PDA

View Full Version : In case anyone cares what Pat Forde thinks...



FerryFor50
09-21-2012, 04:02 PM
Apparently, Coach K and Duke should investigate the jewlery non-issue to maintain their integrity.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaab--mike-krzyzewski-owes-it-to-duke--and-himself---to-investigate-lance-thomas--jewelry-purchase.html

Greg_Newton
09-21-2012, 04:05 PM
I'd like to propose quoting any relevant text from these articles if we're going to post them. Rewarding terrible, hit-fishing "journalists" with more hits/comments only ensures that they will continue to pump out the same uninformed nonsense about the situation.

FerryFor50
09-21-2012, 04:10 PM
I'd like to propose quoting any relevant text from these articles if we're going to post them. Rewarding terrible, hit-fishing "journalists" with more hits/comments only ensures that they will continue to pump out the same uninformed nonsense about the situation.

Fair enough.

Here goes!


Mike Krzyzewski owes it to Duke – and himself – to investigate Lance Thomas' jewelry purchase

So there is an out-of-court settlement in the Lance Thomas jewelry charade.

Except it really isn't convenient at all. Not if Duke still wants to be what it bills itself to be and Mike Kryzyzewski still wants to be who he says he is.

Honest. Playing by the rules. A cut above the dirty, conniving mainstream.

Let's hope it doesn't come to that. It would be a repudiation of what Duke bills itself to be and who Mike Krzyzewski says he is.

Jim3k
09-21-2012, 04:32 PM
Fair enough.

Here goes!



Forde:
Krzyzewski, the most accomplished and authoritative basketball coach in his generation, should persuade Lance Thomas to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth to the NCAA.


Hey Pat!!! How do you know that K hasn't done that? Why is K under any obligation to reveal something which is entirely innocent (assuming that's so). If Thomas blew his college savings on such a thing, embarassed himself and doesn't want to talk about it any more, why should K force him to? Maybe the NCAA already knows and has decided there's nothing to it.

Wheat/"/"/"
09-21-2012, 04:34 PM
Apparently, Coach K and Duke should investigate the jewlery non-issue to maintain their integrity.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaab--mike-krzyzewski-owes-it-to-duke--and-himself---to-investigate-lance-thomas--jewelry-purchase.html

Thanks for opening up a thread to discuss these Thomas issues again.

Hopefully everyone will keep speculation at a minimum and comment fairly on things as they develop, even if the only development is a story saying there needs to be more investigation.

cspan37421
09-21-2012, 04:37 PM
I actually have some sympathy for this point of view, and considerable unease with the notion that we can just wipe our brows and say "Whew! That was a close one. Well, nothing to see here! Move along." or "I don't want to know, it doesn't matter now." That seems to put winning (or blissful ignorance of potential violations) ahead of integrity and to me, well that's just not something to be proud of. We regularly rip those who "get away" with stuff - yet when we MIGHT have benefited from a technicality, it's right and just? Seems like we can't have it both ways. Or shouldn't.

Also: Isn't there a general rule here about not quoting entire articles?

Finally, I had a hearty laugh over one part of it. For those who want to dismiss Pat's point of view, all you really needed to quote was this snippet:

"We could all die ..."

:rolleyes:

CameronBornAndBred
09-21-2012, 04:55 PM
Apparently, Coach K and Duke should investigate the jewlery non-issue to maintain their integrity.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaab--mike-krzyzewski-owes-it-to-duke--and-himself---to-investigate-lance-thomas--jewelry-purchase.html
To be fair, it is (was) very much a true issue. At least in my mind. As Duke fans we are very lucky that what ever transpired happened behind closed doors. As they say, "loose lips sink ships"...and ours is still floating. Whew.
Since the legal matter is settled, the NCAA has no recourse but to wonder like the rest of us. Duke and K certainly don't owe it to anyone to investigate further since Lance's transaction was without their knowledge. Obviously nobody benefited from the purchase, and, guaranteed, nobody wanted this to come to a lawsuit.
But...it was not a "non-issue". Once again....whew. The article is grabbing at straws but it isn't a baseless idea..if the shoe were on the other (light blue or royal blue) foot, we'd be screaming.

CameronBornAndBred
09-21-2012, 04:57 PM
I actually have some sympathy for this point of view, and considerable unease with the notion that we can just wipe our brows and say "Whew! That was a close one. Well, nothing to see here! Move along." or "I don't want to know, it doesn't matter now." That seems to put winning (or blissful ignorance of potential violations) ahead of integrity and to me, well that's just not something to be proud of. We regularly rip those who "get away" with stuff - yet when we MIGHT have benefited from a technicality, it's right and just? Seems like we can't have it both ways. Or shouldn't.

