Thus why Grady Eifert is starting at the 4, and Wheeler and Tre aren't getting any minutes. But hey, who cares if you win as long as you work harder than the next guy...
Trayce Jackson Davis
- Thread starter dbmhoosier
- Start date
Thus why Grady Eifert is starting at the 4, and Wheeler and Tre aren't getting any minutes. But hey, who cares if you win as long as you work harder than the next guy...
This is why the culture of the basketball program has to change. The Brian Cardinal diving on the floor, defense lives here stuff doesn’t translate to recruiting top talent.
We’re still very much the Gene Keady Purdue which was known as blue color grinding over achievers, tough defense, slow Big 10 ball (despite what the metrics say... it’s the perception that matters). But, that style failed in the tourny.
Langford pere got paid by Adidas. The cash went into the family's general fund. RL benefited from the family funds. So yes, he was paid, though indirectly.
To pretend otherwise is silly.
To pretend otherwise is silly.
Yes. “Coach” Langford got paid six figures by Adidas, who then funneled his son to IU. But I’m sure Archie knew nothing about that.
For the 1000th time, Yes, his Dad was paid to coach an AAU team by Addidas. The same way hundreds of other AAU coaches are around the country.
He provided a service and was paid for it. Absolutely nothing illegal. End of story.
No need for you guys to be so butthurt about it.
What? You said he funneled the Addidas money to his son. That is not a fact. Did you actually attend Purdue? Can you graduate from Purdue without knowing what a fact is?
Lol you are so butthurt. I get it though. It must be very frustrating with your team struggling and going through another class full of recruiting flops.
4 years at IU with a BS in Informatics. What about you? Are you an engineer?
Trojan, did the cash not into the family general fund? The general fund supports the family. Was RL part of the family? If yes, the he was paid indirectly.
Your position is that this was legal and thus nothing untoward. A loophole was exploited. While that makes it legal, perhaps, that does not mean that it was not unethical/dirty. Just because something is legal doesn't mean that it is correct. I can tell you that your manner of dress shows that you are a fool with no taste. While legal, it is nonetheless objectionable behavior.
Your position is that this was legal and thus nothing untoward. A loophole was exploited. While that makes it legal, perhaps, that does not mean that it was not unethical/dirty. Just because something is legal doesn't mean that it is correct. I can tell you that your manner of dress shows that you are a fool with no taste. While legal, it is nonetheless objectionable behavior.
No he was not paid indirectly. Growing up I was not "paid" when my dad received checks from his employer. His dad provided a service and was paid for that service. If his son wasnt an elite athlete no one would think anything of it. It happens with every AAU program in the country. You seem very butthurt considering the amount of time you spend talking about Romeo.
He's legally at IU, and there are going to be no consequences come from it. Get over it and stfu.
A counter argument to "Painter isn't sexy"? Please. Give me a serious argument and if I disagree, I'll counter it.
We might as well stop trying to explain how employment and getting paid works. It’s obvious that Purdue fans want to see what they want to see, and it makes them feel better to think that IU only got a good recruit because they paid his dad. Whatever.
I do truly wonder how many AAU coaches there are across the country who coached their sons. I’m sure there are many. And I’m sure there are many of those teams that got a shoe company sponsorship. I would love to see those numbers, because I’m sure it’s a common occurrence. But this was Romeo’s dad.....so it’s all different I guess. Maybe fathers should not be allowed to coach their sons anymore, I guess that would close the “loophole”.
You insinuated I wasnt smart enough to graduate from college. You started the insults.
No, I couldn't care less what you think.
Back to the topic of the thread. I'm very excited to land 5* TJD. Fellow 5* Keion Brooks will be joining him soon, and our class will be complete.
I understand. You don’t want to be reminded of Adidas buying Romeo for Archie.
Actually, cheese, I do not think that there are many. My reasoning for that is that it has raised eyebrows because of how it was done. If it was fairly standard then no eyebrows would be raised.
It is clear that RL received a benefit (shelter, food, clothing) that came from the family's general fund. Adidas supplied cash to that fund via paying the father. Again, this strikes me as a loophole to pass money to a player. You cannot tell me that is ridiculous. You may disagree, but you cannot say that looking askance is unreasonable.
You were not paid but you did receive benefit from your father's employment in the forms of shelter, food, clothing, etc. "..if he wasn't an athlete..." comment is silly. If he was not an athlete the NCAA would not be involved nor their rulings applicable.
As fro "butthurt", I am not. I am logical, however. IU fans make a big deal posting here and everywhere about being elite but above board. Yet when stuff comes out about the program that is shady, they resort to the "..but it's legal and thus OK." You can't have it both ways. You cannot claim to be as pure as Caesar's wife and then rely on the loophole defense. I refer you to Aristotle's Law of the Excluded Middle: Something cannot be itself and it's opposite simultaneously.
Btw, you do not know that this happens at very AAU program. That is an assertion without any backup that you are using to support your case. If you have evidence that this occurs where an athlete is on an AAU team and is coached by the father and the father gets paid a lot of money, please provide evidence that is de rigeur.
