Poor Silvio
-
How about
no evidence of promises of future payments from a convicted felon to a guardian. Can that be used against a minor kid of the guardian? Or same, no evidence of the 20,000 other than he was going to give him the money?
-
@Crimsonorblue22 None of those transactions he received are going to be through traditional methods of receiving payments. Fenny knew what he was doing was against NCAA rules and so the money would likely be paid to him through methods that are not traceable by the NCAA like wire transfers under different names that donât directly tie Fenny to that money. Fenny then has the ability to tell the NCAA they can check all his accounts and theyâll never find the $60,000 because itâs likely in a secret account under a different name.
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 they donât have to prove it to punish Silvio?
-
kjayhawks said:
@Texas-Hawk-10 you could be right but if this case goes to court, you have to prove it. If the NCAA cant prove it, they look silly
Why would KU sue though at this point? By the time a jury reached a verdict, Silvio would be long gone from KU. If the NCAA hands out further punishment to KU, then KU could possibly sue the NCAA over those penalties, but it wonât happen to get Silvio reinstated because Silvio wouldnât benefit from it unless heâs planning on sticking around which is extremely unlikely at this point.
-
Silvios attorney might do something. Silvio is very young, if he could get next year here, he might stay. Hate for him to end up like Preston, Prestons mom screwed him. There needs to be something done about agents. @wissox and i would be great!
-
@Crimsonorblue22 The NCAA isnât a court room or the legal system. Due process doesnât apply to them when investigating schools and athletes. With the NCAA, itâs guilty until proven innocent. It would be up to KU to prove what did or did not happen. Gassnolaâs testimony about the $60,000 payment from Under Armour and his attempting to pay $20,000 to get out from that deal are pretty damning pieces of evidence against Silvioâs eligibility.
The Cam rule absolutely sucks, but itâs the current rules of the NCAA.
The part thatâs troubling for KU is Gassnola being labeled a KU booster. Thatâs what KU is going to be fighting at this point because thatâs where the serious NCAA sanctions would come from. If Silvioâs punishment gets reduced as a result, thatâs great, but KUâs focus in fighting this will be on Gassnola and his label as a booster.
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 thx!
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 is this new about shoe reps being called boosters?
-
Crimsonorblue22 said:
@Texas-Hawk-10 is this new about shoe reps being called boosters?
I have no idea and I havenât seen anything about why the NCAA considers Gassnola a booster.
-
This came up awhile ago in some older articles and seems to be the approach that the NCAA is going to take.
-
@BShark better include all schools
-
Crimsonorblue22 said:
@BShark better include all schools
Ha! Nike hid it better sadly. And now Adidas is back to normal too.
-
@Crimsonorblue22 I think anybody who gives a kid money to attend a particular school is considered a booster for that school.
Hereâs the NCAA definition.
http://www.ncaa.org/enforcement/role-boosters
Boosters, referred to by the NCAA as ârepresentatives of the institutionâs athletic interests,â 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 universityâs 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.Once an individual is identified as a ârepresentative of the institutionâs athletics interests,â the person retains that identity forever.
I donât think they need to be sanctioned by the university. They are just trying to provide a boost to the school, whether or not theyâve been asked to.
-
Jeff Long says that the NCAA would consider reinstatement if KU announces Gassnola was a booster.
Sorry Silvio, kansas doesnt like you that much
-
Just a follow up, Long was told to say Gassnola was a booster to help facilitate a process for reinstatement
-
The full statement by the NCAA announcing what they laughably term Silvioâs âreinstatement decisionâ says that the decision was based on facts provided by KU. Whether de Sousa was not a party to the statement of facts would be pretty much the only factor that would allow him to challenge the factual basis for the decision. If he was, his only challenge would be to the severity.
From NCAA.com:
NCAA provides reinstatement decision for Kansasâ Silvio De Sousa February 1, 2019 6:05pm
University of Kansas menâs basketball student-athlete Silvio De Sousa must sit out the remainder of the 2018-19 season and the 2019-20 season because his guardian received payment from a university booster and agent and agreed to receive additional funds from the same person.
According to the facts provided for purposes of the reinstatement request, De Sousaâs guardian received payment of $2,500 from an agent and booster of the school. He agreed to accept additional payment of $20,000 from the same individual and an Adidas employee for securing De Sousaâs enrollment at Kansas.
According to the guidelines adopted by the NCAA Division I membership, when a prospective student-athlete allows a third party to involve himself in the recruitment process, the prospective student-athlete is then responsible for the actions of that person, regardless of whether the prospective student-athlete had knowledge or if benefits were received. Membership guidelines state the starting point for these violations is permanent ineligibility, but the NCAA staff recognized mitigation based on the specific circumstances of this case when making its decision.
