Is it over?
-
-
It is never over when it comes to this kind of stuff
-
Should it be? Yes. Is it? Probably not.
-
We need to remember what Yogi Berra said…
-
not for BYU. Good grief the NCAA is the dumbest organization I’ve ever seen
-
@BeddieKU23 The penalty and denial of the appeal seem like they are based on disbelief of their own finding that the staff didn’t know about it.
-
Gassnola sentenced to Probation. I wonder if that sets in motion the NCAA’s plans
-
So based on the BYU decision, how does KU escape? The BYU decision, if I’m looking at this from the KU bubble, seems to pave the way for the results we are fearing. This was activity by a booster.
In fact, Gassnola was much closer to our staff than the boosters in BYU’s situation. Gassnola was relied upon for extensive, hands on recruiting help.
Anyone think the NCAA did this to BYU as a purposeful precursor to the punishment decisions related to the Adidas issues?
Gassnola as we all know doesn’t have to talk to the NCAA. But the NCAA can pay him for info. But he can’t change his story so to speak from sworn testimony, e.g., Self didn’t know. Based on the BYU deal, the “Self didn’t know” defense is a weak one.
-
HighEliteMajor said:
So based on the BYU decision, how does KU escape? The BYU decision, if I’m looking at this from the KU bubble, seems to pave the way for the results we are fearing. This was activity by a booster.
In fact, Gassnola was much closer to our staff than the boosters in BYU’s situation. Gassnola was relied upon for extensive, hands on recruiting help.
Anyone think the NCAA did this to BYU as a purposeful precursor to the punishment decisions related to the Adidas issues?
Gassnola as we all know doesn’t have to talk to the NCAA. But the NCAA can pay him for info. But he can’t change his story so to speak from sworn testimony, e.g., Self didn’t know. Based on the BYU deal, the “Self didn’t know” defense is a weak one.
A booster though is directly affiliated with the university, whereas shoe companies are the big, fat gray lady that likes to give money to universities and players and who if she chose to could flat out sing but instead chooses to only hum.
-
@Marco I think we did this dance before. Did you ever read the rule on boosters? Go to the NCAA rules and read the definition of a booster. Gassnola was more a booster than the generic car dealer. Gassnola specifically aided in recruiting. Had direct contact with coaches. We know where the NCAA’s head is on this. We had to concede the booster status in the SDS deal.
Here’s the definition of a booster -
Boosters, referred to by the NCAA as “representatives of the institution’s athletic interests,” include anyone who has:
•Provided a donation in order to obtain season tickets for any sport at the university.
•Participated in or has been a member of an organization promoting the university’s athletics programs.
•Made financial contributions to the athletic department or to a university booster organization.
•Arranged for or provided employment for enrolled student-athletes.
•Assisted or has been requested by university staff to assist in the recruitment of prospective student-athletes.
•Assisted in providing benefits to enrolled student athletes or their families.
•Been involved otherwise in promoting university athletics.
-
@HighEliteMajor and not a one of those are true, atleast in the proven and literal sense, in regards to Adidas and its affiliation with KU.
-
Marco said:
@HighEliteMajor and not a one of those are true, atleast in proven sense, in regards to Adidas and its affiliation with KU.
Just read the highlighted portion. You’re saying with a straight face that Adidas and Gassnola have not, “Assisted or has been requested by university staff to assist in the recruitment of prospective student-athletes”?
Now, the argument comes in my opinion on the fact that the classic “booster” doesn’t do what Adidas and Gassnola do. In fact, the rules prohibit what Gassnola did on its face … helping with recruiting. So I think the real argument there is the NCAA’s application of the rules historically. That everyone who relies on Adidas or Nike to help are violating the rules as written. For example, “boosters” can’t contact recruits for recruiting purposes. At least an argument. On the other hand, they were requested.
-
“Assisted or has been requested by university staff to assist in the recruitment of prospective student-athletes”
Key word “or” doesn’t have to be both. The fact is Gassnola assisted in recruitment, or he did in the eyes of the NCAA. BYU’s argument/defense is the same as ours.
Someone from ESPN, I forgot who, said what we get charged with and what we come away with will be two different things.
Now I know SDS had no clue these shenanigans were taking place, or I hope not, but he owes us in a way to stay his senior season wouldn’t you guys agree?
-
The ncaa has some vague messages. Thank goodness that judge shut them down from getting the rest.
-
I hear we are playing Duke this year…
Sorry can’t take any more of the NCAA and their joke of a system. I heard they had Xion conduct the investigation at Puke. God I hope we crush them with Silvio going for 25 and 15.
-
@Fightsongwriter Silvio will rip them apart. I just hope he doesn’t come out too amped and get in foul trouble
-
HighEliteMajor said:
So based on the BYU decision, how does KU escape? The BYU decision, if I’m looking at this from the KU bubble, seems to pave the way for the results we are fearing. This was activity by a booster.
In fact, Gassnola was much closer to our staff than the boosters in BYU’s situation. Gassnola was relied upon for extensive, hands on recruiting help.
Anyone think the NCAA did this to BYU as a purposeful precursor to the punishment decisions related to the Adidas issues?
Gassnola as we all know doesn’t have to talk to the NCAA. But the NCAA can pay him for info. But he can’t change his story so to speak from sworn testimony, e.g., Self didn’t know. Based on the BYU deal, the “Self didn’t know” defense is a weak one.
I think we have to wait for the potential NOA. It did cross my mind that this decision was in part a chess move to set recent precedent.
There are levels to this as far as potential damage and escape. A lack of institutional control charge would definitely hurt. Any language implicating Self or staff members as complicit with the Preston/De Sousa situations would be headlines we don’t want to see.
The part about Gassnola & Addidas is complicated. It wasn’t proven in testimony that Gassnola was acting under the “permission” of KU/Self to recruit right? Correct me if I’m wrong there. But the assumption is this was the way things got done and maybe that is the way its done across the country. If they dig into that can of worms I have no idea where that goes.
The NCAA being denied access to information from the case makes it appear like they will hit a dead end. How do you see that decision impacting what may come?
