Labissiere & Briscoe

[Jamesvillecuse]

Why are you here?

he was probably hired by Cal to troll other schools boards

 

[Jack Hall]

Syracuse is a better academic institution, yes. Are they cleaner, it doesn't look like it from the position the 2 schools are in now.

Maybe get DaJaun Coleman to spill the beans about how dirty is since he passed up all the whatever you get to play for SU.

You never answered my actual question. You rephrased it and then answered it. But you call out RF? Interesting

 

[The Governor]

Why are you here?

Because it a message board and I have thoughts on the subject.

 

[RF2044]

he was probably hired by Cal to troll other schools boards

No, Cal doesn't get his hands dirty. He'd pay through an intermediary.

 

[NKR1978]

Cal stated in an interview on espn.com recently that he (paraphrasing) - Cares more about the number of kids he gets to the NBA not NCAA championships.

Guy is a DB - How the hell they stay above the APR is beyond my thoughts.

Is that supposed to be a bad thing?

 

[The Governor]

and then one at memphis, but they were just coincidences right?

I just explained what happened, what are you talking about coincidence? I guess it's a coincidence that Boeheim got Syracuse hit with probation in 92 and they're about to get hit again.

 

[Jack Hall]

I just explained what happened, what are you talking about coincidence? I guess it's a coincidence that Boeheim got Syracuse hit with probation in 92 and they're about to get hit again.

If SU gets hit w sanctions then no its not a coincidence, but neither are the umass and memphis situations either.

 

[Jack Hall]

I just explained what happened, what are you talking about coincidence? I guess it's a coincidence that Boeheim got Syracuse hit with probation in 92 and they're about to get hit again.

But thanks for not answering my question again

 

[RF2044]

I just explained what happened, what are you talking about coincidence? I guess it's a coincidence that Boeheim got Syracuse hit with probation in 92 and they're about to get hit again.

One can only imagine what the NCAA would uncover if they spent two full years investigating UK's program like they did here.

It would make our penny ante crap pale in comparison.

 

[HOFCeluck]

Thank you for taking what I said out of context and inferring, incorrectly, that I don't like having any one-and-done players.

To put this simply for you, I don't want a team that has a starting lineup that consists entirely of one-and-done players or sophmores who were supposed to be one-and-done. A.K.A. "a team like Kentucky." Teams like this turnover 80% of their roster every year. I don't want teams that are brand new year after year. And yes, I'm aware that Syracuse has had a lot of new faces recently, but not nearly to the level Kentucky has over the last few seasons.

The '03 team's starting lineup had a single one-and-done talent player, whom I loved. They also had a freshman guard who was expected to be their for 4 years, a good sophmore forward who wasn't expected to leave, a senior center, and a senior guard (one of my favorite players).

This is not a Kentucky-esque lineup.

Well I don't think you're being very consistent. You said that the fun of college basketball was watching players develop. Our best player in 2003 was a one and done who would have been a star anywhere. Most of the key contributors were freshmen and sophmors. I suppose Those Sophmores developed some, but so did UKs. They even had a senior on that title team! How can you say you enjoyed a 2003 that had to replace three starters and featured a star freshman that was all but a finished product? Development!

That's cool that you loved Melo, so did I. Why is that? Because he went to Syracuse? Because he won a national title? Wouldn't you love a handful of OADs if they came here and did something similar? Or is there a cutoff where a certain number of OADs becomes bad? We have had a lot of new faces but that's OK because it's not above a designated threshold? Is two and done good but OAD because Kentucky? (BTW that freshman guard who was expected to stay for four years didn't really develop much during his time here. You probably don't like him much)

Your entitled to your opinion, but forgive me if doesn't come off a little like sour grapes. If next year we start hauling in more OADs and start reaching the final four at a slightly higher clip than once a decade I don't think you or anyone else will be lamenting the good o l' days.

