Is this a serious problem for Kentucky and Calipari?

[Clipsfan]

...How does this affect Calipari outside from the fact that his team will be tiny next year?

Calipari didn't do anything wrong with recruiting him, right? (at least that we or the press knows)

It adds to the long list of Calipari turning a blind eye to infractions committed by his players in the interest of having those players on his team. There is no proof that Calipari paid Enes, for example, although there is probably suspicion on that front. Best case for Calipari, this shows that he couldn't have looked into Kanter's background at all before recruiting him. Worst case, he knew Kanter was completely ineligible and flaunted the rules.

[Olympic Fan]

Let's restrain our enthusiasm here.

This is very disturbing for Kentucky's chances in 2010-11. Kanter was their big hope to have an inside presence to balance all their young guards. Without him, they are way too small.

But long-term, this has no impact on Cal or Kentucky. Kanter was a one-and-done player anyway. Cal has another wave of players coming in next year -- Gilchrist and Davis in the post.

And as it stands there is NO NCAA jeopardy for Cal or Kentucky over this. The worst that could happen is that Kanter will be declared ineligible for the season -- which would ruin Kentucky's 2010-11 season. It's premature to suggest that would happen -- but if the NCAA determines that the info in the linked article is true, that's almost certainly the outcome.

But it won't go beyond that unless Cal is so stupid as to lie to the NCAA or try and stonewall them. Considering how slick he's been in the past, I suspect that's extremely unlikely.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Let's restrain our enthusiasm here.

This is very disturbing for Kentucky's chances in 2010-11. Kanter was their big hope to have an inside presence to balance all their young guards. Without him, they are way too small.

But long-term, this has no impact on Cal or Kentucky. Kanter was a one-and-done player anyway. Cal has another wave of players coming in next year -- Gilchrist and Davis in the post.

And as it stands there is NO NCAA jeopardy for Cal or Kentucky over this. The worst that could happen is that Kanter will be declared ineligible for the season -- which would ruin Kentucky's 2010-11 season. It's premature to suggest that would happen -- but if the NCAA determines that the info in the linked article is true, that's almost certainly the outcome.

But it won't go beyond that unless Cal is so stupid as to lie to the NCAA or try and stonewall them. Considering how slick he's been in the past, I suspect that's extremely unlikely.

Thanks for the clarification. I guess this will be a "dip" year for Kentucky under Cal...

[yancem]

This situation does illustrate another danger to recruiting only (or at least mostly) one and done recruits. Not only is the loss of player magnified by the lack of upperclassmen to stabilize the team but you also greatly increase the chances of a player being ruled ineligible. The players most likely to have eligibility issues are the players that are only going to school because they can't enter the draft. This isn't the case for all one and done talents (see Wall, John or Deng, Luol) but if you have someone who doesn't really want to go to school but feels they have no other choice is more likely to take the easy road.

[muzikfrk75]

“I am sorry for telling this for Enes, but we cannot lie if someone asks the whole story, we cannot hide,” Karakas said.

If the GM himself is saying this, then Kanter's eligibility isn't in doubt anymore in my opinion.

Cal and KY won't get in trouble for this, but my question to Cal is this: why would you recruit someone with 'cloudy paperwork' in the first place?

[Lord Ash]

Let's restrain our enthusiasm here.

This is very disturbing for Kentucky's chances in 2010-11. Kanter was their big hope to have an inside presence to balance all their young guards. Without him, they are way too small.

But long-term, this has no impact on Cal or Kentucky. Kanter was a one-and-done player anyway. Cal has another wave of players coming in next year -- Gilchrist and Davis in the post.

And as it stands there is NO NCAA jeopardy for Cal or Kentucky over this. The worst that could happen is that Kanter will be declared ineligible for the season -- which would ruin Kentucky's 2010-11 season. It's premature to suggest that would happen -- but if the NCAA determines that the info in the linked article is true, that's almost certainly the outcome.

But it won't go beyond that unless Cal is so stupid as to lie to the NCAA or try and stonewall them. Considering how slick he's been in the past, I suspect that's extremely unlikely.

See, I see it as one more year where we are not as worried about Cal finally reaching the Final Four and possibly winning a title, which is one year closer to him finally getting busted for something big enough to run him out of NCAA basketball, so losing a BIG piece of his 2010-2011 puzzle is a big plus. Cal winning a title would, in some ways, "validate" him in basketball and maybe even push more of his type of recruiting... i.e. teams of one and dones.

[BD80]

Let's restrain our enthusiasm here.

This is very disturbing for Kentucky's chances in 2010-11. Kanter was their big hope to have an inside presence to balance all their young guards. Without him, they are way too small.

But long-term, this has no impact on Cal or Kentucky. Kanter was a one-and-done player anyway. Cal has another wave of players coming in next year -- Gilchrist and Davis in the post.
And as it stands there is NO NCAA jeopardy for Cal or Kentucky over this. The worst that could happen is that Kanter will be declared ineligible for the season -- which would ruin Kentucky's 2010-11 season. It's premature to suggest that would happen -- but if the NCAA determines that the info in the linked article is true, that's almost certainly the outcome.

