Sampson was a stupid hire, and he did break a trivial rule, would he have went farther given the chance most likely so. one bad apple doesn't spoil 100 years of running the cleanest program in the ncaa
looks like iu will land mcgumba
- Thread starter kurt cloverdales
- Start date
Are you aware that in his autobiography, Wilt Chamberlain explained that he went to Kansas instead of IU because Kansas outbid IU for his services? Given that is true, your comment of "...100 years of running the cleanest program in the ncaa (sic)" is ridiculous. They bid on Chamberlain. Do you think that he was the only one that they bid on? If so, I can get you a great deal on a bridge connecting Manhattan and Brooklyn. You'd make a fortune on the tolls.
Wilts rep approached Mckracken. IU never bid.
Goudsouzian’s aforementioned article also stated that McCracken claimed he had been approached during Chamberlain’s recruitment by an agent asking for $5,200 plus room and board for Indiana to secure Wilt’s commitment. In the end, assuming McCracken’s declaration was true, he refused to comply.
Your denial means nothing. Chamberlain did not attend IU. McCracken was second-choice. What is he supposed to say: "We offered him money but not enough so we did not get him." Of course, he would deny it. "Assuming it is true..." in your post is literally meaningless.
Your use of logic is really questionable and truly lacking.
You are willing to accept McCracken's words but not Chamberlain's. The question in this case to be asked is: who has the interest to speak falsely? Chamberlain acknowledges that he took money improperly from Kansas. He has nothing to hide in this matter at that point; there is no reason for him to lie. McCracken would get in trouble if he acknowledged making an improper offer. He had good reason to lie. In that case, Chamberlain is much more likely to be speaking correctly. That is simple logic.
Chamberlain finished at Kansas in 1958 after playing for two years there.
Posted by you in this thread:
"Sampson was a stupid hire, and he did break a trivial rule, would he have went farther given the chance most likely so. one bad apple doesn't spoil 100 years of running the cleanest program in the ncaaa"
If made, McCracken's offer would be 67 years old. That means your comment of 100 years is off by a factor of 50%. At best, it assumes that this improper offer was a one-off. If you look at the list of the other schools that YOU compiled, you will note that each has been identified as a serial offender. So your comment is not only significantly over-stated; it is also unlikely.
Posted by you in this thread:
"Sampson was a stupid hire, and he did break a trivial rule, would he have went farther given the chance most likely so. one bad apple doesn't spoil 100 years of running the cleanest program in the ncaaa"
If made, McCracken's offer would be 67 years old. That means your comment of 100 years is off by a factor of 50%. At best, it assumes that this improper offer was a one-off. If you look at the list of the other schools that YOU compiled, you will note that each has been identified as a serial offender. So your comment is not only significantly over-stated; it is also unlikely.
Trivial? Clownpantsnation received 3 years probation and Sanctions was kicked out of college hoops for 5 years.
How was iu so corrupt as to hire a chronic cheater like that in the first place?
A comment made when you know that you have lost the debate.
no, it's a comment made, when someone starts a discussion with clownpants, the guy is not worthy of debate, so he got the whatever and I moved on
Adults Red & White Clown Pants Victorian Style Bloomers Fancy Dress [2 Sizes] | eBay
The Dragons Den Fancy Dress Limited. Avaialble in 2 Adult Sizes S-M to Fit UK Size 8-12 & L-XL to Fit UK Size 14-18.
www.ebay.com
You like to move on when you have nothing to say. In this thread, you cited programs you think have great merit. These programs have been demonstrated to be serial cheaters. So the conclusion is that they achieved their fame and maintained it through cheating. How is this admirable? If anything, it is deserving of scorn.
Honestly, do you ever reflect on your ideas before you post? It really seems that you do not.
Last edited:
that's what they call bull chit, never said anyone had great merit, just stated those who are considered blue bloods.
But isn't a "blueblood" supposed to be a historically great and respected family and thus team? But if that notoriety is achieved by cheating, how is that worthy of respect? Is not the designtaion of a "blueblood" meant to be a team to be looked up to? You are dodging.
Last edited:
if a team achieved their blue bloodedness through scrupulous activities, then I agree with you they are tainted. so, I guess IU and Duke would be the only true Bluebloods.
The best way would be for you to slink back to the clownpants forum you came from.
Scrupulous means that one pays attention to detail. One can be scrupulous and still cheat. The proper word to use is the term "unethical" as it means that they achieved and maintained their prominence through rule-breaking.
If you want to post here, you need to step up your game. As I have pointed out, facts and logic are missing from your posts, now you are using words improperly. Think, reason and look stuff up before you post, you'll be better received.
So please explain how Zion's family achieved a real step up in living situation when he was at Duke if that institution was on the up and up? They were living really large after his commitment.
And you have yet to explain away Chamberlain's admission. IU was cheating as well.
Yes Sampson was a stupid hire. He was a known cheat and unethical operator! He was just in trouble at Oklahoma when they hired him.
“However, before he left Oklahoma in 2006 to take the head coaching job at Indiana, Sampson got caught up in an NCAA investigation that discovered that he and his staff had made more than 577 impermissible phone calls to recruits between 2000 and 2004…”
Why would a program so concerned and dedicated to running a clean program make the move to bring him onboard? It seems as though his history of 20 win seasons trumped running a clean program doesn’t it?
“ Several Midwest schools have been in on the Chamberlain race almost from the beginning. An Indiana University basketball enthusiast admits he offered Wilt $100 a week, plus the usual scholarship benefits, to join the Hoosiers. The $100 would be payment for an off-campus job, the toughest part of which would be picking up his weekly check. Since then, it was learned, matching offers have been submitted by other schools. “ from From away Downtown a professional basketball history blog.
if IU had a booster working behind the scenes 70 years ago that's not a good thing, was McCracken working with him?
I have no idea, this is where I got the information after a brief google search. Original article was listed:
[This article appeared in Sport Magazine in March 1955. Irv Goodman is the writer.]
The High School Kid Who Could Play Pro Right Now
One coach, of some repute and conservative mood, says Wilt is as good as George Mikan was last year or the year before that. Another coach, of equal repute but more courage, says he’s better.…
from-way-downtown.com
Your question is irrelevant to whether there was cheating with the IU program at that time. Players were being paid. UK got in trouble because of boosters. If UK is tainted, then why not IU for the same activity? To separate would make no sense.
We have punished athletes and removed their medals and records when it is found out that they have cheated to attain their prominence. It is decided that their "fame" is not worthy and should not be celebrated. Think of Lance Armstrong or the Eastern European Olympians. Why treat your "bluebloods" differently?
Last edited:
Similar threads
