socaliganbear said:

---

iwantwinners said:

---

Did I miss something regarding the hatred of Miller?

Thought he was a great coach at Xavier, clearly his peers thought the same, and nothing he's done at Arizona has changed that for me.

Is it just because he's had success at rival in-conference program? If there's a legit reason then I missed it.

---

Yeah pretty much?

---

That seems kind of petty. I want Arizona to fail too, but it seems odd to hate him because of his success there. I don't recall us hating Lute Olson like this. Or Ben Howland.

iwantwinners said:

---

Did I miss something regarding the hatred of Miller?

Thought he was a great coach at Xavier, clearly his peers thought the same, and nothing he's done at Arizona has changed that for me.

Is it just because he's had success at rival in-conference program? If there's a legit reason then I missed it.

---

People are just parroting Shocky, hence the constant mention of "donut boy." Why people parrot the most annoying poster this board has even seen, and don't think for themselves, is beyond me. The funny thing is, Miller's not even all that fat.

iwantwinners said:

---

Did I miss something regarding the hatred of Miller?

Thought he was a great coach at Xavier, clearly his peers thought the same, and nothing he's done at Arizona has changed that for me.

Is it just because he's had success at rival in-conference program? If there's a legit reason then I missed it.

---

. Nope. Not for me. Dude is slimy. Altman, too. I hope that every coach in the country who has participated in this black market takes it like Pitino. If that means Cal, too, so be it. If you are going to play a game, play it right, play it fair.

Jim Tressel's argument was he was looking out for the players and trying to take care of them when the NCAA wouldn't (or rather wouldn't allow them to 'take care of themselves'). I have some empathy for a coach turning a blind eye to it, but I can't condone actively participating in it.

Hate Arizona.

Hate UCLA bball much, much more than Zona.

I bet nothing happens to Arizona.

wifeisafurd said:

---

I can see why Monty wanted out. Yuck. Duke has to pay players? Why bother having collegiate basketball. Just turn it into a semi-pro league. .

---

This is from a 2011 interview with Monty, which appears to no longer be online. But with the recent news I remembered I had emailed this excerpt to a friend.

Helps further illuminate why Monty wanted out (one of the reasons anyway) and Miller's recruiting tactics...

Quote:

---

Q. Any comments on the rules reform package that was just passed in terms of access to kids in the summer and all those things?

COACH MONTGOMERY: How do you know that I'd have a reaction to that? It kind of blows my mind to be honest with you. The fact that we're now going to be tweeting, texting, calling these kids any time anyplace, it's hard for me to really understand. I've always been relatively protective of kids and their privacy. I think kids need to have an opportunity to focus on some of the things that are important in their lives such as academics and family. I just don't know how this is going to work itself out. I can remember the whole evolution of all the things that have gone on in the last 30 years as to why we made decisions to protect kids' privacy, to protect kids and give them a chance to study and keep them away. It's so difficult now to keep kids level headed in terms of relative to where they are and what their expectations are, to turn 340 Division I coaches on them 24 hours a day, I'm not certain how this is going to work itself out.
Montgomery was a bit more open during lunch on that point: "Don't get me started on that. That's, when I first got back, that summer, when I took the Cal job, I went recruiting. I watched certain kids, and kids got done and I watched specifically the Arizona horde all go out, and I'm watching this thing, I was stunned. I was in a daze. The NCAA gal was there, and I remember saying, 'You're telling me that this is OK?' I can't talk to him, and we can't do anything, but all of these Arizona guys they can walk up to [recruits] at any time they want and talk with them?"
"My first thought was and I knew we were never going to be able to do it was that I was just going to hire all of my managers. Teams have done that. I was just going to take all my managers and say, 'OK, you're going on the road. You're going to go raise some money and you're going to go with us to places and when the game's over, you need to go up to these guys and say, we've got this guy and when we get you, we're going to do this, they really like you and what are you thinking.'"
"I talked to a kid that we're involved with a good kid, a good family and he's saying, 'Boy, Arizona's really recruiting me hard,' and he's a junior. He just started his junior year, and we're allowed one call a month. So, he was over, and I asked him, 'What do you mean they're recruiting you hard? What are they doing that makes this so much different?' We're allowed to make one call a month, we're allowed to do seven evaluations a year, and somehow, Arizona has contact with him every day, twice a day. It's different social media, so that means that because some guy I've hired in the office knows who you are and knows your email address, just sends you something every day, even with my name attached to it? Is that doing a better job of recruiting? What does that have to do with the school, the location, the education? It's the last thing anybody cares about."

