So either, the "source" is full of shit, the FBI is bluffing and Miller's calling it, or Miller is just saying "suck my dick, you'll never take me alive." :popcorn:
Upvote
0
-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter ScriptOhio
- Start date
Every Perp ever: You won't take me in
Every Cop ever (smiling): Oh yes we will
It's a tale as old as time
Upvote
0
OHSportsFan
Fan of Ohio Sports in Indy
Seems like E!SPN botched this story? Never would have guessed them to fail at journalism.
Upvote
0
OHSportsFan
Fan of Ohio Sports in Indy
God I hope E!SPN burns if this is debunked.
Can’t even get timelines right and they’ve gone radio silent.
Upvote
0
ESPN staff on their way to emergency meeting:
Miller calling in for teleconference with ESPN staff:
Upvote
0
TampaBuckeyes
Assistant Coach
I mean he's fucked either way if true, he will loose his job and never coach again in college, and the season will be stripped from them. So why not coach his team and let the players have the coach they want. If false, why sit and reduce your team's chances?
Upvote
0
OSUK
Sometimes lucid, mostly confused
You can't create an incorruptible system, especially when there is so much money flowing through CBB, but there are things the NCAA can do to make it better.
The definitions of "amateurism" and "student-athlete" need to reflect the circumstances of 2018, not 1918. Getting rid of one and done would help a lot because it is those players that cause most of the problem because they are the ones who are worth the most. Beyond that, just let student-athletes be like every other student. If an English-Lit major writes a great novel, they can have an agent and make 10 million dollars from the sale of their book, and no one cares. You have to own your name, likeness, and property - student-athlete or not. You should be able to have someone represent your interests in that business. Do that - and you don't have to pay athletes. You are just letting them leverage their worth if they have some. If they don't, they are getting a free education, and everyone who has paid a student loan for 20 years knows how valuable that is.
Where I am unsure is in the area of after you allow that, how do you prevent schools from creating a recruiting advantage, i.e. "come here and you will have greater leverage and money"?
The definitions of "amateurism" and "student-athlete" need to reflect the circumstances of 2018, not 1918. Getting rid of one and done would help a lot because it is those players that cause most of the problem because they are the ones who are worth the most. Beyond that, just let student-athletes be like every other student. If an English-Lit major writes a great novel, they can have an agent and make 10 million dollars from the sale of their book, and no one cares. You have to own your name, likeness, and property - student-athlete or not. You should be able to have someone represent your interests in that business. Do that - and you don't have to pay athletes. You are just letting them leverage their worth if they have some. If they don't, they are getting a free education, and everyone who has paid a student loan for 20 years knows how valuable that is.
Where I am unsure is in the area of after you allow that, how do you prevent schools from creating a recruiting advantage, i.e. "come here and you will have greater leverage and money"?
Upvote
0
DZ83CK
Not Banned
I only see one possible solution to the problem of coaches bribing players, and it isn't a particularly good one. But if college is going to become like the pros with the players being paid, then the players could be entered into a draft and then the players would have to stick with whatever college drafts them. If you want to go to college, enter the college draft. If you dont want to go to college, then turn pro. If you don't want to go to that college that drafts you, then you can sit out a year to wait on the NBA and/or turn pro in another league.
Upvote
0
Systems_id
Head Coach
I just don't see why this is such a huge problem, especially in basketball. It's not like one team has been dominating for 10 years. Kentucky had the top class for something like eight years straight yet it's a crap shoot as to whether they go deep in the tourney. Basketball is such a crap shoot that recruiting advantages don't really mean a whole lot unless you get your one-and-done talents to stay for more than a year like Kentucky did in 2015.
Upvote
0
OSUK
Sometimes lucid, mostly confused
I hear you. I'm not going to spend hours looking up and interpreting statistics that will probably do nothing more than expose me as a liar.
I like to try to simplify the complex, so with this it sounds something like this: basketball is a sport that relies on skill and athleticism; it is a sport that rewards height, and, sometimes, muscular weight (a 6-4 guard has an advantage over a 5-10 guard of same/similar skill); the better the athletes you have, and the better their skills are, the more advantage you have in a sport of athleticism and skill; ergo, the schools who can attract the top players in terms of athleticism, size, and skill have an advantage (doesn't guarantee anything, but is an obvious leg up on those who do not have those players).
Further, in a one and done context, you have mostly boys with amazing athleticism, skills, and measurables, but they have to play against older players who are men, and maturity, experience, and knowledge can offset an advantage in talent to a degree. Basketball is also very much a team sport, so as long as the talent and skill advantage isn't overwhelming, a team can often beat a group of individuals. And finally, basketball is a game of execution on defense and in making shots. Your defense can be a constant, but shot-making is a fickle thing.
There are a couple hundred teams competing for an NCAA championship. Only about 20-25 of them have any chance of winning it, and half of those are in the slim category. Once the field gets narrowed to 8-16, what you have left are the uber talented teams and hot teams. Hot teams with less talent can go a ways, but usually the clock strikes XII for Cinderella and she goes home.
I said all that to say this: coaches are being paid tens of millions of dollars to be successful, i.e. compete for and win national championships. The NCAA/schools make billions off of CBB. Players who give coaches and schools an advantage in getting into position to win a NC are a limited and precious market. Those elite players know their value. And we expect money to not flow to players and their families? The entire system is set up for coaches, agents, shoe companies, etc. to pay, and for players and their families to take. And, yet, we have rules that help create that system, but prohibit the very incentive that the system creates. It is utterly absurd.
PS: I'm not an expert on Ky, but my memory is that they had that Miller guy (Darius?) that was a senior, and Terrance Jones and Caulley-Stein who stayed and provided some stability. The difference when they won it was they had boys who were men (a very rare thing) in the unibrow guy and Kidd-Ghilcrest. But Kentucky has been in the final four and the elite eight a lot since Cal went there - very much in position IOW.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