Also: Isn't there a general rule here about not quoting entire articles?

Finally, I had a hearty laugh over one part of it. For those who want to dismiss Pat's point of view, all you really needed to quote was this snippet:

"We could all die ..."

:rolleyes:
Posted mine before reading yours...or wrote it as you put yours up. Agreed completely. An uncomfortable "whew".

FerryFor50
09-21-2012, 05:02 PM
To be fair, it is (was) very much a true issue. At least in my mind. As Duke fans we are very lucky that what ever transpired happened behind closed doors. As they say, "loose lips sink ships"...and ours is still floating. Whew.
Since the legal matter is settled, the NCAA has no recourse but to wonder like the rest of us. Duke and K certainly don't owe it to anyone to investigate further since Lance's transaction was without their knowledge. Obviously nobody benefited from the purchase, and, guaranteed, nobody wanted this to come to a lawsuit.
But...it was not a "non-issue". Once again....whew. The article is grabbing at straws but it isn't a baseless idea..if the shoe were on the other (light blue or royal blue) foot, we'd be screaming.

It WAS an issue. And now it's not. ;)

KenTankerous
09-21-2012, 05:07 PM
Living in Louisville, I long ago grew tired of Forde's crap.

But he has a point here. Lance should come clean and explain this deal. Forget this glorified pawn shop talking - that isn't going to happen. But Lance should. Even if it means the banner comes down. I would rather it come down than hang there with questions.

moonpie23
09-21-2012, 05:14 PM
unless there was an ncaa violation, or law broken, he's not obligated to say or do anything......for all we know, a family member may have given lance the down payment and it has since become a sore issue within the family...lance may just want it all to go away...

FerryFor50
09-21-2012, 05:16 PM
unless there was an ncaa violation, or law broken, he's not obligated to say or do anything......for all we know, a family member may have given lance the down payment and it has since become a sore issue within the family...lance may just want it all to go away...

Exactly. Unless it was a CLEAR violation, Lance owes no explanation.

roywhite
09-21-2012, 05:29 PM
Thanks for opening up a thread to discuss these Thomas issues again.

Hopefully everyone will keep speculation at a minimum and comment fairly on things as they develop, even if the only development is a story saying there needs to be more investigation.


Living in Louisville, I long ago grew tired of Forde's crap.

But he has a point here. Lance should come clean and explain this deal. Forget this glorified pawn shop talking - that isn't going to happen. But Lance should. Even if it means the banner comes down. I would rather it come down than hang there with questions.

So we get a new thread for the UNC and Kentucky fans to whine, talk about a Duke national championship banner coming down, and assume a scandal?

The previous Lance thread was locked for lack of content. This one has less.

KenTankerous
09-21-2012, 05:33 PM
Apologies if I sound like a UK fan whining. My sentiments are those of a college basketball fan that thinks Coach K does things the right way and wants to believe that it is still possible to win honestly.

mkline09
09-21-2012, 05:52 PM
Something like this shouldn't come as much of a surprise to anyone. Once the news that a settlement was announced I figured it was only a matter of time. As fans it really won't do us much good to address this because honestly once people have made up their mind, they typically don't change it. There is nothing I can say to Pat Forde that is going to convince him of what he has come to believe as truth. All we can do is try and understand it, or just ignore it. He is a journalist and he is looking for a story and as much as I hate to admit it, this is a story with a lot of questions that don't appear will ever be answered. I look at it this way; there is far worse things happening in this world than this, but that doesn't mean people won't fixate on it and I'm sure Forde's piece was clicked on thousands of times today so for Yahoo that is money in their pockets so mission accomplished for him. For the rest of us all we can do it wait till the story dies down.

Wheat/"/"/"
09-21-2012, 05:56 PM
So we get a new thread for the UNC and Kentucky fans to whine, talk about a Duke national championship banner coming down, and assume a scandal?

The previous Lance thread was locked for lack of content. This one has less.

Just keep everything out in the open, whatever it may be, is all I ask.
And that goes for UNC, UCONN, UK, UCLA and everybody else too.

Sweeping something under a rug, just because it can be done, will lead to a worse PR outcome in the long run, IMO.

