Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="HoustonCuse, post: 251333, member: 87"] To me there is a much bigger problem here. I assume that both in Fab and Samuel's cases there were not investigated violations but rather incidents that the schools knew about and [I]could[/I] be violations. As such, they held the players out to avoid having to vacate tournament games. Finding out late breaking information like this, there is clearly no time to do a full investigation. So holding the player out for self defense reasons is unfortunate, bt understandable. OK, that said. Lets say it's the eve of a really important game, say the NC game. And lets say someone with an awful lot of cash (like oooh say bigtime players in the gambling game - fill in your choice of who this may be) decides they want to skew the outcome of this game and make some big money. All they have to do is identify a "handler" or coach or assistant, or teacher's aide or anyone else from say Thomas Robinson's background. Pay this guy $100k to drop some information at the last minute (say 6 hours before game time) that indicates there could be activity that would render Robinson ineligible. If you identify the right person, they will have enough credibility to pass first muster and now the school may be forced to hold the player out or risk possibly vacating a national championship. The information revealed by the paid-off informant does not have to be true - it just has to be enough to pass muster for a few hours available before game time (incidentally this is also a way to limit betting action changes as it's unlikely rumors about the possible ineligibility could travel to joe sixpack gamblers who have millions bet on the game). This strategy would be extra effective if there was a big favorite like UK, but maybe less effective if the school is less likely to care about issues like this (such as UK). I see nothing that prevents this strategy from happening though. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?