When a school discovers an NCAA rules violation has occurred, it must declare the student-athlete ineligible and may request the student-athleteâs eligibility be reinstated. The NCAA staff reviews each student-athlete reinstatement request individually based on its own specific facts. This decision may be appealed to the Division I Student-Athlete Reinstatement Committee, which is comprised of representatives from NCAA schools.
-
@mayjay are they saying KU admitted to all of that? Future payments, sorry Iâm confused.
-
@Crimsonorblue22 It looks like it. But whether SDS signed off on that is not known. It does imply from the explanation that the NCAA accepts SDSâ story of not knowing. But the FBI actually cleared Bowen, and that didnât matter, either.
-
So confusing
-
It doesnt really seem to matter if you prove your innocent. Once a rule is broke itâs over. All or nothing
-
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 âdeclareâ the Adidas rep T.J. Gassnola a âboosterâ. 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 âboosterâ 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 itâs 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 isnât 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 isnât going anywhere and he shouldnât. The NCAA doesnât 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 KUâs actions through Silvioâs 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 wasnât making sense about the punishment and statements. we were missing facts. That new fact about the âboosterâ 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 â 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 stillâŚ
-
@kjayhawks Iâm not going to get into a back and forth with you on this- if you want to shift the blame to the âattorneysâ 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 âboosterâ, 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 wouldnât be surprised if they donât put us on probation⌠and probably will ban us from post season play. I donât think many fans have quite grasped how profound this will affect our program, including you. If youâre fine with whatâs certainly going to come, more power to you. But Iâm 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 Iâve 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 âpart of it in the darkâ from Self and SDS. Is interesting
-
@kjayhawks thatâs why Iâm so confused. I was why are we talking a booster, Maryland booster? It seemed like it was one in the same person, but I couldnât understand it. So weird.
-
@KUSTEVE Did you know that our AD actually benefits from KU going on probation? Hereâs the provision -
âShould the University be placed under any federal, state, NCAA, or Conference investigation leading to restrictions or probation for its football, menâs basketball, womenâs basketball or womenâs 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.â
-
@HighEliteMajor which is what I was getting at, Long inherited this mess. He had zip to with it and Iâm okay with saying maybe he shouldnât have done this or that Iâm 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 Iâve 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 feudâŚbut there may be a subtle point you guys are missingâŚand it certainly needs more interpretation:
It could be that the âboosterâ designation as described was for purposes of Silvioâs eligibility this year only, and may have no outcome on past KU games, etc.
Iâm 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 Letâs hope your right, no Blood fued here, I get along with @KUSTEVE fine. We just disagree.
-
@HighEliteMajor Iâm really at a loss to wrap my head around it once I heard Longâs 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 âboosterâ. And thatâs 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 âineligibleâ player, and it will allow them to put us on probation because a 'booster" gave Silvioâs âguardianâ money. So, we now will be blamed and held accountable for the 60,000 that our âboosterâ 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, letâs hope nothing else comes of this crap. doubtful, but fingers crossed.
-
@jayhawkcsg but if itâs just like a hypothetical, not a true statement, and all parties know it isnât true, why do we have to do it.
-
@Crimsonorblue22 No clue. Stupid lawyer crap most likely. Itâs either that or our AD is the dumbest AD on the planet. I prefer to think heâs not.
-
So called felon rep not legal booster, said he was going to give fenny 20,000 to pay off Maryland booster. He didnât 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, Iâm 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 Donât 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 hadnât researched what went down at first, and just assumed the NCAA had set Long up. And thatâs probably true.Then I saw Longâs explanationâŚOMG. i just canât figure out why you would admit the only two things that could put our program on probationâŚone of which ( declaring the Adidas rep as a booster ) was a lie.
-
@kjayhawks Youâre right, he did inherit this. We just donât 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 whatâs 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 donât 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 donât know for sure is if the NCAA used that âadmissionâ against us, or if they made that independent determination.
If they did use the admission against us, Iâm 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. Itâs not a hypothetical if the âadmissionâ is used against you.
Again, this is just spit ballinâ a bit.
When this first came out and read the NCAA statement, I didnât comprehend that Gassnola and the âboosterâ were one in the same.
-
@HighEliteMajor i will surprised if we donât 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 âforebodingâ 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 Selfâs 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 isnât Longâs 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 â 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. Iâm sure we know quite a bit. Iâm sure we can make everyone very uncomfortable. Maybe we tell the NCAA that if they come at us hard, weâre not going to roll over and take it.
Of course, I really donât 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 âŚ
@Crimsonorblue22 Heâs spit ballinâ too. Just theorizing. I would seriously doubt it. But you never know. Itâs 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 schoolâs 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.