And forget about the banner coming down talk, it was won on the court and the NCAA can't change that with their self serving, revisionist rhetoric.

jipops
09-21-2012, 06:01 PM
Apologies if I sound like a UK fan whining. My sentiments are those of a college basketball fan that thinks Coach K does things the right way and wants to believe that it is still possible to win honestly.

No matter what comes to pass, Duke has still won honestly. Please explain how a very expensive purchase in Lance's senior year led to a national title in 2010?

77devil
09-21-2012, 06:02 PM
Just keep everything out in the open, whatever it may be, is all I ask.
And that goes for UNC, UCONN, UK, UCLA and everybody else too.

Sweeping something under a rug, just because it can be done, will lead to a worse PR outcome in the long run, IMO.

And forget about the banner coming down talk, it was won on the court and the NCAA can't change that with their self serving, revisionist rhetoric.

Are you suggesting something has been swept under the rug in this instance? Do you have any basis for this statement or is it idle speculation?

"Enquiring (sic) minds want to know."

Wheat/"/"/"
09-21-2012, 06:16 PM
Are you suggesting something has been swept under the rug in this instance? Do you have any basis for this statement or is it idle speculation?

"Enquiring (sic) minds want to know."

I'm not suggesting anything. I don't know anything beyond what I read about it all in publicly available materials.

Just sayin' that in my opinion, whatever the facts are need to someday soon be public or it will all just continue fester like an open sore.

And for the record, I feel sure nobody in the Duke program had any idea about all this with Lance.

KenTankerous
09-21-2012, 06:23 PM
No matter what comes to pass, Duke has still won honestly. Please explain how a very expensive purchase in Lance's senior year led to a national title in 2010?

Anything offered to an athelete not available to all students is an imperrmissable benefit and makes that athlete ineligible under NCAA rules. Haven't we covered this already?

But more to the point of this thread - Coach K is not just your coach, Dukies. He was our coiach, as in USA. These things allegedly happened during his tenure as our national team coach. We all have a stake in this. And I for one would like the cards laid on the table.

I personally believe there is little, if any, wrong doing to be uncovered. And I want that out there for all to see.

Atlanta Duke
09-21-2012, 06:29 PM
Well we knew this was coming

Will Coach K, Duke skate again? Yes, unless the heat stays on Blue Devils
Gregg Doyel

Duke is going to get away with it -- again. Eleven years after it used an ineligible player to reach the 1999 Final Four, Duke apparently used an ineligible player in 2010 when it won the national championship.

Don't let this one fade, people. It's not so much that Duke was dastardly in 2010 -- it's the hypocrisy of the NCAA, which arbitrarily chooses the schools, and coaches, it wants to punish.

This one is all or nothing. Either Duke surrenders the 2010 national title ... or nothing happens

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/story/20290116/will-coach-k-duke-skate-again-yes-unless-the-heat-stays-on-blue-devils

Olympic Fan
09-21-2012, 06:31 PM
I hate to agree with Forde-- and I don't totally agree with the negative POV of his aricle, but I do agree with his main point -- Duke -- and that means Coach K -- should push hard to clear this up. It's not about avoiding an NCAA penalty, it's about following the rules and doing the right thing. It's about protecting the reputation that Duke has built in the college athletic world.

I happen to believe Duke does follow the rules. That's one of the reasons that I am such a big Duke fan. I used to admire the UNC program, but after their long campaign to avoid NCAA penalties for their systematic academic abuse, I know longer have any respect for our rivals. They may not get any penalties for their sham African-American Studies dodge, but we all know what a bogus thing the "Carolina Way" now is.

I don't want to see Duke go the same way. I want Coach K to get to the bottom of this case. I hope and pray it shows that Lance didn't do anything wrong, didn't violate any rules. In fact, I'd guess he didn't.

But if he did, Duke should find it, report it and take whatever penalty is deemed appropriate.

If we skate only because Lance and the jeweler refuse to talk to investigators -- and we let that happen -- we'll be as bad as our neighbors.

ncexnyc
09-21-2012, 06:31 PM
Quite a few board members have been having a great deal of fun at UNC's expense recently. Honestly it's all been well deserved as things clearly got out of hand over there. What bothers me is that some of those who were shoveling the largest amount of dirt on UNC's grave are some of the very same people who don't want to get to the bottom of the situation between Lance Thomas and the jeweler. Integrity and honesty aren't something that you believe in when it's convienent for you.