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

TheSouseFamily said:

---

BearGreg said:

---

Several points to consider:

• Miller is not a rogue bad guy. This is an endemic issue for college basketball. Many more coaches will be brought down before this is over
• The bigger th programs recruiting profile, the more likely they will be guilty. This is a systemic issue around many of the elite recruits
• Joe Pasternak is not YET guilty of anything. Read the full article Here. Joe talked to the agent that's it. Every college staff talks to ALL the handlers of a player they are recruiting from Vermont to San Jose State to Cal to Kentucky. And Millers transcript of the call about Ayton makes clear he was the money guy. This is far from over and Joe may be guilty of something bad or nothing more than association with Miller much as Wyking is with Pitino. Let's save our sharp knives until there's something much more definitive
• I think this is great news for college basketball and Cal in the long run. More on that to come

---

We'll see. You may very well be right but I'm expecting a much more modest outcome. For one thing, I'd be shocked if we learn that head coaches orchestrating 6 figure payouts for recruits is "endemic" to college basketball. There will surely be evidence of payouts to players and some schools will be involved in those payouts but I suspect that there will be very few examples quite like what we're seeing with Miller and Ayton.

A lot of top schools don't even offer or recruit guys like Ayton (or Bol Bol or Brian Bowen) where there are serious red flags like there was in this instance. Like Bol, Ayton had very few offers for a #3 recruit in the class. Schools like Arizona, Auburn, Oregon, Louisville, maybe Kansas and others) don't care about red flags, but many steer clear of these guys entirely and certainly wouldn't pay them. Not surprisingly, it's these same schools that have already been fingered by the FBI. But pervasive and endemic? I guess we'll see. Will be an interesting ride.

---

Bear Greg is spot on for all points. Very close friend of mine who was the family friend / advisor to Jabari Parker accompanied him on his final 5 college visits (MSU, Duke, Kansas, Florida and actually Stanford - which was merely a favor to Mark Madsen) Only Stanford did not offer money. It is common place for elite players to be offered $50k and much more for committing to schools. Many ways to hide it - including having alums provide high paying jobs for family members etc. This method of paying players thru a variety of avenues has been prevalent for the past 25 years though increasing over the past 10 years.
Joe P is not guilty of anything yet despite several people on the string ready to convict and set an sentence. He has as reported, just talked to an agent. Joe is an good man and extremely hard working coach - He loves Cal and still has Cal in his sights. Possibly more specific info will come out to alter my feelings, but for now I am not making an snap decision on his guilt. BTW UCSB under his leadership is 20-7 currently and in line for the top 5 single season turnarounds in D-1 history.
This will help Cal in the long run, as Wyking is highly ethical, family man and trustworthy - some recruits/families will bond with him and will want to avoid known dirty programs. Our achilles heal is the admission's office, which restricts the program from admitting the 2.5gpa+- student athlete and lack of an practice facility.

---

I can see why Monty wanted out. Yuck. Duke has to pay players? Why bother having collegiate basketball. Just turn it into a semi-pro league. .

---

I've been saying this for some time now. It is incompatible with the mission of the university.

smokeyrover said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

I can see why Monty wanted out. Yuck. Duke has to pay players? Why bother having collegiate basketball. Just turn it into a semi-pro league. .

---

This is from a 2011 interview with Monty, which appears to no longer be online. But with the recent news I remembered I had emailed this excerpt to a friend.

Helps further illuminate why Monty wanted out (one of the reasons anyway) and Miller's recruiting tactics...

Quote:

---

Q. Any comments on the rules reform package that was just passed in terms of access to kids in the summer and all those things?

