|
Post by spudbeaver on Mar 27, 2019 10:46:47 GMT -8
Give it time. Another accusation out today on Bol Bol getting $$$ to play at uo. The money may be coming from Nike, but it's basically on uo's behalf. At some point it could become quite embarrassing for the dux. I have read several posts in reaction to the Avenatti assertions about Nike. One of those posts pointed out that neither U of O nor Nike would gain much by taking such a huge risk as to pay ANY player to come to Oregon. Nike can use its influence in over-the-counter ways (versus underhanded, shady methods) to achieve whatever goals they have to advance their business. Nike has DOZENS of universities marketing contracts and associations that pay dividends for the company in revenue streams. To favor a particular school in recruiting a particular player would certainly be foolish in terms of risk to the overall business. That does not preclude what appears to have happened with the current FBI investigation that nabbed at least two individuals who directly tried to use leverage to influence players to attend certain schools - and to have the network of connections where an agent that would represent that player in their pro career. The fact that one of the individuals was directly connected to Addidas does not necessarily make the Addidas company directly involved (as in the actions by the individual were not at the direction or on behalf of Addidas). It is possible that one or more people saw (see) the potential professional career of Bol Bol as a source of revenue for them to be associated with his choice of agent. Those people might or might not be associated with Nike and/or an AAU program sponsored by Nike - but like Addidas the actions by those individuals could/would have nothing to do with Nike (e.g. not at the direction or for the benefit of Nike). But hey, if the company name Nike is mentioned in relation to Oregon, it MUST MEAN there is corruption ... at least for the audience of posters on this board. And I am not naive enough to think that anyone here would assume anything but the negative view of Oregon. You're focused on the business aspect and financial gain to Nike. You are neglecting the personal wants and desires of Phil Knight, who no matter what title he has or doesn't have at Nike calls the shots. I think it is completely realistic to think that he orchestrated that move as well as many others. And as an outside the industry professional that has had dealings with Nike, yes, they are shady! But more important, they do what Phil wants, and I believe Phil wants to win now, however they have to do it. By the way, I'm married to a Duck from Eugene and her 27 Duck family members. I have no problems with what I call "old" Duck fans. It's the modern bandwagon NFL fan that couldn't find Autzen on a map, and has no idea what Mac Court is, the ones with the 2 foot prisma O on the window of their beater sedan that make me wonder if that marketing is really worth it. But to each his or her own.
|
|
|
Post by green85 on Mar 27, 2019 11:45:37 GMT -8
I have read several posts in reaction to the Avenatti assertions about Nike. One of those posts pointed out that neither U of O nor Nike would gain much by taking such a huge risk as to pay ANY player to come to Oregon. Nike can use its influence in over-the-counter ways (versus underhanded, shady methods) to achieve whatever goals they have to advance their business. Nike has DOZENS of universities marketing contracts and associations that pay dividends for the company in revenue streams. To favor a particular school in recruiting a particular player would certainly be foolish in terms of risk to the overall business. That does not preclude what appears to have happened with the current FBI investigation that nabbed at least two individuals who directly tried to use leverage to influence players to attend certain schools - and to have the network of connections where an agent that would represent that player in their pro career. The fact that one of the individuals was directly connected to Addidas does not necessarily make the Addidas company directly involved (as in the actions by the individual were not at the direction or on behalf of Addidas). It is possible that one or more people saw (see) the potential professional career of Bol Bol as a source of revenue for them to be associated with his choice of agent. Those people might or might not be associated with Nike and/or an AAU program sponsored by Nike - but like Addidas the actions by those individuals could/would have nothing to do with Nike (e.g. not at the direction or for the benefit of Nike). But hey, if the company name Nike is mentioned in relation to Oregon, it MUST MEAN there is corruption ... at least for the audience of posters on this board. And I am not naive enough to think that anyone here would assume anything but the negative view of Oregon. You're focused on the business aspect and financial gain to Nike. You are neglecting the personal wants and desires of Phil Knight, who no matter what title he has or doesn't have at Nike calls the shots. I think it is completely realistic to think that he orchestrated that move as well as many others. And as an outside the industry professional that has had dealings with Nike, yes, they are shady! But more important, they do what Phil