dumbest AD on the planet. I prefer to think he’s not.
-
So called felon rep not legal booster, said he was going to give fenny 20,000 to pay off Maryland booster. He didn’t even give him money. Low down felon, who now is known as a ku booster just said that, never gave him money, right.
?
-
@KUSTEVE You could be right, I’m just not sure Long needs an extension based on that. He already has a crap load of money and is highly respected in this profession. I would think this could very well be his last stop and he would want to end his career with a solid FB and B.B. program.
-
@jayhawkcsg Don’t mistake passion for malice. I agree with KJ 99.9% of the time. He bleeds Crimson and Blue, just like me. To tell you the truth, I hadn’t researched what went down at first, and just assumed the NCAA had set Long up. And that’s probably true.Then I saw Long’s explanation…OMG. i just can’t figure out why you would admit the only two things that could put our program on probation…one of which ( declaring the Adidas rep as a booster ) was a lie.
-
@kjayhawks You’re right, he did inherit this. We just don’t know how he steered the ship, or his role, after arriving. We only know what we hear.
@KUSTEVE One thing to consider. In legal proceedings, there is a process for a Motion to Dismiss. That is at an early stage. But to get the dismissal, you have to assume the allegations of the other side to be true, and thus the judge would rule that the case cannot proceed even on the alleged facts. That may be a bit of what’s going on here. KU wanted a resolution. So to do so, they had to accept the concept of Gassnola being a booster. Essentially, assuming the worst case fact scenario, can we get him reinstated? If Gassnola is really a booster?
That an attempt to provide a possible explanation.
That aside, you don’t do that when the adversary can use the admission against you, just as it appears that they did. That is very hard for me to fathom. Now, what I don’t know for sure is if the NCAA used that “admission” against us, or if they made that independent determination.
If they did use the admission against us, I’m not quite sure what to say at this point.
Why would we have to make such an admission if it could be the dagger that delivers the death shot?
Long called a it hypothetical. It’s not a hypothetical if the “admission” is used against you.
Again, this is just spit ballin’ a bit.
When this first came out and read the NCAA statement, I didn’t comprehend that Gassnola and the “booster” were one in the same.
-
@HighEliteMajor i will surprised if we don’t have an avalanche of consequences, from vacated wins, titles, FF, to probation in the future. It might turn out to be the single most idiotic response to an NCAA investigation in the history of the NCAA.
-
@KUSTEVE I mentioned the word “foreboding” the other day. It does feel that way. I will be surprised if the penalty is less than 1) Vacate FF and wins that DeSousa participated in, 2) No tourney in 2019-20, and 3) a loss of a scholarship or two.
And I know you were a bit upset with me when I said this a while back, but this path is why I have feared that our coach might leave. I wonder if the NCAA comes after Self, what they may know, and what Self’s reaction might be. Regardless of any of that, a normal person might say he can enjoy life better away from such hassles.
-
@HighEliteMajor It makes me wonder if this isn’t Long’s way of pushing him out. Maybe Long has another buddy that coaches basketball.
-
@KUSTEVE no way
-
@KUSTEVE You truly never know the motives of individuals. The insecurities. Or what is in their head.
This also goes back a bit to one of my thoughts – if the NCAA hits our program hard, we should burn it down. Name names, give info, let everyone know where the bodies are buried. We certainly know what Zion got. I’m sure we know quite a bit. I’m sure we can make everyone very uncomfortable. Maybe we tell the NCAA that if they come at us hard, we’re not going to roll over and take it.
Of course, I really don’t know how this leverage game works internally. KU, NCAA, etc. There may be other things going on that make this implausible.
But I do wonder …
@Crimsonorblue22 He’s spit ballin’ too. Just theorizing. I would seriously doubt it. But you never know. It’s worth considering. What do you think about the fact that Long benefits from NCAA sanctions?
I think that contract provision is just ridiculous. You allow an employee to gain more compensation for a negative result? A result that he has his hands on, management wise?
Again, I trust his integrity I guess. But folks have done far worse for more money.
And I think @kjayhawks is right. Attorneys have their hands all over this.
But are these the same attorneys that let Self go out and give that silly statement after the trial verdict? That was not written by a (competent) lawyer.
-
I suggested from the first evidence in 2017 that if the Adidas rep was involved in steering recruits to KU he could possibly be held to be a booster. Maybe that is why I have not been as surprised at what has transpired since. Booster basically means (IIRC) anyone with whom the university has a formal or informal relationship who helps recruit for, raise funds for, or promotes the school with the school’s knowledge. Schools are generally held responsible for supervising the conduct of boosters.
Here, there is in my mind no question based on the evidence from trial that the NCAA has a strong case on which to find the rep was a booster upon whom KU relied extensively for contact and influence in recruiting. I think our only arguable defense is that the booster was engaged in unforeseeable criminal conduct.
