Report: Zions step dad took 400K

[BDB]

1 minute ago, Steubenhoosier said:

Well, when I was a student in the mid-70’s, I knew of at least one player who drove around campus in a Corvette, which I don’t think he could afford. 

Was RMK aware? I don’t know. Did he not have control over everything going on in his program? Maybe. Might he not have been as squeaky clean as portrayed? 

Hmmm...

They made Corvette's back then?   j/k

[IU878176]

1 hour ago, Sark said:

You have it backward. I’m wondering why Knight would associate with a known cheater. Just surprised no one can provide an answer. I have a point but it obviously doesn’t fit the agenda some people have, which I know angers them.

Why would Knight associate with a known cheater? Who knows but Knight was buddies with Tarkanian of UNLV who was known as the gold standard of cheaters.

[milehiiu]

Will say this. In terms of cars.  Had a high school friend who's dad got a new Corvette every year.  And when my friend got back from serving in Vietnam  in the Army.... his dad bought my friend a brand new Corvette.  And then. My friend enrolled in Indiana University.

[IU Scott]

It is like you have a few kids and they will not all be a like.  You might have two of the three be good up standing citizens but the other gets in trouble with the law all the time.  As parents you don't like what that child is doing but you don't love them any less.

[BGleas]

46 minutes ago, Steubenhoosier said:

Well, when I was a student in the mid-70’s, I knew of at least one player who drove around campus in a Corvette, which I don’t think he could afford. 

Was RMK aware? I don’t know. Did he not have control over everything going on in his program? Maybe. Might he not have been as squeaky clean as portrayed? 

Hmmm...

Yeah, not trying to bash Knight but not sure why he’s being put on this pedestal like he couldn’t possible be friends with someone that cheats. Many, many people around the country think Bob Knight is a scumbag. Many, many people in this country think he is a abusive figure who used his position as an authority figure to abuse people. 

This idea that Knight is some saint who couldn’t possibly associate with people who cheat is ridiculous. 

[BGleas]

42 minutes ago, Sark said:

But was Tark’s reputation well earned or more rumor and innuendo than actual cheating? To your point, Knight had much closer relationships with proven cheaters, so anything is possible.

Wait, are you defending Jerry Tarkanian now or am I misreading your post?

[Steubenhoosier]

51 minutes ago, Sark said:

What do you think would happen here if, based on your experience, you called Knight a cheater? Would it be accepted without any more proof than you offered, or would the stand change?

In today’s world, things would get crazy with allegations, conspiracies, and calls for him to be fired. 

The way of the world today. Accuse, convict and punish, first. Then go back and look for facts.

As I said in my post, circumstances were what they were. I can’t prove RMK was complicit in anything. I saw what I saw. I won’t question my own two eyes, but will let each person draw their own conclusions.

[BGleas]

4 minutes ago, Steubenhoosier said:

In today’s world, things would get crazy with allegations, conspiracies, and calls for him to be fired. 

The way of the world today. Accuse, convict and punish, first. Then go back and look for facts.

As I said in my post, circumstances were what they were. I can’t prove RMK was complicit in anything. I saw what I saw. I won’t question my own two eyes, but will let each person draw their own conclusions.

In our years on HSN, you’re not the only poster that attended IU that has posted about seeing basketball players driving very expensive cars during the Knight era. 

[IUCrazy2]

2 hours ago, Sark said:

You have it backward. I’m wondering why Knight would associate with a known cheater. Just surprised no one can provide an answer. I have a point but it obviously doesn’t fit the agenda some people have, which I know angers them.

Norm Ellenberger.

I know what you are trying to do.  Coach K is not clean and Bob Knight has been known to be chummy with guys that have cheated.  Look up "Lobogate" and then tell me how many years Knight not only associated with that cheater but had him as part of his program.

[IU Scott]

9 minutes ago, IUCrazy2 said:

Norm Ellenberger.

I know what you are trying to do and you suck at it.  Coach K is not clean and Bob Knight has been known to be chummy with guys that have cheated.  Look up "Lobogate" and then tell me how many years Knight not only associated with that cheater but had him as part of his program.

How about Tate's Lock who RMK had on his staff and had trouble at Clemson.  Also just looked at Tate's Lock Career and he was an assistant at UNLV before coming here.  Also I had not heard this but I saw where Blue Chips was made about his career.

[HoosierFaithful]

Hey - let's make sure nobody gets into personal attacks, folks.  Thanks.