I do understand that some people will never accept anything that could be presented that would lift the cloud that is currently hanging over Duke's reputation, but the "haters will always hate" line doesn't cut it here and never should. If you're not interested where Lance got the original $30K from or where he thought the balance would come from and why in 15 days, then maybe, just maybe you shouldn't care about what goes on at Kentucky, UNC, or UCONN, because frankly your moral compass needs some serious adjustment.

jv001
09-21-2012, 06:31 PM
No matter what comes to pass, Duke has still won honestly. Please explain how a very expensive purchase in Lance's senior year led to a national title in 2010?

Anything offered to an athelete not available to all students is an imperrmissable benefit and makes that athlete ineligible under NCAA rules. Haven't we covered this already?

But more to the point of this thread - Coach K is not just your coach, Dukies. He was our coiach, as in USA. These things allegedly happened during his tenure as our national team coach. We all have a stake in this. And I for one would like the cards laid on the table.

I personally believe there is little, if any, wrong doing to be uncovered. And I want that out there for all to see.

When Kentucky comes clean, then Duke can come clean. GoDuke!

KenTankerous
09-21-2012, 06:45 PM
When Kentucky comes clean, then Duke can come clean. GoDuke!

So you are putting Coach K and Calapari in the same slimey boat?

jafarr1
09-21-2012, 06:54 PM
I'm like a number of Duke fans that would like us to do the right thing, but I don't see a way for Duke to do anything that satisfies people. Statements could contain lies. Bank statements would need to prove where Thomas got the money ... and if it was a family member, as rumored, then people would want proof that whomever gave him the money (and if it was a family member, everybody else in his family) never took money from a shady source.

If Thomas did do something illicit, there is no way to prove that nobody at Duke knew about it. Duke would have to prove a negative.

If Duke found out there were violations and admitted every last wrong-doing, a number of people would assume that Duke only admitted it because there was more wrong-doing that they needed to cover up. Again, Duke would be left trying to prove a negative.

I see people talk of "doing things the right way" and "keeping things above board", but I'm really not sure what they think Duke can do here. I'm open to ideas, because I don't see any way Duke can ever silence the doubters, and that's what really stings about this mess.

diveonthefloor
09-21-2012, 07:30 PM
Haters will be haters.
This thread is useless.
Please, mods, have mercy on us and close it.

Reilly
09-21-2012, 07:33 PM
... I want Coach K to get to the bottom of this case. ....

How much effort should K expend in doing this?

One option: K calls Lance, says "tell me about this jewelry story."

Lance says, "I can't, Coach; I signed certain documents that says I won't say anything about it to anyone."

Is that enough effort by K? Does K or Duke hire an investigator to question Lance's friends and associates (who were not signatories to such a document) to go digging for the story?

I guess the one thing the media can do is to ask K, directly, at his next press conference, the following: "What steps -- exactly -- did you take to get to the bottom of the jewelry story? Are you confident no rules were broken?"

KenTankerous
09-21-2012, 07:38 PM
You know diveonthefloor, there is a process to self-mod a thread - it's called no-clicky-with-the-mousey...

lotusland
09-21-2012, 07:51 PM
Exactly. Unless it was a CLEAR violation, Lance owes no explanation.


Perhaps not but the assumption will be that Lance got a bunch of $1000 handshakes from Duke Boosters. I cannot think of any innocuous truth that I would sit on in favor of the assumption. It only pays to keep quiet if you have something to hide.

sagegrouse
09-21-2012, 07:53 PM
Perhaps not but the assumption will be that Lance got a bunch of $1000 handshakes from Duke Boosters. I cannot think of any innocuous truth that I would sit on in favor of the assumption. It only pays to keep quiet if you have something to hide.

I read this three times, and I think you said, in essence, "If you keep quiet, you must be hiding something." But maybe I read you wrong because that is clearly a nonsensical assertion.

sagegrouse

hurleyfor3
09-21-2012, 08:08 PM
Haters will be haters.
This thread is useless.
Please, mods, have mercy on us and close it.

I was gonna say, everyone in this thread is guilty of Needless Posting. Crap, now that includes me.

Greg_Newton
09-21-2012, 08:17 PM
Seems that several different things are getting lumped together here:

1. What Duke should do to appease the NCAA

2. What Duke should do to maintain its own ethics/morality

3. What Duke should do to maintain its general reputation


It's done 1, which is all its required to do. Seems the main questions are whether or not its internal investigation will be sufficient (which may never be public knowledge, and certainly isn't at this point) and whether Duke should be doing more to clear its name in the eyes of fans/media.

