The NCAA is showing no mercy after many allegations and infractions, including the controversial SAT incident involving Derrick Rose, thus putting another damper in John Calipari's coaching career. It seems that the '08 Tigers basketball season will be stripped from the record books, erasing every win they had that season.
Memphis Tigers stripped of '08 Final Four berth
I think it's pretty fucked up that the kids who worked their asses off to accomplish something would have it taken away by the selfish acts of a few.
For me, if in order that a Derrick Rose play with my team cheating had to occur jeopardizing everything I worked for as his team mate...I would just prefer not to play with the guy.
Rose goes to the school for 1 year, uses the institution as a platform to showcase his talent, because of that is now off in the NBA making millions while he leaves a Memphis, his former team mates and future Memphis players behind to deal with his mess. With all that, Rose is not primarily to blame. Every coach and administrator who facilitated this and fiascos like it are ten times more to blame and should all somehow face some monetary penalty.
BTW, who can tell us how the word "fiasco" which means roughly in Italian some variation of wine glass or bottle has become a negative word meaning disaster or complete failure in English vernacular? I've always wonder that...anyway..
For me, if in order that a Derrick Rose play with my team cheating had to occur jeopardizing everything I worked for as his team mate...I would just prefer not to play with the guy.
Rose goes to the school for 1 year, uses the institution as a platform to showcase his talent, because of that is now off in the NBA making millions while he leaves a Memphis, his former team mates and future Memphis players behind to deal with his mess. With all that, Rose is not primarily to blame. Every coach and administrator who facilitated this and fiascos like it are ten times more to blame and should all somehow face some monetary penalty.
BTW, who can tell us how the word "fiasco" which means roughly in Italian some variation of wine glass or bottle has become a negative word meaning disaster or complete failure in English vernacular? I've always wonder that...anyway..
I hate when they 'strip' wins from a team. As if those wins didnt exist anymore...just plain stupid. Does the team that they played get the wins now...no. Punish those involved but dont punish future players who had nothing to do with the situation.
I understand why they strip the wins...If you play an ineligible player in a game what other remedy is available beyond stripping away the wins that player participated in? What I can't understand is with the possibility of such a sanction, why would you ever cheat like that?
Since punishing the people involved would require you try to punish a player who's in the NBA (beyond the NCAA's jurisdiction) and punishing the coach and/or institution....the only people likely to be affected are the future players in the program.
The Tigers opponents must certainly get 'forfeit' wins don't they?:dunno: At least that how it always happens here statewide(High School) when a team is stripped of wins. The opponent is awarded a 'forfeit' win.
Memphis should be also made to pay the teams they beat in the NCAA tournament the bonus' they made for advancing past them. Forfeit wins are not nearly as rewarding,but a(moral) win nonetheless.
It's the institution which is getting punished & 'some' kids should be given the option to transfer(if not implicated in wrongdoing) just as recruits are allowed to back out their committments.
I think part of the problem is the stupid NBA rule where you have to wait until your out of high school so many years. That pretty much forces people that don't want to be there to go to a year of college (Although a few, but growing number of them are giving both the NCAA and the NBA the finger and going to play in Europe and other places until they are eligible for the draft.) In the whole situation like this I blame the players the least. The NFL with the NCAA is just as bad if not worse when it comes to things like this. In some ways I think both the NFL and NBA need their own minor leagues or true developmental farm teams, just so they don't have to rely on the NCAA, but there is too much money involved with it and they are in bed with each other.
Think about it. If you’re a kid that’s good at a sport where there’s a good chance you could make hundreds of thousand or maybe even millions of dollars in it, and you don’t want to go through college ball systems, and you have honestly no interest in going to a place of higher education for the actual education, what other reasonable choice do you have? It’s a sham, but one they have to go through with.
What I want to know is how would retroactively punishing a program that's in a tournament work? Giving the last opponent they play against he win is one thing, but then what happens to all the people in the earlier rounds that lost to a team that is later deemed ineligible. It’s not like you can hop into a time machine and redo it at that point with the team that lost moving on.
I'm not a fan of developmental or minor type leagues....they become ways of shelving talent and ultimately rob athletes IMO.
If an 18 year old can take life and give life for his country they ought to be able to play a game.
The NCAA, NBA and NFL are hypocrites IMO. They create rules which force kids into college that don't want that lifestyle but penalize the colleges for trying to create the opportunity for these players to display their talent.
NCAA didn't fall apart because it missed having Kobe or Lebron play in it's organization. Hell, the NBA only has 2 rounds...the NCAA will survive as it's college football regular season and college basketball post seasons are the most exciting in any sport IMO. A handful of elite players who don't play in the NCAA are not going to upset those apple carts....
