In partnership with CBSSports.com
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
I have read articles on Mr. Conley for about a month now and not one of the writers for 247 has mentioned anything about the payment of recruits by the Oregon program a couple years ago with certain sanctions looming. Why? Steve, Todd, Clint?
Is Phil Knight helping out 247.
Does this constant ignoring of the cheating culture that is taking over college football somehow aid in the marketability of this website. Is it just to hard to for journalists covering the sport to report the tough facts?
I listen to College Sports Nation on satellite radio Oregon is mentioned all the time, never anything about the fact that they were caught paying for players and this is still hanging around with-out finality.
I would assume that the guys covering this sport and recruiting want the best for these kids, and divulging the facts would IMO be doing your job.
I would really like some feedback on this. Feel free and tell me I am completely wrong, that not informing these recruits of potential probation at schools they are considering is what's best for them.
If analysts cross into the realm of purposely bringing up potential sanctions to recruits, they should be fired, IMO. It's their job to scout kids and try to determine where they think the recruit will end up. It is not their job to do the due diligence every recruit should be doing about each school.
Ok first off - they didn't pay players, they paid a recruiting service an abnormal amount that brought a player to them.
Secondly - I don't think 247Sports has anything to do with Oregon and just aren't reporting anything on it because nothing has come about recently. Has the NCAA even sent them a formal letter of investigation or a letter for hearings on the sanctions?
Lastly - to me this just screams petty since the Conley news to come out. Why didn't you care about the Oregon sanctions before news of Conley looking at Oregon came about? Why didn't you ask about any other recruits looking at or committed to Oregon knowing of potential sanctions?
This post was edited by freernnur5 21 months ago
"Isn't it amazing what somebody will do when he can't bunt." - Vin Scully
I hear you, but a question such as "will recent NCAA violations and potential future sanctions there influence your decision" would be an innocuous and poignant question.
This is why it is vastly accepted as a part of the sport. No one wants or will talk about it so it continues to happen and kids are continually lead to believe that they are innocent victims of other peoples mistakes.
Instead of considering it common courtesy to help kids make good decisions, now people should be fired for it.
Couldn't state at the bottom of the article, Oregon is still under investigation and possible probation for paying recruits out of Texas?
I agree, but the Willie Lyles stuff came out over a year ago (September 2011), so continuing to ask recruits about something that hasn't had anything new pop up in over a year is a little odd. The most recent stuff on the topic was back in August when Willie Lyles himself said he cooperated with the NCAA and told them, "Never once in my relations with Oregon was I asked to steer kids for payment." So what exactly should analysts be asking kids on this topic right now? No proof of steering kids to Oregon, no disgruntled people spilling the beans, and no paper trail that isn't legit transactions. It's a non story, no matter what really happened.
Analysts are not the kid's advisors or friends. They should not be doing any "common courtesy" or try to help these kids make their decisions. Analysts swaying a kid's decision is crossing a line, in my opinion, no matter what intentions they have.
If it's a common courtesy to inform them of possible sanctions, is it also a common courtesy to state their opinion that they'll be buried on the depth chart? Or in a system that doesn't fit their skills? Or too far from home and might get homesick?
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by Dizzo 21 months ago
I see what your saying.....its not like Oregon egregiously lied to the NCAA about playing ineligible players who traded memorabilia for free tattoos and cash.
The geography, roster, and football are front and center for the kid. Due to the incompetence of the NCAA, investigations often are not, then kids are considered innocent victims when they go to a school and it ends up on probation.
I'm sure I'm overreacting. Many of my friends here in Texas reminded me of LeMichael James recruitment, because I was talking to them about Conley.
Just now saw this thread. Pretty much everything that Dizzo said is what I would have said.
In partnership with