wants, and I believe Phil wants to win now, however they have to do it. By the way, I'm married to a Duck from Eugene and her 27 Duck family members. I have no problems with what I call "old" Duck fans. It's the modern bandwagon NFL fan that couldn't find Autzen on a map, and has no idea what Mac Court is, the ones with the 2 foot prisma O on the window of their beater sedan that make me wonder if that marketing is really worth it. But to each his or her own. I have personal friends that have worked at Nike. They have nothing but positive to say about their experience as employees. Regarding Phil Knight ... his legacy is NIKE ... NOT the University of Oregon. Yes, he is a fan and alum. Yes, he has spent millions of his own dollars to elevate the athletic AND academic side of U of O. Yes, he has donated millions to cancer research at OSHU. But he would not do something to hurt NIKE to help Oregon. He is smarter than that. Besides the fact that he would NEVER directly tell someone at Nike to violate NCAA regulations. Why? Because that would hurt Nike and Oregon both. In addition, it would eliminate his connection to Oregon. So he is motivated NOT to violate any NCAA regulations. And he is motivated NOT to place Nike at any risk for any bad publicity. He knows what happens when bad press hits the street. Sorry. Logic tells me that Phil Knight's love of NIKE and Oregon would actually be the reason he would not direct someone to violate rules.
|
|
|
Post by beaverstever on Mar 27, 2019 12:14:46 GMT -8
You're focused on the business aspect and financial gain to Nike. You are neglecting the personal wants and desires of Phil Knight, who no matter what title he has or doesn't have at Nike calls the shots. I think it is completely realistic to think that he orchestrated that move as well as many others. And as an outside the industry professional that has had dealings with Nike, yes, they are shady! But more important, they do what Phil wants, and I believe Phil wants to win now, however they have to do it. By the way, I'm married to a Duck from Eugene and her 27 Duck family members. I have no problems with what I call "old" Duck fans. It's the modern bandwagon NFL fan that couldn't find Autzen on a map, and has no idea what Mac Court is, the ones with the 2 foot prisma O on the window of their beater sedan that make me wonder if that marketing is really worth it. But to each his or her own. I have personal friends that have worked at Nike. They have nothing but positive to say about their experience as employees. Regarding Phil Knight ... his legacy is NIKE ... NOT the University of Oregon. Yes, he is a fan and alum. Yes, he has spent millions of his own dollars to elevate the athletic AND academic side of U of O. Yes, he has donated millions to cancer research at OSHU. But he would not do something to hurt NIKE to help Oregon. He is smarter than that. Besides the fact that he would NEVER directly tell someone at Nike to violate NCAA regulations. Why? Because that would hurt Nike and Oregon both. In addition, it would eliminate his connection to Oregon. So he is motivated NOT to violate any NCAA regulations. And he is motivated NOT to place Nike at any risk for any bad publicity. He knows what happens when bad press hits the street. Sorry. Logic tells me that Phil Knight's love of NIKE and Oregon would actually be the reason he would not direct someone to violate rules. This post is so ridiculously naive, I don't even know where to begin. Of course Phil isn't telling anybody to violate NCAA rules. Of course he doesn't need to. The crux of the problem is that there is a widespread believe (justifiably so) that athletes get screwed by the NCAA and universities, and deserve to be paid. Many college bball players (especially elite) could care less about a paid-for education. So they are absolutely expecting programs to find ways around the system, and successful programs have been finding ways for a long time. A few get caught periodically, but the actual enforcement hilariously understaffed and toothless. As for Nike, the stakes are very high to get in early with elite athletes. They cannot afford to bungle a relationship like they did with Steph Curry that hugely boosted a direct competitor. Do you really think the shenanigans that Adidas is being accused of is not going on with UA, Nike, etc? In theory, this scandal not only doesn't hurt Adidas but rather helps with signing athletes, because it publicizes them as sympathetic to the social injustice of collegiate athletes lack of a revenue cut. In reality, it probably doesn't matter, because elite athletes know everybody is participating in the bidding wars. To be clear on my position here, I not only fully expect that Nike and Oregon are involved in this kind of activity, I also do not blame them for it, as I do not believe you can get top-tier athletes otherwise - I do not a University with the resources to compete with the ACC/SEC is not playing their same game directly, it would be foolish not to (particularly since they should be able to do it in a more sophisticated fashion). Its a completely broken system that the NCAA has monopolized. I also do not think OSU is doing this, not out of some moral high-ground, but rather for the lack of alumni willing to fund it (outside of obviously giving jobs to the player's parents).
