I’m sure this will surprise many...
http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/page/the_loyalty_game.html
http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/page/the_loyalty_game.html
Shoe company payments to families of Bagley and Josh Jackson.
- Thread starter asindc
- Start date
Your title is misleading, hyperbolic and very sensationalized.
Come on man, we don't need any more of that from anyone.
Title seems pretty spot on to me, unless you can explain how Bagley's parents went from a foreclosed 44,000 house to a 3/4 of a million home.
Any team that consistently gets multiple five star players a year has guys who were getting kickbacks to funnel them to specific programs. Period.
Any team that consistently gets multiple five star players a year has guys who were getting kickbacks to funnel them to specific programs. Period.
Last edited:
obviously, it's gotta be....Cleveland State
I wonder if boosters are funneling funds to the shoe companies to pass on to the parents with the intention of acquiring letters of intent from the kid.
Is Coach K the modern day John Wooden. Pretty good coach then able to pull these stunts under the radar while everybody looks the other way.
I don't think the shoe companies want anything to do with boosters in all of this. Boosters would want a seat at the table and there's no incentive for shoe companies to give them that.
What table? Boosters want to entice players to their preferred school. It might be a way to pay players without involving the school and risking an investigation. Or perhaps using an agent as a middleman to funnel money to parents.
You don’t think boosters have found methods to pay players without the school being involved? Cars, jobs, tractors, broken boxes of cash at FedEx.
Not necessarily. An alum could work with the shoe companies without the school’s knowledge. Not likely, I think, but it could be arranged so that there is enough separation for plausible deniability.
Coach K would’nt have anything to do with this. Nike isn’t paying players to go to a specific school. They just want you to go to a Nike school. Same with Adidas etc. They could care less if it’s Kansas or UCLA. That alone isn’t on the coach of any program imo.
At least this is how I understand it working. Admittedly I’m no expert, just connecting dots
Last edited:
It appears as though shoe companies have figured out how to do all of those things without involving boosters. Why introduce another element that adds both a layer and gets a University closer to sanctions? Boosters pay off players, in part, to feel like big shots. Shoe companies don't need egos like that mucking up their gig.
Doesn't this sound more and more like our current Politicians.
Of course they have, but there's no evidence that they've ever used shoe companies to facilitate that, likely because the shoe guys don't need them to pull off their deals. Boosters would get in the way and directly expose schools (with whom shoe companies have contracts), and that is bad news for everyone. The "beauty" of this scheme is that it drives right past boosters.
Awareness is not the determining factor and shoe brands don't want a bunch of yahoo wannabes putting the process at risk.
Hopefully we will find out what evidence is available from this investigation and where it may lead. Preferably before the next season. However because so much money is involved and prestige may be damaged, I suspect it could be swept under the table to protect some powerful people.
Boosters do and have always been involved to one degree or another. Just not with the brands.
I was reading a story about Sam Gilbert and UCLA and how they were able to funnel a lot of talent there during the glory days. There's been some other questionable recruiting done there but has been swept under the rug and look at the 2018 class. Something fishy is going on.
The FBI doesn’t care about the money involved or the reputations of powerful people in basketball. That’s why this is different from your typical NCAA investigation.
I can at least understand how UCLA recruits so well. LA, their tradition, campus is amazing, etc. Not saying they’re completely on the straight and narrow but it at least makes sense. If I was a top recruit UCLA would be pretty appealing to me. Some of these other recruitments don’t.
I never question when a top kid goes to UCLA, Duke, UK, Kansas, UNC etc. There might be more involved but it makes sense. When a top kid goes to a random bottom feeder team halfway across the country is when I’m suspicious.
When we lived near Lexington in the 80's, we would often see UK players getting free drinks and food at nightclubs with older guys in suits.
i remember Richard Madison with a group in the Fizz Nightclub after a game his freshman year. We saw Kenny Walker land in a helicopter and walk into a restaurant with some more guys in suits.
I imagine some boosters are like they were back in the 80's. Their methods had to change They pay money and expect access to the players while securing the means to win titles.
Having been on that campus twice, I’ve often said this. I’ve also said in contrast, think of what a school like Miss St has to do to recruit.
How about a head coach's agent who happens to sponsor a AAU team and then immediately set up player contacts with his client coach to funnel players to that coach and school and then sign with him as an agent when that player goes pro. MIddle School/High School AAU to College to NBA. All with the same agent.
Like Vandy suddenly pulling in 5* talent for the first time ever, has to be very a suspicious.
Garland, no. Any other 5 star players? Yes, absolutely.
Suspicious doesn’t mean guilty imo. It’s possible there’s an innocent and plausible explanation. But it certainly makes you look twice.
And yet every school you listed has been accused of dirty recruiting, so if a 5 star recruit and his family perhaps want to steer clear of those situations, it automatically is suspicious that they would look at schools that have a good academic reputation and no former history of shading recruiting?
"...a pattern"? "...sense"? The perception/assertion of "pattern" is too often a subjective attempt to make "sense" of circumstance that is not understood or conventional, and as such, is as likely to indicate ignorance as insight.
Just because something is obscure, doesn't mean it's shrouded in 'smoke' that conceals a fire. For my part have yet to see anything in this (Vandy) worth 'betting the farm', even with odds.
Last edited:
How did Bagley even have enough credits to get into Duke? He seemed to change schools at the drop of a hat. Much less the money filtered to his parents. NCAA will go after a kid from MSST. but these don't have investigators enough for the Dukes' UKs' and UNCs'. Bias personified.