COACH MONTGOMERY: How do you know that I'd have a reaction to that? It kind of blows my mind to be honest with you. The fact that we're now going to be tweeting, texting, calling these kids any time anyplace, it's hard for me to really understand. I've always been relatively protective of kids and their privacy. I think kids need to have an opportunity to focus on some of the things that are important in their lives such as academics and family. I just don't know how this is going to work itself out. I can remember the whole evolution of all the things that have gone on in the last 30 years as to why we made decisions to protect kids' privacy, to protect kids and give them a chance to study and keep them away. It's so difficult now to keep kids level headed in terms of relative to where they are and what their expectations are, to turn 340 Division I coaches on them 24 hours a day, I'm not certain how this is going to work itself out.
Montgomery was a bit more open during lunch on that point: "Don't get me started on that. That's, when I first got back, that summer, when I took the Cal job, I went recruiting. I watched certain kids, and kids got done and I watched specifically the Arizona horde all go out, and I'm watching this thing, I was stunned. I was in a daze. The NCAA gal was there, and I remember saying, 'You're telling me that this is OK?' I can't talk to him, and we can't do anything, but all of these Arizona guys they can walk up to [recruits] at any time they want and talk with them?"
"My first thought was and I knew we were never going to be able to do it was that I was just going to hire all of my managers. Teams have done that. I was just going to take all my managers and say, 'OK, you're going on the road. You're going to go raise some money and you're going to go with us to places and when the game's over, you need to go up to these guys and say, we've got this guy and when we get you, we're going to do this, they really like you and what are you thinking.'"
"I talked to a kid that we're involved with a good kid, a good family and he's saying, 'Boy, Arizona's really recruiting me hard,' and he's a junior. He just started his junior year, and we're allowed one call a month. So, he was over, and I asked him, 'What do you mean they're recruiting you hard? What are they doing that makes this so much different?' We're allowed to make one call a month, we're allowed to do seven evaluations a year, and somehow, Arizona has contact with him every day, twice a day. It's different social media, so that means that because some guy I've hired in the office knows who you are and knows your email address, just sends you something every day, even with my name attached to it? Is that doing a better job of recruiting? What does that have to do with the school, the location, the education? It's the last thing anybody cares about."

---

---

I remember this and was very dissapointed in Monty's response. Texting players every day is not the same as paying players. I know many here agree with Monty's attitude, but it shows one reason why Monty was such a bad recruiter. You have to be willing to at least compete to the extent allowed by the rules. Yes, the school, the location, the education are important, but so is knowing the coach likes you, wants you on his team, thinks he can really help you improve your game.

tequila4kapp said:

---

ayetee11 said:

---

Big Dog said:

---

don't blame the 'contract', but the President & Regents at the University who approved it.

---

The contract tells me that the school knew and approved what was being done in order to win games. I would guess it went something like this...

"We want you to do whatever it takes, break the rules, you probably won't be able to land a job if you get caught so we'll give you a favorable buyout if we have to fire you with cause."

---

You are exactly right. That contract is the institutional sign off on the whole thing. We need a real minor league system for hoops and kids need to be able to go from HS to the league.

---

+1. We need minor league FB too.

calumnus said:

---

smokeyrover said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

I can see why Monty wanted out. Yuck. Duke has to pay players? Why bother having collegiate basketball. Just turn it into a semi-pro league. .

---

This is from a 2011 interview with Monty, which appears to no longer be online. But with the recent news I remembered I had emailed this excerpt to a friend.

Helps further illuminate why Monty wanted out (one of the reasons anyway) and Miller's recruiting tactics...

Quote:

---

Q. Any comments on the rules reform package that was just passed in terms of access to kids in the summer and all those things?