But it won't go beyond that unless Cal is so stupid as to lie to the NCAA or try and stonewall them. Considering how slick he's been in the past, I suspect that's extremely unlikely.

Wonder if Gilchrist got the memo about being a post player. I'm pretty sure he sees himself as a wing, as a dribbler in the dribble drive. There is another top 10 PF coming to Ky next year, Wiltjer (or something like that).

In my mind, this drama is wearing down the Ky faithful. They will sell their souls for more championships, but Cal hasn't delivered a championship yet, and it looks like another #1 recruiting class will come and go without hanging a banner. Pressure will mount, and the "cool" factor will fade. There are a lot of proud Ky alumni who will not be patient with this tactic.

Cal is in a difficult position, he will want to downplay expectations this year because he has no post presence, but he can't downplay expectations to the alumni. Frankly, he doesn't have the depth to go small and pressure, so it will be a bad year.

Next year will be very interesting with Gilchrist, Davis, Teague and Wiltjer. If Poole and Lamb stick around for next year it will be a very, very talented team, but I don't know if I see the on floor leadership that it takes to win. If that team crashes early in the tourney as well, I think they will be lighting the torches in Ky.

[roywhite]

See, I see it as one more year where we are not as worried about Cal finally reaching the Final Four and possibly winning a title, which is one year closer to him finally getting busted for something big enough to run him out of NCAA basketball, so losing a BIG piece of his 2010-2011 puzzle is a big plus. Cal winning a title would, in some ways, "validate" him in basketball and maybe even push more of his type of recruiting... i.e. teams of one and dones.

Like Professor Harold Hill of "Music Man" fame, Cal is one step ahead of the sheriff. He'd love to lead the big parade, but mostly it's self-preservation...on to the next town when things get too hot.

So far, the Lexington locals appear to be more entertained than concerned.

[OldPhiKap]

In my mind, this drama is wearing down the Ky faithful. They will sell their souls for more championships, but Cal hasn't delivered a championship yet, and it looks like another #1 recruiting class will come and go without hanging a banner. Pressure will mount, and the "cool" factor will fade. There are a lot of proud Ky alumni who will not be patient with this tactic. . . .

If that team crashes early in the tourney as well, I think they will be lighting the torches in Ky.

Especially if Pitino gets Louisville rolling!

Calipari always leaves one step ahead of the posse. Has he ever been thrown out by a school? If so, I can't recall.

[Greg_Newton]

See, I see it as one more year where we are not as worried about Cal finally reaching the Final Four and possibly winning a title, which is one year closer to him finally getting busted for something big enough to run him out of NCAA basketball, so losing a BIG piece of his 2010-2011 puzzle is a big plus. Cal winning a title would, in some ways, "validate" him in basketball and maybe even push more of his type of recruiting... i.e. teams of one and dones.

Agreed... plus, anything that helps diminish his current aura and hot streak is good. It's entirely possible that UK could miss the tournament and only produce (gasp) 1-2 draft picks this year, possible zero in the lottery!

Also, just think how important this development could make Cal's slimy poaching of T. Jones. Without him, their only two post players would be Josh Harrelson and Eloy Vargas - who averaged 1.3 and 0.0 points in their most recent college seasons, respectively. Even with him, their frontcourt is now in a weaker situation than UNC's. Jones is very good, but he's more a big wing - they'll be very thin and untalented in the post, and I wouldn't expect them to get much scoring down low at all.

Lastly, not that it even needs to be said, but this is a completely different situation than Maggette. Situation A: you're recruiting a American HS kid who plays AAU, and assume he's elligible. Situation B: you're recruiting a European kid who's played professionally for years overseas, who has a shoe deal with Nike, who Oak Hill wouldn't accept because of eligibility issues... and assume he's elligible.

Situation A happens all the time, and you can't really fault the integrity of a program if it later comes out a small amount of money changed hands before the program was involved. Situation B, however, is just asking for trouble... the program knows full well what it's getting into.

[Nugget]

this doesn't seem to be an instance where he's done anything particularly sleazy.

Recruiting any high-profile foreign player who was part of a club basketball program involves a substantial risk that (i) he or his family may have received some form of payment, (ii) the truth will be extremely murky, and (iii) there will be NCAA eligibility tangles.

This is par for the course, and certainly not an indication of Cal/Kentucky doing anything improper for recruiting advantage.

Indeed, as others noted, there's a bit of a "glass houses" aspect to this criticism of Cal given that the Kanter situation doesn't even approach what happened with Corey/Piggie.

[roywhite]

this doesn't seem to be an instance where he's done anything particularly sleazy.

Recruiting any high-profile foreign player who was part of a club basketball program involves a substantial risk that (i) he or his family may have received some form of payment, (ii) the truth will be extremely murky, and (iii) there will be NCAA eligibility tangles.

