NCAA investigation: Internship hours, ties between YMCA and Syracuse athletes part of inquiry

[hungrychuck]

Mehhh, depends what your definition of investigative journalism is. A lot of it has been "hypothetical", but hey thats the way "journalists" report in this day in age. I think they have had a difficult time finding factual evidence to put in their articles, so they have been relying on "hypotheticals" to get more page clicks.

"Page clicks" is simply a modern term for reader interest.

I think it's silly to pretend there isn't significant reader interest in the latest NCAA saga.

 

[Toga]

First, what is this?

Investigators also asked about a former YMCA employee who had exceptional access to Syracuse men's basketball players and was sued for allegedly misappropriating close to $350,000 from the Y. It is unclear if any of those funds were given to athletes

It is unclear or there is absolutely no evidence that any of these funds were given to athletes? This is ridiculous and implies potential guilt to make the story jucier.

Second, do you see Axe's comment in the comments section:

"The plot thickens?"

I know it's just the comments, but What.

I usually defend these guys but this is some BS. Act, write and behave like a professional.

What would be the distinction here between "unclear" and "no evidence"?

 

[hungrychuck]

First, what is this?

Investigators also asked about a former YMCA employee who had exceptional access to Syracuse men's basketball players and was sued for allegedly misappropriating close to $350,000 from the Y. It is unclear if any of those funds were given to athletes

It is unclear or there is absolutely no evidence that any of these funds were given to athletes? This is ridiculous and implies potential guilt to make the story jucier.

Second, do you see Axe's comment in the comments section:

"The plot thickens?"

I know it's just the comments, but What.

I usually defend these guys but this is some BS. Act, write and behave like a professional.

I agree with this point. That's a cheap backdoor way to raise the point, and shouldn't have gotten past an editor.

 

[DoctorBombay]

So far, any indications of a Doomsday "UMiami-like booster" or "UNC-like academic" situation seem unlikely.
Its the nature of fans to look at the worst case, I know I'm guilty of that at times.
However, IF this is all they've got then we can all start to breathe easier. LGO

 

[M2MPrinciples]

I agree with this point. That's a cheap backdoor way to raise the point, and shouldn't have gotten past an editor.

No. If they don't include the disclaimer, it implies that the reporter believes the funds were likely made available to the athletes. This is very responsible reporting/writing and it's mind-boggling that some of you are taking it as far as you are.

 

[Dave85]

http://www.syracuse.com/orangesport..._between_ymca_and_syracuse_athletes_part.html

"I know that I've always done my part," Rhodes said. "I have no issue saying that. I've always held up my end of the bargain. I can't control what other people do."

What the heck does this mean?

Exactly what did the PS reporters do wrong here?

The found out more details about matters already under investigation by the NCAA and made them known to their readers.

They did not turn up evidence of violations or other information not already known to the NCAA.

So we know a little more about the probe. Good on them as far as I'm concerned.

How you do know they are not omitting facts that allow people to come to a completely different conclusions instead of the innuendo they are trying to sell? That's my problem with reporters in general. If it bleeds it leads. The facts are secondary. Controversy is everything.

 

[AlaskaSU]

Soun

Not clear how a guy who allegedly embezzled $300,000+ was not charged with a crime.

Out of court settlement?

 

[M2MPrinciples]

"I know that I've always done my part," Rhodes said. "I have no issue saying that. I've always held up my end of the bargain. I can't control what other people do."

What the heck does this mean?


How you do know they are not omitting facts that allow people to come to a completely different conclusions instead of the innuendo they are trying to sell? That's my problem with reporters in general. If it bleeds it leads. The facts are secondary. Controversy is everything.

How do you know they are? You seem pretty convinced.

 

[Dave85]

How do you know they are? You seem pretty convinced.

I did not say I know that they are omitting facts. Did I say that? Learn how to read.

 

[hungrychuck]

No. If they don't include the disclaimer, it implies that the reporter believes the funds were likely made available to the athletes. This is very responsible reporting/writing and it's mind-boggling that some of you are taking it as far as you are.

Sorry, can't agree with this. There is absolutely no indication based on the reporting that any embezzled money wound up in the hands of athletes. Therefore you do not as a reporter introduce that possibility yourself. You remain mute on the subject and let the reader draw what conclusion he may.

It is a cheap shot and mars what otherwise seems to be a very well reported piece.

 

[texascpa]

Exactly. A lot of young journos looking to make a name for themselves.

FTFY

 

[hungrychuck]

"I know that I've always done my part," Rhodes said. "I have no issue saying that. I've always held up my end of the bargain. I can't control what other people do."

What the heck does this mean?