-
@mayjay With that, how quickly do dots get connected to the top of the food chain? How could Self be ignorant of all of this if that’s really the narrative? I keep thinking of his statement after the verdict.
And I know you’ll remember me mentioning this – I have felt from the start of the prosecution that the real target is the big fish, the pristine leader, Bil Self. Prosecutors love bringing such folks down. The higher the mountain, the harder the fall.
How this would all work between the FBI and NCAA and KU, I don’t know. But the former seem to be working together a bit, and much to our detriment.
-
@mayjay what about the way they presented it to us? Kinda underhanded?
-
@HighEliteMajor I still don’t think that suspicion is correct, and nothing leads me to suspect Self would be a target of the FBI.
-
@Crimsonorblue22 I think our strategy has been designed to allow us to continue asserting innocence without subjecting ourselves to a “lack of cooperation” finding. A tightrope indeed, and one we may find is not well anchored.
Edit: innocence and ignorance both
-
@mayjay so what can we do to help Silvio w/ not hurting ku?
-
@Crimsonorblue22 I have wondered something that is connected to your question: Can Silvio stay at KU on schollie while being ruled ineligible?
-
That said he could, and practice, hopefully travel w/them
-
@mayjay Another “target” I had thought of was the NCAA model. A political motivation. I just can’t imagine though that this sort of prosecution is solely designed to prosecute a few underlings in this swamp.
@Crimsonorblue22 This was underhanded I think. I have never seen anything (nor every heard of anything) that requires an admission such as this. To admit that the employee of a third party (a shoe company in this case) was acting as a booster, and not as focusing on his duties as employee of Adidas, is outrageous to me. He was acting for Adidas. He could not care less if it was KU or Cal Poly Tech. Insert the name. It was a college that promoted Adidas best. That is much different than a booster – the guy that donates to the program, etc.
DeSousa remains on scholarship. We can give scholarships to ineligible players. So this talk about this only hurting the player and others skating is baloney. DeSousa can’t play basketball. KU can’t have him play basketball. Both are hurt. But DeSousa still gets the free education if he wants it (at least this season).
-
@Crimsonorblue22 Then we should make a big deal about all of our efforts to keep him here long enough to get a degree. Include details of how he worked extra hard to enroll early, what his program is, our work to help this maligned kid in school, his grades, etc.
Basically show that we care more about him as a student athlete than the NCAA does when that is their alleged goal. And dispel any notion in the minds of potential recruits that KU would not stay committed to our own.
-
@mayjay I don’t think that would be a problem! KU fans and support staff love those kids. Ever listen to the senior speeches? The number of fans that stay. That’s what KU is all about! I read scot pollards twitter today and he said he came to Kansas because of the tradition, he could have gone where there was
-
@HighEliteMajor I was thinking the same thing. Burn that sucker down.
-
STEVE and HEM are in agreement.
The end is nigh.
-
I’ll give it to you guys. Firing Long is the dumbest idea I’ve heard in 2019. Well done! You set a high bar.
-
If I’m Self while I was recruiting this past year I was wearing wire. So if John Doe said Coach K is give me a car and 50k, I want more to go to kansas. I tell the NCAA, I got your poster boy, your move folks. I still said we need to drop Adidas right now and go with NIKE, the NCAA obviously is getting a monster check from Phil Knight at this point.
-
@HighEliteMajor I think you are right. I think our FF gets vacated. Scholarship or two…probably. The one I can’t quite decide on is tourney ban. I also agree…burn it down. I don’t like being one of the few programs they make an example of…and others get off scot free.
-
They aren’t going to vacate anything. They already over-reached and they know it.
-
@DanR I hope you are right. But I think the NCAA wants to pound on their chest and pretend they’re being tough.
-
@Crimsonorblue22 I was being facetious. I’m still at a loss how Long thought declaring the representative from Adidas a "booster"was a good idea, or declaring Silvio ineligible was a good idea. It wasn’t like we were playing Silvio. If they take away’s Devonte and company’s FF, I’m gonna be pissed.
-
@FarmerJayhawk Hyperbole. Knee jerk reaction. Emotional outburst. Over the top. i grant you most of that. However, the dumbest idea of 2019, imo, was to declare a guy under federal indictment a "booster’, and declaring a player who wasn’t playing “ineligible”, so it would give the NCAA grounds to vacate half our season. When the penalties start flying, I think my point will come into focus a bit more.
-
Anyone notice that ESPN announcers basically agreed with the decision? Fran saying that “most coaches agreed” is pure crap, imo. Both Frannie and Dickie V only complained about the length of time to reach a decision, and never actually voiced any dissent about the harshest decision I can ever remember. Sounds like they were given scripts what to say. That’s why I keep saying that ESPN is not our friend.