[IUCrazy2]

3 minutes ago, HoosierFaithful said:

Hey - let's make sure nobody gets into personal attacks, folks.  Thanks.

Noted and edited.

[IUCrazy2]

12 hours ago, Sark said:

I acknowledged Knight had associated with cheaters (Norm was one, Tates Locke was another) but, in both cases, allegations had been proven, punishment rendered, and contrition was expressed. Only then did Knight extend a hand. In the case of Coach K, no proof of any kind has ever existed that he he isn’t clean. Not saying he doesn’t cheat, only that the standard of proof should exist, even a little. Not sure why that’s controversial.

I have seen enough smoke to conclude there is fire.  If the NCAA had a will and the schools actually had to cooperate with an investigation, you would have your proof.

What you are left with now is basically a house down the street that has random cars pulling up at all hours of the night and people leaving the house being caught with drugs, repeatedly, over decades.  But the person who owns the house is chummy with the authorities and so nobody ever lifts any rocks to investigate what is going on in the house.  They just keep busting the people leaving it.

Coach K is dirty.  You do not recruit at that level without it.  And to me the proof is in program like Arizona and UNC not getting as a high a caliber guy at the same rate when the NCAA light shown on them.

Someone mentioned that Calipari changed the game for Coach K.  I would agree, I think he was doing some lower level dirt in the past but having Calipari land 5 NBA draft picks every year convinced Coach K to go all in on the same stuff.  Now the money is not everything, because it is clear most of these guys are getting offered cash to go to school, so some of it is the "Duke" mystique that helps land players, but, you have to ante in to be part of the hand.

I would be willing to change my innuendo standard if the owners of the houses would open up their programs to the "police" of the NCAA and be bound to cooperate with the investigation.  Short of that, I think the drug house standard is fair.

[IU878176]

14 hours ago, Sark said:

But was Tark’s reputation well earned or more rumor and innuendo than actual cheating? To your point, Knight had much closer relationships with proven cheaters, so anything is possible.

I think you must be trolling but below is pasted from the first article that came up when I googled Tark and cheating..Tark coached at three schools and all three got in trouble. .Reading about the recruitment of Lloyd Daniels is especially sad/entertaining/damning. 

 

“Here's how the NCAA describes the violations committed by Cal State-Long Beach during Tarkanian's tenure: Improper entertainment, financial aid, lodging and transportation; extra benefits; out-of-season practice; improper recruiting employment, inducements, lodging and transportation; tryouts; academic fraud; eligibility; improper administration of financial aid; unethical conduct; institutional control.”

“Here's how the NCAA describes the violations committed by UNLV during Tarkanian's tenure: Improper entertainment, financial aid, lodging and transportation; extra benefits, improper recruiting entertainment, inducements, lodging and transportation; tryouts; excessive number of official visits; academic fraud; eligibility; unethical conduct; questionable practice; institutional control; certification of compliance.”

[IUCrazy2]

3 hours ago, Sark said:

So innuendo is enough? “Smoke” is enough? Good thing the Duke lacrosse team wasn’t judged by those standards. And heaven help us when IU is judged by the same standards. Maybe they should’ve been after the recruitments of Troy and Noah and Thomas and Romeo, all of which were smoky in nature. And when has Duke ever failed to cooperate with an NCAA investigation, as you’re alleging?

You do you.

My impression is that you are just here to argue.  Magette was found to have taken impermissible benefits and Zion got at least $400k.  That is not smoke, it is fire.  Proven fire at this point.

You are just arguing like I said above.  All these people getting caught with "drugs" after leaving Kryzewski's "crack house" but he is not involved...whatever.  You can build a case  on circumstantial evidence and there is plenty to damn Duke and Coach K with.  At the end of the day though, there really is no point arguing with you over it.

[go_iu_bb]

7 minutes ago, IUCrazy2 said:

You do you.

My impression is that you are just here to argue.  Magette was found to have taken impermissible benefits and Zion got at least $400k.  That is not smoke, it is fire.  Proven fire at this point.

You are just arguing like I said above.  All these people getting caught with "drugs" after leaving Kryzewski's "crack house" but he is not involved...whatever.  You can build a case  on circumstantial evidence and there is plenty to damn Duke and Coach K with.  At the end of the day though, there really is no point arguing with you over it.

You are correct, Sark is just here to argue. They demand a smoking gun and rock solid evidence from others for the wrong doing of any coach that isn't at IU but is more than happy to use innuendo and circumstantial evidence to accuse IU coaches. They've done this in multiple threads. It's funny they accuse others of having an agenda when theirs is so very obvious.  Let them have the last word (because they just have to have it) and move on is my advice.