The latter question may be a legitimate one - and sure, I'd like them to get ahead of this if possible - but it's entirely separate from what Duke "needs" to do.

lotusland
09-21-2012, 08:23 PM
I read this three times, and I think you said, in essence, "If you keep quiet, you must be hiding something." But maybe I read you wrong because that is clearly a nonsensical assertion.

sagegrouse

In regard to this specific situation that is exactly what I meant. I can't contrive plausible scenarios where you keep quiet in this situation when you are not hiding something. I challenge you to come up with something that isn't far fetched at best. Everyone has the right to lawyer up and hide behind legalese but I'm not buying it. Hopefully Lance will spill the beans in his own time otherwise I can't just accept that everything is on the up and up and no explanation is needed.

Greg_Newton
09-21-2012, 08:28 PM
In regard to this specific situation that is exactly what I meant. I can't contrive plausible scenarios where you keep quiet in this situation when you are not hiding something. I challenge you to come up with something that isn't far fetched at best. Everyone has the right to lawyer up and hide behind legalese but I'm not buying it. Hopefully Lance will spill the beans in his own time otherwise I can't just accept that everything is on the up and up and no explanation is needed.

Perhaps there was a misunderstanding that, while not a violation, could be fairly embarrassing to Lance?

I agree that it would be nice if, at some point, we did clear up certain things. However, the fact that we haven't done so yet does not mean that we've broken rules.

sagegrouse
09-21-2012, 08:46 PM
In regard to this specific situation that is exactly what I meant. I can't contrive plausible scenarios where you keep quiet in this situation when you are not hiding something. I challenge you to come up with something that isn't far fetched at best. Everyone has the right to lawyer up and hide behind legalese but I'm not buying it. Hopefully Lance will spill the beans in his own time otherwise I can't just accept that everything is on the up and up and no explanation is needed.

I am not a lawyer, but in my impression, an objective of our friends in the litigation community is to keep information private and certainly away from the other side. Why? Because it is a legal advantage, and because no one else is entitled to private information.

I'll give you one substantive reason in this case -- buying a bunch of expensive (and IMHO junky) jewelry is really embarrassing -- and I am not saying he did. Why the heck would anyone want to speak publicly about it?

There's also a non-disclosure agreement in place, affecting both parties. And, believe me, Lance has every reason to keep those creeps from spreading lies, or -- even more lies. And confidentiality agreements are almost always reciprocal. Usually the "carve-outs" in such agreements are for a court order, and, of course, despite its most fervent wishes, the NCAA does not have subpoena power. So, I expect that Lance CANNOT talk to Duke or the NCAA.

Duke apparently knew nothing of the situation at the time: No knowledge of Lance having money (which he certainly could have obtained from relatives or had in personal savings, such as an education fund). No one at Duke ever saw any such jewelry. From some of the articles I have been reading, these are key points. In the Derrick Rose case, Memphis was aware of his soaring test scores and was aware of the location (Detroit) of his "high-test" results (he was from Chicago IIRC).

And, no, Lance does not owe anyone an explanation.

sagegrouse

ForkFondler
09-21-2012, 08:52 PM
Perhaps there was a misunderstanding that, while not a violation, could be fairly embarrassing to Lance?

I agree that it would be nice if, at some point, we did clear up certain things. However, the fact that we haven't done so yet does not mean that we've broken rules.

Seems to me that there is absolutely no doubt that it is embarassing to Lance. Buying bling he couldn't afford was dumb.

OTOH, I'm much less concerned about whether or not rules were broken for a couple of reasons:

1) The rules are ill-conceived and misdirected
2) The rules are enforced in a haphazard and probably corrupt manner

The idea that moral indignation is required here rather than elsewhere is absurd.

lotusland
09-21-2012, 09:39 PM
I am not a lawyer, but in my impression, an objective of our friends in the litigation community is to keep information private and certainly away from the other side. Why? Because it is a legal advantage, and because no one else is entitled to private information.

I'll give you one substantive reason in this case -- buying a bunch of expensive (and IMHO junky) jewelry is really embarrassing -- and I am not saying he did. Why the heck would anyone want to speak publicly about it?

There's also a non-disclosure agreement in place, affecting both parties. And, believe me, Lance has every reason to keep those creeps from spreading lies, or -- even more lies. And confidentiality agreements are almost always reciprocal. Usually the "carve-outs" in such agreements are for a court order, and, of course, despite its most fervent wishes, the NCAA does not have subpoena power. So, I expect that Lance CANNOT talk to Duke or the NCAA.