COACH MONTGOMERY: How do you know that I'd have a reaction to that? It kind of blows my mind to be honest with you. The fact that we're now going to be tweeting, texting, calling these kids any time anyplace, it's hard for me to really understand. I've always been relatively protective of kids and their privacy. I think kids need to have an opportunity to focus on some of the things that are important in their lives such as academics and family. I just don't know how this is going to work itself out. I can remember the whole evolution of all the things that have gone on in the last 30 years as to why we made decisions to protect kids' privacy, to protect kids and give them a chance to study and keep them away. It's so difficult now to keep kids level headed in terms of relative to where they are and what their expectations are, to turn 340 Division I coaches on them 24 hours a day, I'm not certain how this is going to work itself out.
Montgomery was a bit more open during lunch on that point: "Don't get me started on that. That's, when I first got back, that summer, when I took the Cal job, I went recruiting. I watched certain kids, and kids got done and I watched specifically the Arizona horde all go out, and I'm watching this thing, I was stunned. I was in a daze. The NCAA gal was there, and I remember saying, 'You're telling me that this is OK?' I can't talk to him, and we can't do anything, but all of these Arizona guys they can walk up to [recruits] at any time they want and talk with them?"
"My first thought was and I knew we were never going to be able to do it was that I was just going to hire all of my managers. Teams have done that. I was just going to take all my managers and say, 'OK, you're going on the road. You're going to go raise some money and you're going to go with us to places and when the game's over, you need to go up to these guys and say, we've got this guy and when we get you, we're going to do this, they really like you and what are you thinking.'"
"I talked to a kid that we're involved with a good kid, a good family and he's saying, 'Boy, Arizona's really recruiting me hard,' and he's a junior. He just started his junior year, and we're allowed one call a month. So, he was over, and I asked him, 'What do you mean they're recruiting you hard? What are they doing that makes this so much different?' We're allowed to make one call a month, we're allowed to do seven evaluations a year, and somehow, Arizona has contact with him every day, twice a day. It's different social media, so that means that because some guy I've hired in the office knows who you are and knows your email address, just sends you something every day, even with my name attached to it? Is that doing a better job of recruiting? What does that have to do with the school, the location, the education? It's the last thing anybody cares about."

---

---

I remember this and was very dissapointed in Monty's response. Texting players every day is not the same as paying players. I know many here agree with Monty's attitude, but it shows one reason why Monty was such a bad recruiter. You have to be willing to at least compete to the extent allowed by the rules. Yes, the school, the location, the education are important, but so is knowing the coach likes you, wants you on his team, thinks he can really help you improve your game.

---

This is the first I've seen of this interview. Is he saying Arizona flouted the rules on contacting players and the NCAA looked the other way? Or that different rules applied to AZ and Cal?

FuzzyWuzzy said:

---

calumnus said:

---

smokeyrover said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

I can see why Monty wanted out. Yuck. Duke has to pay players? Why bother having collegiate basketball. Just turn it into a semi-pro league. .

---

This is from a 2011 interview with Monty, which appears to no longer be online. But with the recent news I remembered I had emailed this excerpt to a friend.

Helps further illuminate why Monty wanted out (one of the reasons anyway) and Miller's recruiting tactics...

Quote:

---

Q. Any comments on the rules reform package that was just passed in terms of access to kids in the summer and all those things?

COACH MONTGOMERY: How do you know that I'd have a reaction to that? It kind of blows my mind to be honest with you. The fact that we're now going to be tweeting, texting, calling these kids any time anyplace, it's hard for me to really understand. I've always been relatively protective of kids and their privacy. I think kids need to have an opportunity to focus on some of the things that are important in their lives such as academics and family. I just don't know how this is going to work itself out. I can remember the whole evolution of all the things that have gone on in the last 30 years as to why we made decisions to protect kids' privacy, to protect kids and give them a chance to study and keep them away. It's so difficult now to keep kids level headed in terms of relative to where they are and what their expectations are, to turn 340 Division I coaches on them 24 hours a day, I'm not certain how this is going to work itself out.
Montgomery was a bit more open during lunch on that point: "Don't get me started on that. That's, when I first got back, that summer, when I took the Cal job, I went recruiting. I watched certain kids, and kids got done and I watched specifically the Arizona horde all go out, and I'm watching this thing, I was stunned. I was in a daze. The NCAA gal was there, and I remember saying, 'You're telling me that this is OK?' I can't talk to him, and we can't do anything, but all of these Arizona guys they can walk up to [recruits] at any time they want and talk with them?"
"My first thought was and I knew we were never going to be able to do it was that I was just going to hire all of my managers. Teams have done that. I was just going to take all my managers and say, 'OK, you're going on the road. You're going to go raise some money and you're going to go with us to places and when the game's over, you need to go up to these guys and say, we've got this guy and when we get you, we're going to do this, they really like you and what are you thinking.'"
"I talked to a kid that we're involved with a good kid, a good family and he's saying, 'Boy, Arizona's really recruiting me hard,' and he's a junior. He just started his junior year, and we're allowed one call a month. So, he was over, and I asked him, 'What do you mean they're recruiting you hard? What are they doing that makes this so much different?' We're allowed to make one call a month, we're allowed to do seven evaluations a year, and somehow, Arizona has contact with him every day, twice a day. It's different social media, so that means that because some guy I've hired in the office knows who you are and knows your email address, just sends you something every day, even with my name attached to it? Is that doing a better job of recruiting? What does that have to do with the school, the location, the education? It's the last thing anybody cares about."

