Page 1 of 2

Under Armor

PostPosted: Mon Jul 14, 2014 4:28 pm
by sacklunch
This is just me speculating and putting rumors together.

It seems like Under Armour's sponsorship caused Eman's ineligibility and then UA went ahead and put together the deal for him to go overseas.

I'd bet big money he also signs an endorsement deal with them soon.

I'll be curious to see what this NCAA investigation leads to.....not sure how they can punish Under Armor at all....

Re: Under Armor

PostPosted: Mon Jul 14, 2014 4:30 pm
by gostangs
how'd you like to have Larry Brown all over the country talking down your brand

Re: Under Armor

PostPosted: Mon Jul 14, 2014 5:54 pm
by chpalmer24
It'll be telling if the NCAA goes after UA. If they were the source of the violations through High School sponsorship the NCAA might do something to their involvement in NCAA activities

Re: Under Armor

PostPosted: Mon Jul 14, 2014 6:16 pm
by B1GPonyFan
Presuming this is true, Mudiay isn't the victim here even if he wasn't directly involved. His side was a willing accomplice. But this is the ugliness that comes with these types of players. Occasionally it bubbles to the surface.

Re: Under Armor

PostPosted: Mon Jul 14, 2014 9:52 pm
by SMUer
It's possible to get money for mom and not get caught...only at SMU...

Re: Under Armor

PostPosted: Mon Jul 14, 2014 10:29 pm
by gostangs
the mom thing is an excuse. Not the issue.

Re: Under Armor

PostPosted: Mon Jul 14, 2014 10:49 pm
by smusportspage
How is it that UK, Louisville, Syracuse, Memphis, Arizona, Indiana not seem.to have these issues. Don't their players have Mamas too?

Re: Under Armor

PostPosted: Tue Jul 15, 2014 1:15 am
by SMU 86
B1GPonyFan wrote:Presuming this is true, Mudiay isn't the victim here even if he wasn't directly involved. His side was a willing accomplice. But this is the ugliness that comes with these types of players. Occasionally it bubbles to the surface.


Baylor seems to do very well going after them as you have reported on the other site.

Re: Under Armor

PostPosted: Tue Jul 15, 2014 10:05 am
by Zman89
smusportspage wrote:How is it that UK, Louisville, Syracuse, Memphis, Arizona, Indiana not seem.to have these issues. Don't their players have Mamas too?

The good thing is that the Ponies can go through this season without having eligibility issues creeping up. We have a very good team returning and know what to expect from each player. I don't think the team is worried about the upcoming season. These kind of things sometimes makes a team stronger.

Re: Under Armor

PostPosted: Tue Jul 15, 2014 10:13 am
by Treadway21
Zman89 wrote:
smusportspage wrote:How is it that UK, Louisville, Syracuse, Memphis, Arizona, Indiana not seem.to have these issues. Don't their players have Mamas too?

The good thing is that the Ponies can go through this season without having eligibility issues creeping up. We have a very good team returning and know what to expect from each player. I don't think the team is worried about the upcoming season. These kind of things sometimes makes a team stronger.

I agree. We had a tight team before and this only make them more hungry. I suspect that as disappointed as the players are, they will also want to prove they are than a team on 1 guy.

I suspect that this will change the dynamic on the one and done players. If Eman makes this work, others will go the same route and take the money a year sooner rather than going through the charade of going to college for a year.

Re: Under Armor

PostPosted: Tue Jul 15, 2014 10:27 am
by Zman89
What needs to be done Treadway if the athlete has no intention of going to college put them all in a sports academy and just let them hone their skills in whatever sport they're in. At least coaches won't have to waste time on them. If they don't make it big time that's life.

Re: Under Armor

PostPosted: Tue Jul 15, 2014 10:46 am
by Stallion
smusportspage wrote:How is it that UK, Louisville, Syracuse, Memphis, Arizona, Indiana not seem.to have these issues. Don't their players have Mamas too?



I don't even follow national college basketball that closely and even I know that just about all those schools have had recent eligibility issues with high school superstars -some with multiple players. Now maybe they didn't have a kid decide to abandon college basketball-but maybe it wasn't as voluntary a decision as it appears. Some just focus too closely on their own teams

Re: Under Armor

PostPosted: Tue Jul 15, 2014 11:05 am
by PonySnob
Zman89 wrote:
smusportspage wrote:How is it that UK, Louisville, Syracuse, Memphis, Arizona, Indiana not seem.to have these issues. Don't their players have Mamas too?

The good thing is that the Ponies can go through this season without having eligibility issues creeping up. We have a very good team returning and know what to expect from each player. I don't think the team is worried about the upcoming season. These kind of things sometimes makes a team stronger.


Speaking of eligibility, any idea as to how the rest of the roster is looking with being eligible to play this next season?

Re: Under Armor

PostPosted: Tue Jul 15, 2014 11:06 am
by smusportspage
Stallion....Exactly my point. These other schools have found away to make it work. How is that? No, this was not a voluntary decision.

Re: Under Armor

PostPosted: Tue Jul 15, 2014 11:07 am
by Digetydog
chpalmer24 wrote:It'll be telling if the NCAA goes after UA. If they were the source of the violations through High School sponsorship the NCAA might do something to their involvement in NCAA activities


Not going to happen. The member schools that benefit from UA sponsorship dollars would go ballistic.