Duke apparently knew nothing of the situation at the time: No knowledge of Lance having money (which he certainly could have obtained from relatives or had in personal savings, such as an education fund). No one at Duke ever saw any such jewelry. From some of the articles I have been reading, these are key points. In the Derrick Rose case, Memphis was aware of his soaring test scores and was aware of the location (Detroit) of his "high-test" results (he was from Chicago IIRC).

And, no, Lance does not owe anyone an explanation.

sagegrouse

We already know Lance bought a bunch of jewelry that he couldn't afford so sparing himslef embarrassment doesn't make sense and is certainly no reason to allow himself and Duke appear shady just to spare himself a little embarrassment. If that's the the only reason then sorry but it's time to man up and put on your big boy pants. Lance doesn't owe me an explanation for his suspicious actions but I don't owe him blind trust if he isn't willing to explain what happened.

ForkFondler
09-21-2012, 10:19 PM
We already know Lance bought a bunch of jewelry that he couldn't afford so sparing himslef embarrassment doesn't make sense and is certainly no reason to allow himself and Duke appear shady just to spare himself a little embarrassment. If that's the the only reason then sorry but it's time to man up and put on your big boy pants. Lance doesn't owe me an explanation for his suspicious actions but I don't owe him blind trust if he isn't willing to explain what happened.

Why do you need to trust Lance? I never trusted him to score, but that was years ago.

gam7
09-21-2012, 10:20 PM
How much effort should K expend in doing this?

One option: K calls Lance, says "tell me about this jewelry story."

Lance says, "I can't, Coach; I signed certain documents that says I won't say anything about it to anyone."

Is that enough effort by K? Does K or Duke hire an investigator to question Lance's friends and associates (who were not signatories to such a document) to go digging for the story?

I guess the one thing the media can do is to ask K, directly, at his next press conference, the following: "What steps -- exactly -- did you take to get to the bottom of the jewelry story? Are you confident no rules were broken?"

Your hypo is likely what will happen. A confidentiality agreement very well could apply to both parties, and Coach K obviously is not going to encourage Lance to break it. I think you can count on the media asking K about it early and often. Also questions like "did you ever see lance with jewelry," "did anyone ever tell you about jewelry Lance bought," "did you learn about this before or after the lawsuit was filed," "did you talk to lance about the situation before he settled the case". It will be interesting to see how he handles it. In response to the first question you thought they'd ask above, I'd think the best approach would be to explain in detail the steps he took in cooperation with the NCAA.

blazindw
09-21-2012, 10:20 PM
We're rehashing old arguments and speculation here. Nothing new has been brought to light in this case since it was settled...the other thread was locked for lack of content and so I must do the same here. Until we have some new developments in this case, let's just move on.

Newton_14
09-21-2012, 10:38 PM
We already know Lance bought a bunch of jewelry that he couldn't afford so sparing himslef embarrassment doesn't make sense and is certainly no reason to allow himself and Duke appear shady just to spare himself a little embarrassment. If that's the the only reason then sorry but it's time to man up and put on your big boy pants. Lance doesn't owe me an explanation for his suspicious actions but I don't owe him blind trust if he isn't willing to explain what happened.

No we don't know that at all. But I will play along. How much money did Lance and his family have available to them 15 days after the purchase? Any idea? You stated as fact they did not have enough to pay the balance. How short were they at that time? See how that works?


We do not know how much money Lance or his family has. You are making the very big mistake of jumping to the conclusion that because Lance allegedly did not pay the balance, that automatically means he did not have enough money available to him to pay. That's absurd. First, we don't know if he really owed that much or not. But even assuming he did, we have absolutely no way of knowing why the money was not paid in 15 days. For all we know, Lance's family could have been wealthy enough at the time and right now to buy the business owner out.

I will repeat what I said in the original thread. There are very large assumptions being made by folks that they are trying to pass off as fact. One guy even wants Duke to turn in the banner right now and vacate every win after the purchase right now. That is beyond insane. As of right now, there is not one single grain of factual evidence available to the public, that Lance Thomas broke any NCAA rule. It is not against any NCAA rule for an athlete to purchase things they want to purchase. Be it jewelry, a car, a house, or a town. Not every athlete comes from poverty or modest financial means.

It's also absurd to assume Duke and K are not investigating this or don't already know every single fact there is to know about the situation.