PonyFans.com

Is it not a violation for other schools to contact a current player on our team?

smubrooks wrote:Is it not a violation for other schools to contact a current player on our team?

It is all done through 3rd parties. None of it comes from a coach directly affiliated with a particular school. It's reach out to HS basketball coach who calls, or AAU coach, or an uncle or cousin ect.

The schools aren't contacting them. It's through intermediaries that are "unaffiliated" with any programs.

His AAU coach

StallionsModelT wrote:So let me get this straight. UNC can foster 20 years worth of impropriety, Syracuse ten years, and SMU greases the skids for one kid and we are the ones who are going to get a postseason ban and "slammed" by the NCAA?

Everything I've heard is that we expect to lose one scholarship and Ulric is out. I've heard nothing to contradict that.

UNC and Syracuse are "brand name" schools and therefore part of the established hierarchy. In 1987 the NCAA made sure SMU would never again be part of that.

I'm a big fan of Drew Magary, and though this piece on Jim Boeheim is satire, it sums things up pretty well. You could apply the same Calipari at UMass vs. Calipari at Kentucky idea to SMU.

http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/jim-bo ... 1690573801

But when you do it at Kentucky, you aren't threatening the established hierarchy. You can do shady [deleted] and seem far less shady doing it. And then you can blame it all on the YMCA pool boy. NCAA penalties are all brand-driven: designed to punish "bad" programs (UMass) and teach "good" programs (Syracuse) valuable lessons. There's no rhyme or reason to their methodology except when you factor in PR.

There actually is a obstacle that will apply to Nic Moore utilizing the graduate transfer rule since Nic Moore has already transferred once from Illinois St. He's going to have to get a consent/waiver from SMU. And Hoop stop saying Head Coach are talking to Nic Moore. No coach is going to be that stupid to talk to a kid during the season who has not gotten his release. If its through other channels then say it accurately

http://www.athleticscholarships.net/201 ... waiver.htm

GoMustAAngs2007 wrote:

StallionsModelT wrote:So let me get this straight. UNC can foster 20 years worth of impropriety, Syracuse ten years, and SMU greases the skids for one kid and we are the ones who are going to get a postseason ban and "slammed" by the NCAA?

Everything I've heard is that we expect to lose one scholarship and Ulric is out. I've heard nothing to contradict that.

UNC and Syracuse are "brand name" schools and therefore part of the established hierarchy. In 1987 the NCAA made sure SMU would never again be part of that.

I'm a big fan of Drew Magary, and though this piece on Jim Boeheim is satire, it sums things up pretty well. You could apply the same Calipari at UMass vs. Calipari at Kentucky idea to SMU.

http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/jim-bo ... 1690573801

But when you do it at Kentucky, you aren't threatening the established hierarchy. You can do shady [deleted] and seem far less shady doing it. And then you can blame it all on the YMCA pool boy. NCAA penalties are all brand-driven: designed to punish "bad" programs (UMass) and teach "good" programs (Syracuse) valuable lessons. There's no rhyme or reason to their methodology except when you factor in PR.

If we get slammed with postseason bans and multiple scholarships over this thing while UNC and Syracuse do not then I officially give up on college athletics. There will be no chance for an SMU type program to survive in that environment. I still maintain that everything I've heard indicates a relatively minor penalty with a one scholarship ban and Ulric being let go. If we get nuked then we might as well all give up.

StallionsModelT wrote:

GoMustAAngs2007 wrote:

StallionsModelT wrote:So let me get this straight. UNC can foster 20 years worth of impropriety, Syracuse ten years, and SMU greases the skids for one kid and we are the ones who are going to get a postseason ban and "slammed" by the NCAA?

Everything I've heard is that we expect to lose one scholarship and Ulric is out. I've heard nothing to contradict that.

UNC and Syracuse are "brand name" schools and therefore part of the established hierarchy. In 1987 the NCAA made sure SMU would never again be part of that.

I'm a big fan of Drew Magary, and though this piece on Jim Boeheim is satire, it sums things up pretty well. You could apply the same Calipari at UMass vs. Calipari at Kentucky idea to SMU.

http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/jim-bo ... 1690573801

But when you do it at Kentucky, you aren't threatening the established hierarchy. You can do shady [deleted] and seem far less shady doing it. And then you can blame it all on the YMCA pool boy. NCAA penalties are all brand-driven: designed to punish "bad" programs (UMass) and teach "good" programs (Syracuse) valuable lessons. There's no rhyme or reason to their methodology except when you factor in PR.