|
|
|
Post by green85 on Mar 27, 2019 13:23:28 GMT -8
I have personal friends that have worked at Nike. They have nothing but positive to say about their experience as employees. Regarding Phil Knight ... his legacy is NIKE ... NOT the University of Oregon. Yes, he is a fan and alum. Yes, he has spent millions of his own dollars to elevate the athletic AND academic side of U of O. Yes, he has donated millions to cancer research at OSHU. But he would not do something to hurt NIKE to help Oregon. He is smarter than that. Besides the fact that he would NEVER directly tell someone at Nike to violate NCAA regulations. Why? Because that would hurt Nike and Oregon both. In addition, it would eliminate his connection to Oregon. So he is motivated NOT to violate any NCAA regulations. And he is motivated NOT to place Nike at any risk for any bad publicity. He knows what happens when bad press hits the street. Sorry. Logic tells me that Phil Knight's love of NIKE and Oregon would actually be the reason he would not direct someone to violate rules. This post is so ridiculously naive, I don't even know where to begin. Of course Phil isn't telling anybody to violate NCAA rules. Of course he doesn't need to. The crux of the problem is that there is a widespread believe (justifiably so) that athletes get screwed by the NCAA and universities, and deserve to be paid. Many college bball players (especially elite) could care less about a paid-for education. So they are absolutely expecting programs to find ways around the system, and successful programs have been finding ways for a long time. A few get caught periodically, but the actual enforcement hilariously understaffed and toothless. As for Nike, the stakes are very high to get in early with elite athletes. They cannot afford to bungle a relationship like they did with Steph Curry that hugely boosted a direct competitor. Do you really think the shenanigans that Adidas is being accused of is not going on with UA, Nike, etc? In theory, this scandal not only doesn't hurt Adidas but rather helps with signing athletes, because it publicizes them as sympathetic to the social injustice of collegiate athletes lack of a revenue cut. In reality, it probably doesn't matter, because elite athletes know everybody is participating in the bidding wars. To be clear on my position here, I not only fully expect that Nike and Oregon are involved in this kind of activity, I also do not blame them for it, as I do not believe you can get top-tier athletes otherwise - I do not a University with the resources to compete with the ACC/SEC is not playing their same game directly, it would be foolish not to (particularly since they should be able to do it in a more sophisticated fashion). Its a completely broken system that the NCAA has monopolized. I also do not think OSU is doing this, not out of some moral high-ground, but rather for the lack of alumni willing to fund it (outside of obviously giving jobs to the player's parents). Funny thing is that Nike can do absolutely nothing regarding a single player signing with ANY school and still have a great chance to sign them to an endorsement deal / shoe contract simply by their current position in the market. Nike has lots of ways to influence a pro athlete to sign with them, not the least of which is their success with athletes as spokespeople. It is NOT naive to think that Nike's corporate strategy has NOTHING to do with where a particular player signs to play in college. With one-and-done it is even less important to Nike and Addidas. Which is why I think you missed the point of one of my previous posts ... the scandal that has Addidas name on it now is NOT about Addidas. It is about a person associated with Addidas doing things to help themselves. It is influence pedaling USING the association with Addidas, not because of Addidas. The reason the FBI is involved is because of the wide spread fraud, again not because of Addidas but because people in the flow get greedy and see a chance to move dollars and influence FOR THEIR OWN GAIN. If I know an AAU coach or "mentor" of a high profile athlete that is choosing among colleges, that inherently puts me in position to "sell MY influence". It does not mean that it is a marketing strategy of Addidas, Nike or UnderArmor to pursue such influence - they have NOTHING to gain (or so little to gain that it would not move the needle on stock value).
