You better have some rough ridin' answers, Currie.

[Rage Against the McKee]

Couldn't Currie decide he is too far from Manhattan, too far from the witnesses, too far from the facts, examine all issues instead of making a snap decision?

Short answer: no, he can't. Like I've said before, the NCAA rules don't work that way when it comes to eligibility and improper benefits. When the Cam Newton stuff first came out, Auburn immediately ruled him ineligible due to the possibility of him having taken improper benefits. Then they investigated, found nothing, applied for reinstatement, were granted it. I'm telling you, it happens all the time, everywhere. K-State is not special or unique in this regard.

So you are saying that any person could report any violation, and that person will be ruled intelligible until they can confirm the reports are true/false?

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk

Depends on the report -- if you just called some place and said stuff, had no proof of any kind, just your say so... would probably require some kind of prelim investigation from the school before they held the player out. If you contacted the school with proof, lots of schools would hold the player out until they can look into it further. Such as Durand Scott.

What proof could K-State have possibly had? Western Union transactions are supposed to be confidential. The only thing K-State could have possibly had that constituted proof would be the testimony of one of the employees, and if that were the case, I sincerely hope that employee was turned into Western Union for a violation of their terms.

[Trim]

This is going well.

[Pete]

Couldn't Currie decide he is too far from Manhattan, too far from the witnesses, too far from the facts, examine all issues instead of making a snap decision?

Short answer: no, he can't. Like I've said before, the NCAA rules don't work that way when it comes to eligibility and improper benefits. When the Cam Newton stuff first came out, Auburn immediately ruled him ineligible due to the possibility of him having taken improper benefits. Then they investigated, found nothing, applied for reinstatement, were granted it. I'm telling you, it happens all the time, everywhere. K-State is not special or unique in this regard.

So you are saying that any person could report any violation, and that person will be ruled intelligible until they can confirm the reports are true/false?

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk

Depends on the report -- if you just called some place and said stuff, had no proof of any kind, just your say so... would probably require some kind of prelim investigation from the school before they held the player out. If you contacted the school with proof, lots of schools would hold the player out until they can look into it further. Such as Durand Scott.

What proof could K-State have possibly had? Western Union transactions are supposed to be confidential. The only thing K-State could have possibly had that constituted proof would be the testimony of one of the employees, and if that were the case, I sincerely hope that employee was turned into Western Union for a violation of their terms.

Yep.  Will be very, very interesting to learn who was involved.  I greatly look forward to it.   

[michigancat]

What proof could K-State have possibly had? Western Union transactions are supposed to be confidential. The only thing K-State could have possibly had that constituted proof would be the testimony of one of the employees, and if that were the case, I sincerely hope that employee was turned into Western Union for a violation of their terms.

one possibility: they got the tip, asked jamar about it, and he confirmed the story. And what CC is saying is that you can't not ask as soon as you know about this crap. Especially when you consider how quickly and openly Curtis Malone talked.

[Dugout DickStone]

What proof could K-State have possibly had? Western Union transactions are supposed to be confidential. The only thing K-State could have possibly had that constituted proof would be the testimony of one of the employees, and if that were the case, I sincerely hope that employee was turned into Western Union for a violation of their terms.

one possibility: they got the tip, asked jamar about it, and he confirmed the story. And what CC is saying is that you can't not ask as soon as you know about this crap. Especially when you consider how quickly and openly Curtis Malone talked.

This is what I think is going to come out.

1.  Tip from person who should be fired
2.  Currie to Frank - "ask Jamar"
3.  Frank to Jamar "Did Curt send you $200?"
4.  Jamar to Frank "yup"
5.  Frank "shazbot!"

[Pete]

What proof could K-State have possibly had? Western Union transactions are supposed to be confidential. The only thing K-State could have possibly had that constituted proof would be the testimony of one of the employees, and if that were the case, I sincerely hope that employee was turned into Western Union for a violation of their terms.

one possibility: they got the tip, asked jamar about it, and he confirmed the story. And what CC is saying is that you can't not ask as soon as you know about this crap. Especially when you consider how quickly and openly Curtis Malone talked.