---

---

I remember this and was very dissapointed in Monty's response. Texting players every day is not the same as paying players. I know many here agree with Monty's attitude, but it shows one reason why Monty was such a bad recruiter. You have to be willing to at least compete to the extent allowed by the rules. Yes, the school, the location, the education are important, but so is knowing the coach likes you, wants you on his team, thinks he can really help you improve your game.

---

This is the first I've seen of this interview. Is he saying Arizona flouted the rules on contacting players and the NCAA looked the other way? Or that different rules applied to AZ and Cal?

---

I believe he was saying that there was a "rules reform package" in which certain traditional types of communication (visits, phone calls, snail mail) by the official coaching staff were limited, but that it did not include contact via texting and social media from others "associated" with the program.

Monty saw this (the unofficial communications) as hypocritical BS and didn't want to engage in it, whereas other staffs took full advantage, using volunteer student managers to contact recruits almost daily.

iwantwinners said:

---

socaliganbear said:

---

iwantwinners said:

---

Did I miss something regarding the hatred of Miller?

Thought he was a great coach at Xavier, clearly his peers thought the same, and nothing he's done at Arizona has changed that for me.

Is it just because he's had success at rival in-conference program? If there's a legit reason then I missed it.

---

Yeah pretty much?

---

That seems kind of petty. I want Arizona to fail too, but it seems odd to hate him because of his success there. I don't recall us hating Lute Olson like this. Or Ben Howland.

---

You're overthinking this. It's a sports forum and peopel talk sh*t they probably don't truly mean. Personally, I don't actually cares if Arizona fails or not. That seems far more petty to me.

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

iwantwinners said:

---

Did I miss something regarding the hatred of Miller?

Thought he was a great coach at Xavier, clearly his peers thought the same, and nothing he's done at Arizona has changed that for me.

Is it just because he's had success at rival in-conference program? If there's a legit reason then I missed it.

---

People are just parroting Shocky, hence the constant mention of "donut boy." Why people parrot the most annoying poster this board has even seen, and don't think for themselves, is beyond me. The funny thing is, Miller's not even all that fat.

---

Amazingly, shocky was on point about Az and miller. People don't hate them for success, but because they are cheaters.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/3/topics/28431/30

Steve Kerr had an interesting take on the problems. He noted that he was saddened that UofA was involved, as it is his alma mater. His point was that paying players was a bad idea, but he thought allowing them to make their own endorsement deals (similar to Olympic athletes) might be a way to go. At first this sounded sensible; however, as I think about it, the problem is that this gives Nike, UA, Adidas, etc.even more clout and power to direct kids to certain schools, etc.

The NBA just needs to get rid of the one and done rule. Simple. Then basketball needs to go with the baseball system or something similar. You either go to college or you don't.

I hate the idea of making basketball a minor league thing. That would defeat a lot of the purpose for me. For me, the tradition is a big part of it. If the sport is merely "affiliated' with the university, then it changes everything.

Miller's contract may not actually require UofA to pay out more if he's fired with cause.

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona-investigations/2018/02/25/university-says-sean-miller-would-not-get-more-money-if-fired-cause/371709002/

Wow, that post from Shocky was from September 2016 . . .

parentswerebears said:

---

The NBA just needs to get rid of the one and done rule. Simple. Then basketball needs to go with the baseball system or something similar. You either go to college or you don't.