 

[Brooky03]

Well I don't think you're being very consistent. You said that the fun of college basketball was watching players develop. Our best player in 2003 was a one and done who would have been a star anywhere. Most of the key contributors were freshmen and sophmors. I suppose Those Sophmores developed some, but so did UKs. They even had a senior on that title team! How can you say you enjoyed a 2003 that had to replace three starters and featured a star freshman that was all but a finished product? Development!

That's cool that you loved Melo, so did I. Why is that? Because he went to Syracuse? Because he won a national title? Wouldn't you love a handful of OADs if they came here and did something similar? Or is there a cutoff where a certain number of OADs becomes bad? We have had a lot of new faces but that's OK because it's not above a designated threshold? Is two and done good but OAD because Kentucky? (BTW that freshman guard who was expected to stay for four years didn't really develop much during his time here. You probably don't like him much)

Your entitled to your opinion, but forgive me if doesn't come off a little like sour grapes. If next year we start hauling in more OADs and start reaching the final four at a slightly higher clip than once a decade I don't think you or anyone else will be lamenting the good o l' days.

a) I disagree that I've been inconsistent. I like players who have developed AND who are expected to develop in the program. Not inconsistent, just not fully detailed orginally I suppose. The expectation that they'll be staying for awhile impacts my emotions towards them. More succinctly, I'll get more invested in a potential long-term player than I will in a player who is here just to get to the NBA.

b) Obviously, I will still bleed Orange and root for all players that come through the program, regardless of OAD status. If we have 5 OAD's, I'll love all 5 players. There is a big difference between this and what I WANT the team to be like, though. I don't WANT a team full of OAD's. Why? Primarily, because the culture that is required in order to build teams like this is not a culture that I'm a fan of. I don't want Syracuse to simply be a means to an end. Don't mistake me, I'm not naive to the nature of college basketball, but I'd like at least the illusion that the players care about the school. That's not to say OAD's don't care about the univeristies they attend (i.e. Melo Center), but I'd bet money that the players who stay 3 or 4 years are much more attached to the university and fanbase than OAD's, in general. I get satisfaction from this feeling (real or not) and I appreciate the ability to watch a player grow (or the potential ability to watch a player - who isn't an expected OAD - to grow).

I've had similar arguments with Kentucky fans before. They can't understand why you wouldn't want the absolute best recruits every single season. Whereas, I think it's easy to understand why you wouldn't want that.

 

[Brooky03]

Your entitled to your opinion, but forgive me if doesn't come off a little like sour grapes. If next year we start hauling in more OADs and start reaching the final four at a slightly higher clip than once a decade I don't think you or anyone else will be lamenting the good o l' days.

You're entitled to your opinion as well, but I don't appreciate the sour grapes comment. It implies that there is something to be jealous of. Kentucky is not even on my radar until a couple rounds into the NCAAT. Given the volatility and uncertainty of recruiting classes and rankings, seeing them #1 on Scout's or Rivals' websites is no skin off my back.

 

[HOFCeluck]

a) I disagree that I've been inconsistent. I like players who have developed AND who are expected to develop in the program. Not inconsistent, just not fully detailed orginally I suppose. The expectation that they'll be staying for awhile impacts my emotions towards them. More succinctly, I'll get more invested in a potential long-term player than I will in a player who is here just to get to the NBA.

b) Obviously, I will still bleed Orange and root for all players that come through the program, regardless of OAD status. If we have 5 OAD's, I'll love all 5 players. There is a big difference between this and what I WANT the team to be like, though. I don't WANT a team full of OAD's. Why? Primarily, because the culture that is required in order to build teams like this is not a culture that I'm a fan of. I don't want Syracuse to simply be a means to an end. Don't mistake me, I'm not naive to the nature of college basketball, but I'd like at least the illusion that the players care about the school. That's not to say OAD's don't care about the univeristies they attend (i.e. Melo Center), but I'd bet money that the players who stay 3 or 4 years are much more attached to the university and fanbase than OAD's, in general. I get satisfaction from this feeling (real or not) and I appreciate the ability to watch a player grow (or the potential ability to watch a player - who isn't an expected OAD - to grow).