If we get slammed with postseason bans and multiple scholarships over this thing while UNC and Syracuse do not then I officially give up on college athletics. There will be no chance for an SMU type program to survive in that environment. I still maintain that everything I've heard indicates a relatively minor penalty with a one scholarship ban and Ulric being let go. If we get nuked then we might as well all give up.

I will be right there with you.

StallionsModelT wrote:

GoMustAAngs2007 wrote:

StallionsModelT wrote:So let me get this straight. UNC can foster 20 years worth of impropriety, Syracuse ten years, and SMU greases the skids for one kid and we are the ones who are going to get a postseason ban and "slammed" by the NCAA?

Everything I've heard is that we expect to lose one scholarship and Ulric is out. I've heard nothing to contradict that.

UNC and Syracuse are "brand name" schools and therefore part of the established hierarchy. In 1987 the NCAA made sure SMU would never again be part of that.

I'm a big fan of Drew Magary, and though this piece on Jim Boeheim is satire, it sums things up pretty well. You could apply the same Calipari at UMass vs. Calipari at Kentucky idea to SMU.

http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/jim-bo ... 1690573801

But when you do it at Kentucky, you aren't threatening the established hierarchy. You can do shady [deleted] and seem far less shady doing it. And then you can blame it all on the YMCA pool boy. NCAA penalties are all brand-driven: designed to punish "bad" programs (UMass) and teach "good" programs (Syracuse) valuable lessons. There's no rhyme or reason to their methodology except when you factor in PR.

If we get slammed with postseason bans and multiple scholarships over this thing while UNC and Syracuse do not then I officially give up on college athletics. There will be no chance for an SMU type program to survive in that environment. I still maintain that everything I've heard indicates a relatively minor penalty with a one scholarship ban and Ulric being let go. If we get nuked then we might as well all give up.

relax and take a xanax.

I'm not buying at all that this is serious. But if we are "slammed" then this system is inherently flawed to the point that an SMU can no longer and should no longer compete in. Again, I don't see it happening but if it does then screw this.

UNC is about to get bombed by the NCAA. We will get a shot fired over the bow and a stern warning. That's what I'm hearing in Bama and from my SEC friends anyway (and, unfortunately Bama knows all too well about dealing with the NCAA).

StallionsModelT wrote:I'm not buying at all that this is serious. But if we are "slammed" then this system is inherently flawed to the point that an SMU can no longer and should no longer compete in. Again, I don't see it happening but if it does then screw this.

The system would be unfair but it's not like it is impossible to be a small school and not compete. VCU, Witchita state, Butler, and gonzaga all compete without NCAA trouble. Maybe our issues are unique (ie hostile very powerful neighbors) but that is hard to imagine being enough. I agree with others hear we will have a relative slap on the wrist if anything. At the end of the day the thing that makes the most sense is maybe an improper contact between coach and high school, which I doubt is post season ban and maybe a scholly's lose maybe.

Stallion wrote:At one time had offers from these schools although I don't know if still committable:

Rhode Island
George Mason
Houston
Old Dominion
Oklahoma State
SMU
Tulsa

here's a pretty long highlite reel of Johnny Hamilton. He definitely is athletic and can play above the rim but his is skinny. Sometimes these tall guys can't get off the floor but Hamilton seems like he can really jump which makes him play even taller

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gkkt9TD4yUU

Yes, please. If he has work ethic, is coachable, competitive and is a great teammate, let's get him! I saw enough on the tape to know he's got what we need physically/athletically for sure.

You have xanax?! Share please.

Ok back to the topic hand.

Let's talk about real issues that we know about...

My proposed depth chart:

PG - Nic Moore (SR), Sedrick Barefield (FR), Shake Milton (FR)
SG - Sterling Brown (JR), Ben Emelogu (JR), Jonathan Wilfong (JR)
SF - Semi Ojeleye (TR-SO?), Keith Frazier (JR), Jarrey Foster (FR)
PF - Ben Moore (JR), Jordan Tolbert (TR-SR)
C - Markus Kennedy (SR)

We have one backup big, and he's 6'6.