So, would the athletic department have to ask about every allegation? What is the criteria for determining the allegation credibility? I honestly would like to know.

Is it like criminal allegations, where the accuser (when anonymous) has to demonstrate that they have knowledge of initimate details that only someone close to the situation would have?  Is this standard written anywhere and made available to AD employees?  Or, is this merely a "gut feel" kind of thing...merely up to the discretion of the AD?

For example, I if I called the athletic department 5 minutes before kick-off against Miami, and shared with them how I had bought Collin Klein a coke at the Union, would they be forced to hold Collin out of the game?

[michigancat]

What proof could K-State have possibly had? Western Union transactions are supposed to be confidential. The only thing K-State could have possibly had that constituted proof would be the testimony of one of the employees, and if that were the case, I sincerely hope that employee was turned into Western Union for a violation of their terms.

one possibility: they got the tip, asked jamar about it, and he confirmed the story. And what CC is saying is that you can't not ask as soon as you know about this crap. Especially when you consider how quickly and openly Curtis Malone talked.

This is what I think is going to come out.

1.  Tip from person who should be fired
2.  Currie to Frank - "ask Jamar"
3.  Frank to Jamar "Did Curt send you $200?"
4.  Jamar to Frank "yup"
5.  Frank "shazbot!"

Makes a lot of sense. I can see Frank giving a massive facepalm  and going "Why the eff did you tell me that jamar? Why the eff did you tell me?"

[Pete]

What proof could K-State have possibly had? Western Union transactions are supposed to be confidential. The only thing K-State could have possibly had that constituted proof would be the testimony of one of the employees, and if that were the case, I sincerely hope that employee was turned into Western Union for a violation of their terms.

one possibility: they got the tip, asked jamar about it, and he confirmed the story. And what CC is saying is that you can't not ask as soon as you know about this crap. Especially when you consider how quickly and openly Curtis Malone talked.

This is what I think is going to come out.

1.  Tip from person who should be fired
2.  Currie to Frank - "ask Jamar"
3.  Frank to Jamar "Did Curt send you $200?"
4.  Jamar to Frank "yup"
5.  Frank "shazbot!"

Makes a lot of sense. I can see Frank giving a massive facepalm  and going "Why the eff did you tell me that jamar? Why the eff did you tell me?"

I could buy that.  Seems logical.  Sure would love to know.

[michigancat]

What proof could K-State have possibly had? Western Union transactions are supposed to be confidential. The only thing K-State could have possibly had that constituted proof would be the testimony of one of the employees, and if that were the case, I sincerely hope that employee was turned into Western Union for a violation of their terms.

one possibility: they got the tip, asked jamar about it, and he confirmed the story. And what CC is saying is that you can't not ask as soon as you know about this crap. Especially when you consider how quickly and openly Curtis Malone talked.

So, would the athletic department have to ask about every allegation? What is the criteria for determining the allegation credibility? I honestly would like to know.

Is it like criminal allegations, where the accuser (when anonymous) has to demonstrate that they have knowledge of initimate details that only someone close to the situation would have?  Is this standard written anywhere and made available to AD employees?  Or, is this merely a "gut feel" kind of thing...merely up to the discretion of the AD?

For example, I if I called the athletic department 5 minutes before kick-off against Miami, and shared with them how I had bought Collin Klein a coke at the Union, would they be forced to hold Collin out of the game?

Honestly, I would guess they would probably have to ask the player no matter how small. But when the allegation involves Curtis Malone and cash you can be damn sure that any compliance department/AD in our situation will ask regardless of the amount.

[Pete]

What proof could K-State have possibly had? Western Union transactions are supposed to be confidential. The only thing K-State could have possibly had that constituted proof would be the testimony of one of the employees, and if that were the case, I sincerely hope that employee was turned into Western Union for a violation of their terms.

one possibility: they got the tip, asked jamar about it, and he confirmed the story. And what CC is saying is that you can't not ask as soon as you know about this crap. Especially when you consider how quickly and openly Curtis Malone talked.

So, would the athletic department have to ask about every allegation? What is the criteria for determining the allegation credibility? I honestly would like to know.