They could always make a rule that a player could never be signed for more than one or two years at a time in those leagues before he became a free agent again. Teams could draft like they do now to all the top prospects aren't on one team. Besides the NBA almost no athlete is ready to play pro right out of high school, and even that is pretty rare, so you need someway to evaluate them or develop the people you have. It could provide a way for more athletes in general to be paid and give practice squad people or people that might not otherwise have made it or that are on the fringe a couple more chances to shine. In any case if somebody is really good they are going to get the big money no matter what. If they added in a salary cap and revenue sharing with it it would make it even harder to horde talent that way.
Hey, I play the tournament pool with my brother and his friends, can I get my money back for the different results now?
I agree. All of the claims about 'getting an education', 'get better prepared playing college',' scouts better able to evaluate talent',etc....... are all without merit. In fact High School NBA draftees have had a 75% success rate or better while 2,3 & 4 year college veterans have very very low success rates in comparison.
The following is one of the better articles dismissing all of the 'supposed benefits of college':
http://www.realgm.com/src_feature_article/165/20080409/a_76_percent_success_rate_not_enough/
Free marketing of young talent in college is one of the things the NBA wants & not the Players best interest ,but the Leagues. The NBA wants ready made superstars(with a ready made college educated fanbase of fellow alumni/fans) like Grant Hill who actually got the most All star votes as a rookie & even got more votes than MJ in only his second season in the League.
Basketball is a young man's game & NBA scouts have been doing just fine evaluating Players straight from High School(better than they do with college Players).
Mike Dunleavy even admitted in the above article that the increased NBA practice time , 15 mpg off the bench & a couple years in a long NBA schedule is a far better at developing young talent than 4 years in any college. He is not the only NBA insider to suggest this & the article basically proves it.
It's not that I don't agree with much of what you are saying, and I think the minimum age is stupid, but out of intellectual honesty I have to say that statistic is deeply flawed. The reason it's so high is that only the people perceived to have the very best potential were chosen strait out of high school. Of course they would have a better success rate than all the other people that include marginal draft picks and other free agent pickups that teams take a flier on. It would be the equivalent of only counting the first couple of picks in the draft each year for everybody else which would also have an extremely high success rate.
I'm not following you.:dunno:
You have stated here ,along with others, that Scouts need Players to go to College/developmental Leagues to better evaluate players ,but they are right 80% of the time on High Schoolers?:dunno:
You say that they only pick the very best High Schoolers? Isn't that the object of ANY draft is to pick the the very best potential whether it be HS or College D Rock?:dunno: Just because they have the best potential doesn't mean they will always succeed. Yet High Schoolers succeed nearly 80% of the time which proves that NBA scouts are doing an EXCELLENT job at weeding out those who may fail(are not ready) & are not 'overreaching' for HS talent too much.
Deeply Flawed statistic? Are you kidding? That stats proves the effectiveness of NBA scouts at picking HS kids.
It also gives credence to Mike Dunleavy's claim(& other NBA insiders) that actual NBA experince is far more valuable in future NBA success than any College can give them.
Skyraider22
The One and Only Big Daddy
You are not kidding he is batting a 1.000 2 for 2 and Memphis has been to the Final Four three times and only has one to show for it.
I'm not disputing the fact that going to the NBA might be better for their development. Even if that wasn't the case, I still wouldn't have a problem with it. I just don't think you can compare the few of the cream of the crop high school players that were drafted with everybody else, and use that as a measure of it being better than the college system for developing them. It very well could be, but what is shown doesn't necessarily prove it. In a statistical sense that study is suffering from a significant selection bias. To be valid one would have to assume a significant portion of those players that were taken out of high school during that time and succeeded wouldn't have eventually succeeded if they went to college anyway, which is probably not the case. Only the best talents were taken out of high school. It's not a random selection of players that might be considered for entry into the NBA. They were so good that I believe nearly the same percentage would have still made it anyhow if they went the college route. If they were picked out of high school they were probably a step above everybody else in talent, especially for their age (or at least perceived to be). It isn't like where all the teams take a chance on hundreds of players at varying levels of talent and skill where a fraction of them work out so you can't compare it to something that does that. That's why I think it would be more fair to compare the percentage of high school players that made or were very successful it with the percentage of the top handful of players in each years draft and see how many of them also made or were very successful in the NBA which would probably be a pretty high number also.
Looks like you can blame the French.
http://www.answers.com/topic/fiasco
As far as the Tigers go,who cares? They didn't win the championship,so what does it really matter at this point?