This is par for the course, and certainly not an indication of Cal/Kentucky doing anything improper for recruiting advantage.

Indeed, as others noted, there's a bit of a "glass houses" aspect to this criticism of Cal given that the Kanter situation doesn't even approach what happened with Corey/Piggie.

Not sure what you mean with the Maggette comparison.

The comments so far have been that the Maggette situation involved much less.

Are we doomed to hear Maggette's name every time a Kentucky scandal pops up?

[Lord Ash]

Oh lord. Seriously? With the amount of times this sort of thing is brought up, I feel like there should be a sticky to clearly explain certain Duke events, like the Maggette situation, and why it is NOTHING like the Kanter situation.

[sagegrouse]

Indeed, as others noted, there's a bit of a "glass houses" aspect to this criticism of Cal given that the Kanter situation doesn't even approach what happened with Corey/Piggie.

The posts I have read on this thread were basically doing a 'tee-hee' as a top Kentucky recruit runs afoul of the amateur rules. And, of course, they were pulling Cal's chain a bit.

WRT Maggette and Myron Piggie, lets remember there are two orders of magnitude of difference in the amounts (x100) and that the NCAA concluded that Duke was totally unaware that there were some payments beyond expenses. I expect the NCAA will exonerate Kentucky in the Kanter case, but his eligibility would seem to be an open issue.

sagegrouse

[Nugget]

The posts I have read on this thread were basically doing a 'tee-hee' as a top Kentucky recruit runs afoul of the amateur rules. And, of course, they were pulling Cal's chain a bit.

WRT Maggette and Myron Piggie, lets remember there are two orders of magnitude of difference in the amounts (x100) and that the NCAA concluded that Duke was totally unaware that there were some payments beyond expenses. I expect the NCAA will exonerate Kentucky in the Kanter case, but his eligibility would seem to be an open issue.

sagegrouse

The relevant point is not the dollar amount (in part because much of what is being talked about here is likely the value of in-kind benefits (e.g., housing), but that Corey played in games while (apparently) ineligible, and Duke suffered no consequence.

Last I recall, Kanter hasn't yet suited up for Kentucky in a game.

[camion]

The relevant point is not the dollar amount (in part because much of what is being talked about here is likely the value of in-kind benefits (e.g., housing), but that Corey played in games while (apparently) ineligible, and Duke suffered no consequence.

Last I recall, Kanter hasn't yet suited up for Kentucky in a game.

Another relevant point is that other players involved with Piggie played for other college teams and those teams also suffered "no consequence." The Duke decision by the NCAA wasn't special handling.

As far as Kentucky is concerned, there is no violation problem for them in this case as far as I can see. From an NCAA viewpoint it's Kanter's problem, not Kentucky's.

[Duvall]

The relevant point is not the dollar amount (in part because much of what is being talked about here is likely the value of in-kind benefits (e.g., housing), but that Corey played in games while (apparently) ineligible, and Duke suffered no consequence.

Last I recall, Kanter hasn't yet suited up for Kentucky in a game.

That's certainly relevant to determining whether Kentucky should be sanctioned, but it's not the only relevant point in assessing Calipari's conduct. Another important difference between Kanter and Maggette is that it was widely known last year, well before Kanter arrived on campus, that his Turkish team was claiming that he was paid as a professional. While the NYT story might be the first time that an actual dollar figure made it into the press, the allegations were common knowledge. That simply wasn't true with Maggette.

[sagegrouse]

The relevant point is not the dollar amount (in part because much of what is being talked about here is likely the value of in-kind benefits (e.g., housing), but that Corey played in games while (apparently) ineligible, and Duke suffered no consequence.

Last I recall, Kanter hasn't yet suited up for Kentucky in a game.

I don't believe Corey Maggette was ever declared "ineligible" by the NCAA.

sagegrouse

[Lord Ash]

First off, I don't think anyone here is saying Kentucky as a University did something wrong, or should be penalized.

Second, I DO think there are people here who think Calipari knew about the payments but hoped to keep Kanter eligible.

Lastly, your comparison to the Maggette situation is completely and totally off-base.

A) Maggette played at Duke; Kanter has not played at Kentucky.

B) Kanter played for a professional team; Maggette did not.

C) Kanter was paid apparently a GREAT deal of money; Maggette was paid a 50th of that.

D) People have been saying Kanter may have been paid for a while; no one had any idea on Maggette until he was in the NBA.

Given all of this, and more, I have no idea how you think there is a comparison between the situations, other than they both involve basketball players and eligibility. Any real Duke fan should know this, and should know why NONE of the group of schools who played players who were paid by Piggie were penalized.

[hq2]

Folks, this all sounds like typical Calipari. He's gotten all of this down to a science over the years. He knows exactly how to recruit questionable players while simultaneously positioning himself so that he can deny any knowledge of what's going on. It's what he did the last two times, and he's at it again. I doubt if they'll nail the slippery (deleted) this time, but who knows; if the NCAA keeps trying, they may get him eventually. But, he'll probably skip town ahead of the posse this time too.