Is it like criminal allegations, where the accuser (when anonymous) has to demonstrate that they have knowledge of initimate details that only someone close to the situation would have?  Is this standard written anywhere and made available to AD employees?  Or, is this merely a "gut feel" kind of thing...merely up to the discretion of the AD?

For example, I if I called the athletic department 5 minutes before kick-off against Miami, and shared with them how I had bought Collin Klein a coke at the Union, would they be forced to hold Collin out of the game?

Honestly, I would guess they would probably have to ask the player no matter how small. But when the allegation involves Curtis Malone and cash you can be damn sure that any compliance department/AD in our situation will ask regardless of the amount.

That's reasonable.  I can appreciate that.

[Dugout DickStone]

What proof could K-State have possibly had? Western Union transactions are supposed to be confidential. The only thing K-State could have possibly had that constituted proof would be the testimony of one of the employees, and if that were the case, I sincerely hope that employee was turned into Western Union for a violation of their terms.

one possibility: they got the tip, asked jamar about it, and he confirmed the story. And what CC is saying is that you can't not ask as soon as you know about this crap. Especially when you consider how quickly and openly Curtis Malone talked.

So, would the athletic department have to ask about every allegation? What is the criteria for determining the allegation credibility? I honestly would like to know.

Is it like criminal allegations, where the accuser (when anonymous) has to demonstrate that they have knowledge of initimate details that only someone close to the situation would have?  Is this standard written anywhere and made available to AD employees?  Or, is this merely a "gut feel" kind of thing...merely up to the discretion of the AD?

For example, I if I called the athletic department 5 minutes before kick-off against Miami, and shared with them how I had bought Collin Klein a coke at the Union, would they be forced to hold Collin out of the game?

LHCBS to Colin: "Colin, did some youngster buy you a cherry phosphate down at the soda fountain?
CK:  Christ no.
LHCBS:  Good luck today, make your new wife proud.

[Pete]

You know what I wish?

I wish it didn't feel like Currie wasn't on our side.  You know?


I am thankful for his fund raising, but it's nothing that every single other AD at the BCS level doesn't do.  We had very, very poor leadership in that way for the last decade, and by comparison Currie seems like a white knight.  Glad to have it, but not going to award him AD of the Galaxy for it....it's just what you are supposed to do.


Where am I am missing the "skin" he is putting into the game?  When he's out there applying for other jobs, whilst saying KSU is a destination job, it comes off as deceitful and shallow.  Of course, the Wabash Station crowd never picks up on this....so I suppose he assumes that all is well.

Set me straight here...am I wrong to have this impression of Currie?  What am I missing?





 

[michigancat]

You know what I wish?

I wish it didn't feel like Currie wasn't on our side.  You know?


I am thankful for his fund raising, but it's nothing that every single other AD at the BCS level doesn't do.  We had very, very poor leadership in that way for the last decade, and by comparison Currie seems like a white knight.  Glad to have it, but not going to award him AD of the Galaxy for it....it's just what you are supposed to do.


Where am I am missing the "skin" he is putting into the game?  When he's out there applying for other jobs, whilst saying KSU is a destination job, it comes off as deceitful and shallow.  Of course, the Wabash Station crowd never picks up on this....so I suppose he assumes that all is well.

Set me straight here...am I wrong to have this impression of Currie?  What am I missing?

I would just say that I think he can want a better job and still be on our side. (I feel the same way about Frank, FWIW). Other than trim not liking him and townie rumors of frank not liking him, there's no reason to think he "isn't on our side", and I have no problem with any coach/AD at KSU wanting to move up the ladder in their profession.

[Trim]

You know what I wish?

I wish it didn't feel like Currie wasn't on our side.  You know?


I am thankful for his fund raising, but it's nothing that every single other AD at the BCS level doesn't do.  We had very, very poor leadership in that way for the last decade, and by comparison Currie seems like a white knight.  Glad to have it, but not going to award him AD of the Galaxy for it....it's just what you are supposed to do.


Where am I am missing the "skin" he is putting into the game?  When he's out there applying for other jobs, whilst saying KSU is a destination job, it comes off as deceitful and shallow.  Of course, the Wabash Station crowd never picks up on this....so I suppose he assumes that all is well.