[milehiiu]

35 minutes ago, go_iu_bb said:

You are correct, Sark is just here to argue. They demand a smoking gun and rock solid evidence from others for the wrong doing of any coach that isn't at IU but is more than happy to use innuendo and circumstantial evidence to accuse IU coaches. They've done this in multiple threads. It's funny they accuse others of having an agenda when theirs is so very obvious.  Let them have the last word (because they just have to have it) and move on is my advice.

Against my better judgement.   I am going to offer a solution :

Don't Feed The Sark

[IU Scott]

14 minutes ago, milehiiu said:

Against my better judgement.   I am going to offer a solution :

Don't Feed The Sark

I have put him on ignore but you can still see other arguing with him and it is ruing this board.  I left the rivals board because of posters like him and now it appears those posters are now coming here.

[BGleas]

I’m not sure that there’s ever been an investigation into Duke led by an independent organization with subpoena power. So, we don’t really know if the smoke around Duke has been proven or not. 

Look at UNC, they fought the NCAA the entire way, because the NCAA doesn’t have subpoena power, then got off on a technicality when we all know they’ve been cheating with fake classes in their athletic department for years. 

Plots of guilty get away with crimes and lots of innocent people go to jail. It happens all of the time. 

[milehiiu]

7 minutes ago, BGleas said:

I’m not sure that there’s ever been an investigation into Duke led by an independent organization with subpoena power. So, we don’t really know if the smoke around Duke has been proven or not. 

Look at UNC, they fought the NCAA the entire way, because the NCAA doesn’t have subpoena power, then got off on a technicality when we all know they’ve been cheating with fake classes in their athletic department for years. 

Plots of guilty get away with crimes and lots of innocent people go to jail. It happens all of the time. 

I have been saying for years.  Without subpoena power.... the NCAA is useless. 

[BGleas]

5 minutes ago, milehiiu said:

I have been saying for years.  Without subpoena power.... the NCAA is useless. 

Exactly. Even the people that support Cal by saying there wasn’t anything found at UMass or Memphis, well the organization doing that investigation had no subpoena power. 

[IowaHoosierFan]

19 hours ago, IU Scott said:

I have put him on ignore but you can still see other arguing with him and it is ruing this board.  I left the rivals board because of posters like him and now it appears those posters are now coming here.

Careful Scott throwing rocks in your glass house

[Hoosierhoopster]

15 hours ago, BGleas said:

I’m not sure that there’s ever been an investigation into Duke led by an independent organization with subpoena power. So, we don’t really know if the smoke around Duke has been proven or not. 

Look at UNC, they fought the NCAA the entire way, because the NCAA doesn’t have subpoena power, then got off on a technicality when we all know they’ve been cheating with fake classes in their athletic department for years. 

Plots of guilty get away with crimes and lots of innocent people go to jail. It happens all of the time. 

Yes, IU self-reported for Sampson's phone-gate BS (infractions that the next year became permissible) which led to the NCAA (in its anger of Sampson, who escaped its investigation at Okla) handing down 5 major infractions (talk about overreach and stupidity), which led IU to completely deconstruct our entire MBB program.

In stark contrast, UNC simply fought the overwhelming evidence of its fake classes involving the multiple MBB and football players over more than a decade, deny deny deny, and there was nothing the NCAA could do. The NCAA was, and is, a joke. 

[milehiiu]

 I am no lawyer. But, I know this.  People can lie, lie, deny, deny... knowing they are not under oath.  Subpoena power would be a game changer.

[FKIM01]

21 hours ago, IU Scott said:

I have put him on ignore but you can still see other arguing with him and it is ruing this board.  I left the rivals board because of posters like him and now it appears those posters are now coming here.

 

2 hours ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

Careful Scott throwing rocks in your glass house

Scott, please...we know you want sark removed, but the 41st request to do so won't change anything.  Just keep sark on ignore and scroll past others fighting with him.  I'm going to be brutally honest here...your tendency to repeat, repeat, repeat and repeat the same stuff grinds on other members too.  It's obvious in the way they interact with you.  Frankly, I'm personally tired of you repeatedly asking for sark to be removed and I don't care for sark either and consider you a friend and a good member here.

A word to the wise...perhaps others don't mind debating with sark and don't consider it ruining this forum, so give it a rest, maybe?  If a lot of people other than you consider sark a problem, rest assured, sark will be removed.  Meanwhile, scroll on, my friend.

-30-