I've had similar arguments with Kentucky fans before. They can't understand why you wouldn't want the absolute best recruits every single season. Whereas, I think it's easy to understand why you wouldn't want that.

Then that's the difference between you and me. Syracuse is a means to an end for EVERY single kid we recruit. I harbor no illusions about this. CJ Fair would be gone if at any point during his career he was a projected lottery pick.

I've said this a couple times, but every kid we recruit has the same dream. And it's not to play basketball at Syracuse.

 

[HOFCeluck]

You're entitled to your opinion as well, but I don't appreciate the sour grapes comment. It implies that there is something to be jealous of. Kentucky is not even on my radar until a couple rounds into the NCAAT. Given the volatility and uncertainty of recruiting classes and rankings, seeing them #1 on Scout's or Rivals' websites is no skin off my back.

You took all of three replies to jump into an obvious Kentucky discussion, so I'm not sure that's accurate.

 

[Brooky03]

Then that's the difference between you and me. Syracuse is a means to an end for EVERY single kid we recruit. I harbor no illusions about this. CJ Fair would be gone if at any point during his career he was a projected lottery pick.

I've said this a couple times, but every kid we recruit has the same dream. And it's not to play basketball at Syracuse.

Agreed. I don't doubt that this is every college athletes dream either.

CJ Fair would have left if he was projected to be a Lottery pick. But he wasn't, and it was a safe bet that he wasn't going to be for at least 2 seasons. I guess that's the crux of my argument... expectations.

If a player surprises me and jumps earlier than initially expected, more power to him. I would hold no ill-will, even if it was a decision I disagreed with.

 

[Brooky03]

You took all of three replies to jump into an obvious Kentucky discussion, so I'm not sure that's accurate.

I jumped into the discussion to discuss SYRACUSE and the type of team/recruting that I prefer at SYRACUSE. Kentucky happens to be the example of a team grabbing tons of OAD's each season. If another school was doing it, then I'd use that school as an example of what I don't like. This topic only comes up in regards to Kentucky obviously. So, by happenstance, I talk about Kentucky. Doesn't mean I much care about what Kentucky is up to. I know that they recruit OAD's and land them. That's basically the extent of my knowledge/'research' into Kentucky.

I don't think your belief that my statement was inaccurate is accurate.

 

[Madbiker]

Cal was paying the dirty agent to pay his own current player? OK. Who does the payoff come from after they leave school? Oh wait, you're not answer that since you just made it up.

Cal didn't pay the agent at UMass. He may have arranged for the agent -- technically that is unproven. But the experience at UMass is what provides the genesis of the much improved plan at UK. And yes Cal wants the players to leave after 1 year. That is part of the process -- how the agents make money and why the agents pay the players (though not until they leave). Some day someone will write a book about it.

 

[Fly Rodder]

There are some incredibly silly posts in this thread.

 

[Jamesvillecuse]

I wonder if these Kentucky recruits know about what kind of man Adolph Rupp was and if so how they feel playing in a arena named for a man like him. Shows you the kind of school Kentucky is that they play in a arena named after a racist like Rupp

 

[SUintheVille]

I just explained

Governor, you live in Louisville, right? You must be a UK fan. Otherwise, why in the world would you be defending UK's basketball program and Cal? I live here too, and it all drives me crazy. No team gets all those top 10 guys all the time. And I have many UK friends.

 

[NKR1978]

I wonder if these Kentucky recruits know about what kind of man Adolph Rupp was and if so how they feel playing in a arena named for a man like him. Shows you the kind of school Kentucky is that they play in a arena named after a racist like Rupp

If recruits cared about that no one would play in the SEC or even much of the ACC aside from us, Pitt and BC.

Though I agree with you. Its sick that Rupp would be honored like that.