Set me straight here...am I wrong to have this impression of Currie?  What am I missing?

I would just say that I think he can want a better job and still be on our side. (I feel the same way about Frank, FWIW). Other than trim not liking him and townie rumors of frank not liking him, there's no reason to think he "isn't on our side", and I have no problem with any coach/AD at KSU wanting to move up the ladder in their profession.

It's not exactly fanning, but Pete does get his impressions from better sources than my negativity and random townies.

[Fuktard]

it's really funny that some people (KK and MANY OTHERS I'm sure) can even throw stones at him for making too much profit.  "all he's doing is building his resume"...."it's not his job to make a profit, donor's want to break even!"  this poor bastard can't win for losing.

[Pete]

it's really funny that some people (KK and MANY OTHERS I'm sure) can even throw stones at him for making too much profit.  "all he's doing is building his resume"...."it's not his job to make a profit, donor's want to break even!"  this poor bastard can't win for losing.

Win for losing?  It seems pretty simple to me.  I don't see a "catch 22" at all.  But, this isn't the primary topic of the thread (albeit a good one).

[kso_FAN]

What proof could K-State have possibly had? Western Union transactions are supposed to be confidential. The only thing K-State could have possibly had that constituted proof would be the testimony of one of the employees, and if that were the case, I sincerely hope that employee was turned into Western Union for a violation of their terms.

one possibility: they got the tip, asked jamar about it, and he confirmed the story. And what CC is saying is that you can't not ask as soon as you know about this crap. Especially when you consider how quickly and openly Curtis Malone talked.

This is what I think is going to come out.

1.  Tip from person who should be fired
2.  Currie to Frank - "ask Jamar"
3.  Frank to Jamar "Did Curt send you $200?"
4.  Jamar to Frank "yup"
5.  Frank "shazbot!"

Yes, I would agree with that. And like you said, once Malone was connected it was over.

[kim carnes]

is this thread a joke?   

[OregonSmock]

 

[Rams]

CC, would you say that goEMAW.com threw Currie under the bus? tia

[0.42]

Man you have to feel great right now.

[Dr Rick Daris]

cpt crap-

could kstate have called the ncaa and said hey, we just heard this and have some concern about jamar but don't have all of the facts yet. we're going to play him and then once we have everything in order we will submit what we know. seems like this is reasonable and has been floated around a lot. also, any truth to the fact that currie was not going to let him play unless the ncaa came back that he was good to go. meaning if the ncaa didn't rule in time, then he still wasn't going to play.

[Rams]

cpt crap-

could kstate have called the ncaa and said hey, we just heard this and have some concern about jamar but don't have all of the facts yet. we're going to play him and then once we have everything in order we will submit what we know. seems like this is reasonable and has been floated around a lot. also, any truth to the fact that currie was not going to let him play unless the ncaa came back that he was good to go. meaning if the ncaa didn't rule in time, then he still wasn't going to play.

Guessing the NCAA would've said "well what do you know right now?" Then we're back to the same result.

[Dr Rick Daris]

cpt crap-

could kstate have called the ncaa and said hey, we just heard this and have some concern about jamar but don't have all of the facts yet. we're going to play him and then once we have everything in order we will submit what we know. seems like this is reasonable and has been floated around a lot. also, any truth to the fact that currie was not going to let him play unless the ncaa came back that he was good to go. meaning if the ncaa didn't rule in time, then he still wasn't going to play.

Guessing the NCAA would've said "well what do you know right now?" Then we're back to the same result.

yeah. i don't think that's how it works.

[Pete]

cpt crap-

could kstate have called the ncaa and said hey, we just heard this and have some concern about jamar but don't have all of the facts yet. we're going to play him and then once we have everything in order we will submit what we know. seems like this is reasonable and has been floated around a lot. also, any truth to the fact that currie was not going to let him play unless the ncaa came back that he was good to go. meaning if the ncaa didn't rule in time, then he still wasn't going to play.

Guessing the NCAA would've said "well what do you know right now?" Then we're back to the same result.

What would Lew Perkins have done?  That's what i expect of my AD.  Also, I do not care about ticket scalping scandals in the midst of winning championships, just in case you were wondering....