I hate the idea of making basketball a minor league thing. That would defeat a lot of the purpose for me. For me, the tradition is a big part of it. If the sport is merely "affiliated' with the university, then it changes everything.

---

If the NBA doesn't get rid of the one-and-done rule (and it is entirely up to them), then what do you think college basketball should do?

Nobels make us a-holes.

BearSD said:

---

parentswerebears said:

---

The NBA just needs to get rid of the one and done rule. Simple. Then basketball needs to go with the baseball system or something similar. You either go to college or you don't.

I hate the idea of making basketball a minor league thing. That would defeat a lot of the purpose for me. For me, the tradition is a big part of it. If the sport is merely "affiliated' with the university, then it changes everything.

---

If the NBA doesn't get rid of the one-and-done rule (and it is entirely up to them), then what do you think college basketball should do?

---

I think they should do it the way football does- you can't leave until your junior year.

parentswerebears said:

---

BearSD said:

---

parentswerebears said:

---

The NBA just needs to get rid of the one and done rule. Simple. Then basketball needs to go with the baseball system or something similar. You either go to college or you don't.

I hate the idea of making basketball a minor league thing. That would defeat a lot of the purpose for me. For me, the tradition is a big part of it. If the sport is merely "affiliated' with the university, then it changes everything.

---

If the NBA doesn't get rid of the one-and-done rule (and it is entirely up to them), then what do you think college basketball should do?

---

I think they should do it the way football does- you can't leave until your junior year.

---

That isn't a college football rule, that's an NFL rule that says players are only draft-eligible after their third year in college (i.e., juniors and redshirt sophomores).

In baseball, the players eligible for the MLB draft are:

• High school players, if they have graduated from high school and have not yet attended college or junior college;
• College players, from four-year colleges who have either completed their junior or senior years or are at least 21 years old; and
• Junior college players, regardless of how many years of school they have completed

But in all three sports, basketball, baseball, and football, the NCAA is not doing a dam thing other than living with the rules adopted by each pro sport. So the question is, what should the NCAA do if the NBA doesn't change its draft rules?

Why should the NBA give a rats you know what about any of this? It doesn't involve them in any way. Kids can go overseas for a year.

BearSD said:

---

parentswerebears said:

---

The NBA just needs to get rid of the one and done rule. Simple. Then basketball needs to go with the baseball system or something similar. You either go to college or you don't.

I hate the idea of making basketball a minor league thing. That would defeat a lot of the purpose for me. For me, the tradition is a big part of it. If the sport is merely "affiliated' with the university, then it changes everything.

---

If the NBA doesn't get rid of the one-and-done rule (and it is entirely up to them), then what do you think college basketball should do?

---

While I like the Minor league (aka nuclear) option - due to the pervasiveness of money (which will not go away quickly), I like pwb's idea for a simple interim measure.

To answer BearSD's question: Until NBA/CBA removes the 'one-and-done' rule, the NCAA should simply make freshman ineligible. Like Lew Alcindor, they can spend a year adjusting to college and practicing. working on school and stuff.

parentswerebears said:

---

Darn. Is it wrong to start a chant of "fire his ass?"

---

How about Lock Him Up?

Not at practice today per Arizona board. Romar in the saddle preparing to lose to a Stanford.

parentswerebears said:

---

The NBA just needs to get rid of the one and done rule. Simple. Then basketball needs to go with the baseball system or something similar. You either go to college or you don't.

I hate the idea of making basketball a minor league thing. That would defeat a lot of the purpose for me. For me, the tradition is a big part of it. If the sport is merely "affiliated' with the university, then it changes everything.

---

I completely agree. The one-and-done practice has been very bad for college basketball.

ColoradoBear said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

iwantwinners said:

---

Did I miss something regarding the hatred of Miller?

Thought he was a great coach at Xavier, clearly his peers thought the same, and nothing he's done at Arizona has changed that for me.

Is it just because he's had success at rival in-conference program? If there's a legit reason then I missed it.