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Mar 27, 2019 13:27:25 GMT -8
This post is so ridiculously naive, I don't even know where to begin. Of course Phil isn't telling anybody to violate NCAA rules. Of course he doesn't need to. The crux of the problem is that there is a widespread believe (justifiably so) that athletes get screwed by the NCAA and universities, and deserve to be paid. Many college bball players (especially elite) could care less about a paid-for education. So they are absolutely expecting programs to find ways around the system, and successful programs have been finding ways for a long time. A few get caught periodically, but the actual enforcement hilariously understaffed and toothless. As for Nike, the stakes are very high to get in early with elite athletes. They cannot afford to bungle a relationship like they did with Steph Curry that hugely boosted a direct competitor. Do you really think the shenanigans that Adidas is being accused of is not going on with UA, Nike, etc? In theory, this scandal not only doesn't hurt Adidas but rather helps with signing athletes, because it publicizes them as sympathetic to the social injustice of collegiate athletes lack of a revenue cut. In reality, it probably doesn't matter, because elite athletes know everybody is participating in the bidding wars. To be clear on my position here, I not only fully expect that Nike and Oregon are involved in this kind of activity, I also do not blame them for it, as I do not believe you can get top-tier athletes otherwise - I do not a University with the resources to compete with the ACC/SEC is not playing their same game directly, it would be foolish not to (particularly since they should be able to do it in a more sophisticated fashion). Its a completely broken system that the NCAA has monopolized. I also do not think OSU is doing this, not out of some moral high-ground, but rather for the lack of alumni willing to fund it (outside of obviously giving jobs to the player's parents). Funny thing is that Nike can do absolutely nothing regarding a single player signing with ANY school and still have a great chance to sign them to an endorsement deal / shoe contract simply by their current position in the market. Nike has lots of ways to influence a pro athlete to sign with them, not the least of which is their success with athletes as spokespeople. It is NOT naive to think that Nike's corporate strategy has NOTHING to do with where a particular player signs to play in college. With one-and-done it is even less important to Nike and Addidas. Which is why I think you missed the point of one of my previous posts ... the scandal that has Addidas name on it now is NOT about Addidas. It is about a person associated with Addidas doing things to help themselves. It is influence pedaling USING the association with Addidas, not because of Addidas. The reason the FBI is involved is because of the wide spread fraud, again not because of Addidas but because people in the flow get greedy and see a chance to move dollars and influence FOR THEIR OWN GAIN. If I know an AAU coach or "mentor" of a high profile athlete that is choosing among colleges, that inherently puts me in position to "sell MY influence". It does not mean that it is a marketing strategy of Addidas, Nike or UnderArmor to pursue such influence - they have NOTHING to gain (or so little to gain that it would not move the needle on stock value). To strengthen your argument, maybe you should learn to spell Adidas. Sincerely, Nyke P.S- Here’s how I remember It’s All Day I Dream About Sex not All Day Duck Idiots Are Stupid
|
|
|
Post by beaverstever on Mar 27, 2019 14:08:31 GMT -8
Ok, this is tiresome, but I'll try one more time. Tell me, what value is it to Nike of having Zion WIlliamson go to a Nike school? Here's a little help on answering - check this link: www.google.com/search?q=zion+williamson&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwj7sdKUo6PhAhXpxYsBHUh3Cy0Q_AUIECgD&biw=1661&bih=937Notice something? Yep, the Nike logo is visible in virtually ever image. What's the value to Nike of that kind of brand impression? What's the value of those images not having a competitor logo instead? Many, many millions. You better believe Nike was VERY involved in determining what school he went to - maybe they don't care if it's Duke vs. UNC (although I'm sure they actually do even to that level), but I guarantee they care a ton that he doesn't go to say Kansas or Notre Dame. Do not believe Nike leaves their brand's influence to chance - it is insulting to those employed there. Nike is first and foremost a marketing company - so if you really believe this happened by chance means you have no idea why Nike is so successful. As for those greedy folks in trouble with the FBI, sure, it's just a few bad apples, corporate is totally innocent! Yea, sure. Yes, they may have taken advantage of their position and gotten sloppy, but you better believe plausible deniability is part of any sketchy initiatives - it's no different from oil companies bribing foreign officials; is just simply how the business gets done. Look, I have friends that are execs in the sports apparel industry, so there's other info that influences my perspective. However, I'm only speaking here to things that are obvious and public. Believe what you want to believe though, I'm just telling you it doesn't even match up with the basic 'follow the money' analysis.