How you do know they are not omitting facts that allow people to come to a completely different conclusions instead of the innuendo they are trying to sell? That's my problem with reporters in general. If it bleeds it leads. The facts are secondary. Controversy is everything.

Seems like these reporters did a pretty good job of getting at facts here.

I'm not sure why anyone would assume they omitted facts. That seems a bizarre reaction to me.

 

[Toga]

Sorry, can't agree with this. There is absolutely no indication based on the reporting that any embezzled money wound up in the hands of athletes. Therefore you do not as a reporter introduce that possibility yourself. You remain mute on the subject and let the reader draw what conclusion he may.

It is a cheap shot and mars what otherwise seems to be a very well reported piece.

"At this time there is no indication" = fine
"It is unclear" = not fine

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

In NY, interns, for the most part, now need to be paid. SU just ahead of the curve

 

[Cusefan0307]

"Page clicks" is simply a modern term for reader interest.

I think it's silly to pretend there isn't significant reader interest in the latest NCAA saga.

I didn't say there wasn't reader interest, but to say Carlson and Mink have only reported facts is a little bit of a stretch...their own analysis/opinions have been included.

 

[M2MPrinciples]

Sorry, can't agree with this. There is absolutely no indication based on the reporting that any embezzled money wound up in the hands of athletes. Therefore you do not as a reporter introduce that possibility yourself. You remain mute on the subject and let the reader draw what conclusion he may.

It is a cheap shot and mars what otherwise seems to be a very well reported piece.

What do you think the reaction here would be had that sentence not been included?

 

[Dave85]

Seems like these reporters did a pretty good job of getting at facts here.

I'm not sure why anyone would assume they omitted facts. That seems a bizarre reaction to me.

Here's the quote:

"Investigators also asked about a former YMCA employee who had exceptional access to Syracuse men's basketball players and was sued for allegedly misappropriating close to $350,000 from the Y. It is unclear if any of those funds were given to athletes."

The "unclear" innuendo here is that the man being sued was giving the money to the basketball students.

Maybe the lyrics from this Don Henley song will help you understand:

We can do "The Innuendo," we can dance and sing
When it's said and done we haven't told you a thing
We all know that crap is king, give us dirty laundry

 

[texascpa]

Soun

Out of court settlement?

Embezzlement is a criminal offense. You can't do an "out of court settlement" on a criminal offense, only civil.

 

[jgeorge322]

just to throw my 2 cents in:
1. i have no problem w the article. i dont think it is inflammatory
2. it makes me feel better, if anything

 

[jgeorge322]

Embezzlement is a criminal offense. You can't do an "out of court settlement" on a criminal offense, only civil.

well you can do a pleas bargain, but you appear correct that no charges were brought. i wonder why because thats a lot of money, especially for the Y, which i imagine operates a strict budget.

 

[bubba1917]

I think we are being a little to optimistic. What the Post revealed seems to be small potatoes. However you don't proceed to a hearing unless the investigators have determinee a 'serious' violation. Hope it is a tempest in a teapot but i feel there is some substance to the charges.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Investigators also asked about a former YMCA employee who had exceptional access to Syracuse men's basketball players and was sued for allegedly misappropriating close to $350,000 from the Y. It is unclear if any of those funds were given to OttoinGrotto.

For the record - no.

 

[texascpa]

well you can do a pleas bargain, but you appear correct that no charges were brought. i wonder why because thats a lot of money, especially for the Y, which i imagine operates a strict budget.

Yeah, the only thing I can think of is that the DA didn't have enough evidence and allowed the YMCA to work it out themselves with the guy.

 

[AlaskaSU]

The Y would not bring suit, with attendant public disgrace, unless it was dam sure that there was an embezzlement. The out of court settlement could mean that a) the Y got their money back which means that it did not go to Cuse athletes, or 2) they were able to garnish his wages until the money is paid back, which means that there is a question as to where the money went. Even though he was not a Univ. employee, if there was a $350,000 slush fund for athletes it would be lack of institutional control. If it was a slush fund it will eventually be exposed. The Univ needs to find out rather than sit and wait for this to unwind now or in the future. At this point it seems that it could be minor or major. Too early to reach a conclusion one way or the other.

 

[hungrychuck]

Here's the quote:

"Investigators also asked about a former YMCA employee who had exceptional access to Syracuse men's basketball players and was sued for allegedly misappropriating close to $350,000 from the Y. It is unclear if any of those funds were given to athletes."

The "unclear" innuendo here is that the man being sued was giving the money to the basketball students.

Maybe the lyrics from this Don Henley song will help you understand:

We can do "The Innuendo," we can dance and sing
When it's said and done we haven't told you a thing
We all know that crap is king, give us dirty laundry

I'm glad you like Don Henley, but how does this post support your contention that facts were omitted?