Kansas Crimson

Illy: the master of repeating the obvious

Technically, De Sousa is eligible now...

i think many forget this fact

TDub wrote: ↑Thu Dec 13, 2018 8:44 am Illy: the master of repeating the obvious

It's obvious to anyone that watched a single second of the Big 12 Tourney and NCAA Tourney what De Sousa is.

TraditionKU wrote: ↑Thu Dec 13, 2018 8:55 am Technically, De Sousa is eligible now...

i think many forget this fact

Yes, I mean I guess overall the distinction does not really matter, especially in terms of what we all want: seeing De Sousa play this year.

But, it's important to keep in mind that we aren't waiting on some kind of NCAA ruling or reinstatement, so therefore, we don't technically have to wait until the NCAA doles out rulings/punishments after the April trials.

This whole thing, not completely but largely, has mostly been bad optics.

He was given $2500. Pay it back and take a 9-games sitting in street clothes and call it even. His people asked for more but neither the NCAA or the FBI can prove that he actually got more. How can he sit and Zion and others plays?

It's not really a question of "how" but more of one as to "why." And the reason is b/c Bill is playing this one cautiously after Kansas Basketball had the heightened media scrutiny. Plus, Bill is the current head of NABC. Throw in how we handled Preston last year, and Self/KU decided to play this one as cautious as it gets.

With KU being the biggest fish in the FBI investigation, Self is wise to not butt heads with the ncaa on DeSousa. Honestly, we don't need him. No reason to give the ncaa more reason to want to zing us if you don't have to.

I don't see how we beat Duke w/o De Sousa. At the very least, he's an important part of our lineup in w/ that matchup.

Lonestarjayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Dec 13, 2018 9:51 am He was given $2500. Pay it back and take a 9-games sitting in street clothes and call it even. His people asked for more but neither the NCAA or the FBI can prove that he actually got more. How can he sit and Zion and others plays?

the NCAA doesn't have to prove anything.

And you can keep leaving out the Maryland stuff, but just because he didn't go there doesn't make those allegations irrelevant. It's very much in play, but I think he can potentially escape that since not as much evidence was presented relating to that.


Please stop comparing the Zion situation to this and thinking it's apples to apples. Zion is mentioned in a text (by OUR schools staff, not Dukes)...there was no evidence presented that indicated Zion took anything from us or Duke, just that our staff was willing to meet whatever wish list his camp potentially had.....do we all think Zion took something? Yes, absolutely. but there was no evidence presented related to Zion or Duke.

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Thu Dec 13, 2018 10:29 am I don't see how we beat Duke w/o De Sousa. At the very least, he's an important part of our lineup in w/ that matchup.

I'm hopeful we won't have to. We should both be 1 seeds and I don't have faith in 1 and done type teams with limited shooting and limited guard experience/depth.

IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Dec 13, 2018 10:31 amPlease stop comparing the Zion situation to this and thinking it's apples to apples. Zion is mentioned in a text (by OUR schools staff, not Dukes)...there was no evidence presented that indicated Zion took anything from us or Duke, just that our staff was willing to meet whatever wish list his camp potentially had.....do we all think Zion took something? Yes, absolutely. but there was no evidence presented related to Zion or Duke.

What, though, does anyone have on De Sousa that they don't have on Zion?

It's all just a bunch of guys nodding and acknowledging that it's going to take cash payments to secure either's commitment.

We're not talking about paper trails, here. And, iirc, the only reason Zion stuff didn't get presented was because of the lack of establishing a hearsay exception. All of the shit is the same stuff.

It seems to me they had a lot of stuff on our staff and SDS, and little on Zion (mainly a text by our staff), and nothing presented that I'm aware of from duke staff....so I'd say they have a lot more on SDS than Zion.

Am I missing something?

Was there a phone call with K saying "we good"...or texts by Duke assistants? No. Duke staff regularly having meetings with Gatto? No.

If Nike guys were on trial it'd look a lot different. But it was adidas guys. We got unlucky.

The most implicating text by KT was about Zion Williamson.

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Thu Dec 13, 2018 10:41 am The most implicating text by KT was about Zion Williamson.

But it didn't say we gave him anything and he didn't end up at KU...so not sure how you punish duke for KU trying to give him improper benefits.

IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Dec 13, 2018 10:43 am

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Thu Dec 13, 2018 10:41 am The most implicating text by KT was about Zion Williamson.

But it didn't say we gave him anything and he didn't end up at KU...so not sure how you punish duke for KU trying to give him improper benefits.

???

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1690&p=19017#p19017

KU is not innocent. It's obvious.


Do I think Duke is innocent. No. But they aren't really involved in this and likely won't be involved in the next round of trials because they are Nike and didn't deal with Dawkins and Code it appears.

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Thu Dec 13, 2018 10:45 am

IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Dec 13, 2018 10:43 am

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Thu Dec 13, 2018 10:41 am The most implicating text by KT was about Zion Williamson.

But it didn't say we gave him anything and he didn't end up at KU...so not sure how you punish duke for KU trying to give him improper benefits.

???

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1690&p=19017#p19017

Meh.

Whatever.

No one is innocent...that's the point. Who is Adidas competing with? If they are giving kids $100k it's because Nike or UA or both is offering $90k. Don't try to defend Duke, they we're just lucky FBI were only taping Adidas guys.

Lonestarjayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Dec 13, 2018 11:47 am No one is innocent...that's the point. Who is Adidas competing with? If they are giving kids $100k it's because Nike or UA or both is offering $90k. Don't try to defend Duke, they we're just lucky FBI were only taping Adidas guys.

Which is why I've said numerous times "we got unlucky".

But that doesn't really matter. The ncaa is going to punish the people who got caught...I'm not defending Duke. But they didnt get caught like us and Louisville (and orhers) did.

When has Duke ever peen punished for a thing?

2010 national champion starting power forward Lance Thomas crapped out on a $67 thousand dollar line of credit from a jewelry store.

the ncaa basically came out and said, after not investigating, we didn’t find anything...how bout that!