Provide evidence that the langfords did something illegal. If you cant then shut up on the matter. This is like the 10th time you have brought this subject up. If you truly arent butthurt, stop talking about it.
nice deflection.Lol I'm sure they bought TJD and Keion for IU too?
Hey - it’s legal to have shoe companies buy players for you, Coach Cal has been doing it for years.
At this time, it simply appears that a loophole was exploited as I wrote. Having said that, exploiting the loophole does not mean it isn't shady. If that is your defense, fine. But then don't come here claiming that you have a clean program.
Btw, you have claimed that Lutz is dirty because of allegations at Creighton. Yet nothing has been proven there to the best of my knowledge. So you are rather situational in your application of ethics.
And if if so "standard", then why was there all this national press about the situation? "Dog Bites Man" stories rarely attract the press and attention. "Man Bites Dog" stories do. Seems to fit the latter category and not the former.
Also, it is not up to you to determine what I feel, post and I am under no obligation to obey your "..get over it." dictum.
Btw, you have claimed that Lutz is dirty because of allegations at Creighton. Yet nothing has been proven there to the best of my knowledge. So you are rather situational in your application of ethics.
And if if so "standard", then why was there all this national press about the situation? "Dog Bites Man" stories rarely attract the press and attention. "Man Bites Dog" stories do. Seems to fit the latter category and not the former.
Also, it is not up to you to determine what I feel, post and I am under no obligation to obey your "..get over it." dictum.
I never claimed Lutz was dirty. I said saying Archie was dirty because he coached at Arizona would be like me saying Lutz was dirty because he came from Creighton. Big difference. I dont think either are dirty. Either way, I'm very happy with IU's recruiting, especially since there has been no claims of illegal activity. The FBI had Addidas' phone tapped and heard nothing about IU doing illegal activity.
We can end this dumb*** argument now. Go Hoosiers.
Why do you insist on continuously using the term ‘butthurt’? I assume that’s your preference and there’s nothing wrong with that, I’m glad you feel comfortable enough to use it, but I might suggest that this isn’t the appropriate forum for such discussions.
It raised eyebrows because Romeo is a high profile kid, that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen all over the place. It just doesn’t get talked about unless the kid is high profile.
In terms of whether it happens elsewhere, I looked up the first AAU team that came to my mind, the Spiece Indy Heat. They are part of the Nike EYBL, and although I don’t have access to their bank statements, I’m pretty sure they get sponsorship money from Nike to run the team, pay salaries, etc. Keion Brooks plays for them, his dad is listed as an Assistant Coach. I’m sure he gets paid something for coaching. Again, I don’t have access to financial records, but I’m sure he gets some sort of compensation for his time.
As far as I’ve heard, no one knows the financial records for Romeo’s AAU team either, they just know the team is sponsored, his dad coached, and he likely got to keep whatever was left over after team expenses. I would assume he did too, as he should. It takes a lot of time and effort to coach those teams. As I said, I’m sure this happens often, as it is right now with Keion Brooks. I’m sure I could find more teams with dads as coaches, that was just the first one I looked up. You only see this as an issue because of the high profile of Romeo. I guess we could put all AAU players in tiers and specify that no fathers of top tier players can coach.....who wants to figure out which players are good enough that their dads can’t coach them? It’s stupid, and a non issue.
Without some evidence that there was an agreement made with Romeo’s dad that he would send his son to an Adidas school, it’s not even shady. And even if there was, it doesn’t mean IU knew anything about it.
First of all, there are differences between AZ and Creighton. We know the FBI has tape of Miller at AZ discussing payments to Ayton. There is no suggestion about Creighton other than Bowen Sr. asserting that and he has problems of credibility. So using Creighton as an excuse for Archie is not reasonable. Also, we might reasonably expect brothers to know more about what is going on in a program than would a non-family member. That is not always always true but it is likely true given family relationships
You may well have a degree in Informatics, but it seems fairly obvious that you missed a semester or two of Philosophy as part of your studies. You seem to intentionally ignore/refuse to recognize that there is a difference between legal behavior and ethical behavior.
So far, l'affaire Langford suggests unethical behavior at the minimum. Again, national press has written about this because it looks really bad. Otherwise, why would they do it? Again, you ignore the point that if it was common, it would not be news. As I wrote, exploiting a loophole may make it legal, but it does not make it ethical. As the fan of a program that has made a point of ethics, you should be sensitive to the differences. If you are going to rely upon the letter but not spirit of the law, so be it; but just recognize that you give something up in the process.
You may well have a degree in Informatics, but it seems fairly obvious that you missed a semester or two of Philosophy as part of your studies. You seem to intentionally ignore/refuse to recognize that there is a difference between legal behavior and ethical behavior.
So far, l'affaire Langford suggests unethical behavior at the minimum. Again, national press has written about this because it looks really bad. Otherwise, why would they do it? Again, you ignore the point that if it was common, it would not be news. As I wrote, exploiting a loophole may make it legal, but it does not make it ethical. As the fan of a program that has made a point of ethics, you should be sensitive to the differences. If you are going to rely upon the letter but not spirit of the law, so be it; but just recognize that you give something up in the process.
Cool, you think it's unethical. I dont. Agree to disagree. I'm tired of talking in circles with you. Goodbye.