---

People are just parroting Shocky, hence the constant mention of "donut boy." Why people parrot the most annoying poster this board has even seen, and don't think for themselves, is beyond me. The funny thing is, Miller's not even all that fat.

---

Amazingly, shocky was on point about Az and miller. People don't hate them for success, but because they are cheaters.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/3/topics/28431/30

---

One needs both god coaching and players.
Miller appears to be a good coach. He also gets good players.

Yes, shocky had inside knowledge cause he was a fat mouth as others were with him.
He was also a jerk to many.

I don't miss him.

iwantwinners said:

---

Did I miss something regarding the hatred of Miller?

Thought he was a great coach at Xavier, clearly his peers thought the same, and nothing he's done at Arizona has changed that for me.

Is it just because he's had success at rival in-conference program? If there's a legit reason then I missed it.

---

No one disputes his coaching ability. However, his farewell speech at Xavier to the Administration, faculty, players, and fans, where he thanked no one for giving him the chance to coach there, and thanked no one for playing for him, etc., and then said he was very excited about finally going to a school where he'd have a chance to win a national championship -- that speech left him with few friends at Xavier.

In fact it was none other than his friend Calipari, the Kentucky coach, who had his own ethical problems at UMass and Memphis, who urged Miller to take the Arizona job, telling him he'd have a great chance to win the NCAA if he took that job.

I also didn't like it when Miller arrived in Arizona and saw he needed a point guard so he talked Mark Lyons into coming to Arizona as a graduate transfer. I wonder who initiated contact and when he did. Even if there was something suspicious in that, it pales in comparison to the later stuff, like $100K to Ayton.

I don't hate the guy, or anyone else, but I've never liked him. Have to respect his coaching though. The Cal games vs Arizona with Monty vs Miller were coaching clinics.

If the NCAA were serious it would be easy. You get to replenish your scholarships according to a simple formula: Number of graduates/% of overall undergraduate grad. rate as reported to the Department of Education. Of course that is about as likely as hell freezing over because what matters MOST to the NCAA is keeping the cash cow that is March madness going like mad. As long as TV ratings are going great they will do absolutely NOTHING and the University Presidents - a spineless lot of markedly lower abilities, will do NOTHING.

socaltownie said:

---

If the NCAA were serious it would be easy. You get to replenish your scholarships according to a simple formula: Number of graduates/% of overall undergraduate grad. rate as reported to the Department of Education. Of course that is about as likely as hell freezing over because what matters MOST to the NCAA is keeping the cash cow that is March madness going like mad. As long as TV ratings are going great they will do absolutely NOTHING and the University Presidents - a spineless lot of markedly lower abilities, will do NOTHING.

---

SCT:

The proposal to tie scholarships to grad rate has been around forever, but as you say there is slightly less than ZERO chance of it every happening for the reason you state.

parentswerebears said:

---

The NBA just needs to get rid of the one and done rule. Simple. Then basketball needs to go with the baseball system or something similar. You either go to college or you don't.

I hate the idea of making basketball a minor league thing. That would defeat a lot of the purpose for me. For me, the tradition is a big part of it. If the sport is merely "affiliated' with the university, then it changes everything.

---

That's my view also. It doesn't make sense to me that the solution to the current environment of secret mercenaries is to have open mercenaries. I agree the stipend should be enough to allow college athletes, if they're from poor families, to have a similar experience to other students. But paying them based on market value is just going to remove any incentive to go to class, and will probably make the playing field among schools in basketball even less level that it is now.

My solution would be draconian enforcement of scholarship rules, so that if a school recruits a kid, and the kid leaves early, the school loses access to that scholarship until the four-year eligibility period is over. That eliminates the incentive to recruit kids who aren't interested in a college education. Those kids should go to the NBA, the D League or oversees, as they are able.

This is never going to happen, because the NCAA thinks it will kill off their tournament golden goose because of casual fans who only watch to see who the upcoming NBA stars are. I disagree, since most of the tournament interest is in the first two weeks when upsets can occur. I also don't care. College basketball should return to primarily being the province of the schools, the players, the non-playing students and the alumni. If casual fans have an interest, that's fine, but should not be the primary audience.