 

[Reilly35]

There's this amazing new invention you should check out, called Google. Feel free to do your own search.

As for whether Bledsoe's grade changes were justified--yeah... I'm going to go with a "NO" on that:

This much is certain: The grades in question are from Algebra 3, a course Bledsoe took before Algebra 2 and purportedly aced with an A.

“It isn’t normal for a person to do that or be allowed to do that,’’ former Parker principal Joseph Martin told the Birmingham News. “Had I looked at the transcript, I wouldn’t have allowed him to do that. By the time he got to us, I guess what we had to do … Well I ain’t even going there with that. I’m going to my grave with that.’’

More important, the Birmingham school district, at the request of the Alabama High School Athletic Association, already is in the process of reviewing Bledsoe’s eligibility. According to the News, the school system report is being compiled by outside lawyers and is expected soon.

And that’s what really matters for Kentucky.

If the high school association deems Bledsoe ineligible, then the NCAA finds itself in the tricky situation of figuring out what to do with a player who played collegiately but never should have qualified.
​

There's also this
http://www.kentucky.com/2010/09/28/1453853/several-bledsoe-grade-books-missing.html

The panel's four-page report noted that 17 of Bledsoe's 24 grades in his senior year had been "conspicuously changed."
Clemon said the panel used the word "conspicuously" because "If you look at the grade books, it would be very, very clear to you changes were made. You could see that numbers had been written over. In many instances, you could make out what the original entry was."
So Bledsoe's grades weren't changed until his senior year. Not between his junior and senior years as said by The Gov.

http://ukbasketball.bloginky.com/2009/05/06/bledsoe-commits-to-kentucky/

And when he committed to Kentucky on 5/6/09 he was ineligible. Not sure when high schools in Alabama graduate but I'm going to assume it's sometime in June. But he wasn't "challenged academically until after he committed to UK?

Bledsoe has not yet gained his academic eligibility as a college freshman. His coach at Parker High in Birmingham, Maurice Ford, voiced confidence that Bledsoe will be eligible. “He’s on track,” Ford told the Birmingham News. “This is the first time he’s been challenged academically. He knows what he has to do.”

 

[The Governor]

Cal didn't pay the agent at UMass. He may have arranged for the agent -- technically that is unproven. But the experience at UMass is what provides the genesis of the much improved plan at UK. And yes Cal wants the players to leave after 1 year. That is part of the process -- how the agents make money and why the agents pay the players (though not until they leave). Some day someone will write a book about it.

He arranged for a dirty low level agent to give Marcus Camby money the summer of his sophomore season at UMass? OK, you gotta explain to me what Calipari would gain from this. Your theory based in zero facts isn't even logical.

 

[pearl31]

.

Rationalizing to somehow change the minds of people who can't stand your white-supremacist-reared program and sleazy coach (whose minds are never going to change)... that's a terrific hobby you have!

 

[moqui]

Briscoe's dad had stated that he wanted Isaiah to be focus of the offense on the team he would ultimately play for. Ya gotta wonder how that's going to shake out at Kentucky where there are an infinitesimally higher amount of wanted touches than touches available. Just another one of these young kids who thinks the sun rises and sets on their ambitions and theirs alone.

Briscoe's dad said that, not Briscoe himself. In the event, in fact, Isaiah went the opposite direction, choosing instead to join a team where he would be forced to share the spotlight with equally talented teammates. Which makes him the opposite of the kind of kid you describe in the last sentence above.

Dujuan Coleman was told during his visit to Kentucky that he would never have to take a test, they would be taken for him.

I know, because I know his HS guidance counselor, with whom he is very close.
He was insulted. It was a major factor in his decision.

if anyone has direct knowledge of that kind of corruption and does not take it to the authorities and, if that fails, make it public, then they are complicit in the corruption . . . so I am to believe that DC was personally insulted, but chose to remain silent and to allow something like that to continue corrupting the game he loves? makes no sense to me