|
|
|
Post by green85 on Mar 27, 2019 14:12:04 GMT -8
Funny thing is that Nike can do absolutely nothing regarding a single player signing with ANY school and still have a great chance to sign them to an endorsement deal / shoe contract simply by their current position in the market. Nike has lots of ways to influence a pro athlete to sign with them, not the least of which is their success with athletes as spokespeople. It is NOT naive to think that Nike's corporate strategy has NOTHING to do with where a particular player signs to play in college. With one-and-done it is even less important to Nike and Addidas. Which is why I think you missed the point of one of my previous posts ... the scandal that has Addidas name on it now is NOT about Addidas. It is about a person associated with Addidas doing things to help themselves. It is influence pedaling USING the association with Addidas, not because of Addidas. The reason the FBI is involved is because of the wide spread fraud, again not because of Addidas but because people in the flow get greedy and see a chance to move dollars and influence FOR THEIR OWN GAIN. If I know an AAU coach or "mentor" of a high profile athlete that is choosing among colleges, that inherently puts me in position to "sell MY influence". It does not mean that it is a marketing strategy of Addidas, Nike or UnderArmor to pursue such influence - they have NOTHING to gain (or so little to gain that it would not move the needle on stock value). To strengthen your argument, maybe you should learn to spell Adidas. Sincerely, Nyke P.S- Here’s how I remember It’s All Day I Dream About Sex not All Day Duck Idiots Are Stupid Thanks for the correction. Enjoy the rest of your day.
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Mar 27, 2019 14:33:18 GMT -8
This post is so ridiculously naive, I don't even know where to begin. Of course Phil isn't telling anybody to violate NCAA rules. Of course he doesn't need to. The crux of the problem is that there is a widespread believe (justifiably so) that athletes get screwed by the NCAA and universities, and deserve to be paid. Many college bball players (especially elite) could care less about a paid-for education. So they are absolutely expecting programs to find ways around the system, and successful programs have been finding ways for a long time. A few get caught periodically, but the actual enforcement hilariously understaffed and toothless. As for Nike, the stakes are very high to get in early with elite athletes. They cannot afford to bungle a relationship like they did with Steph Curry that hugely boosted a direct competitor. Do you really think the shenanigans that Adidas is being accused of is not going on with UA, Nike, etc? In theory, this scandal not only doesn't hurt Adidas but rather helps with signing athletes, because it publicizes them as sympathetic to the social injustice of collegiate athletes lack of a revenue cut. In reality, it probably doesn't matter, because elite athletes know everybody is participating in the bidding wars. To be clear on my position here, I not only fully expect that Nike and Oregon are involved in this kind of activity, I also do not blame them for it, as I do not believe you can get top-tier athletes otherwise - I do not a University with the resources to compete with the ACC/SEC is not playing their same game directly, it would be foolish not to (particularly since they should be able to do it in a more sophisticated fashion). Its a completely broken system that the NCAA has monopolized. I also do not think OSU is doing this, not out of some moral high-ground, but rather for the lack of alumni willing to fund it (outside of obviously giving jobs to the player's parents). Funny thing is that Nike can do absolutely nothing regarding a single player signing with ANY school and still have a great chance to sign them to an endorsement deal / shoe contract simply by their current position in the market. Nike has lots of ways to influence a pro athlete to sign with them, not the least of which is their success with athletes as spokespeople. It is NOT naive to think that Nike's corporate strategy has NOTHING to do with where a particular player signs to play in college. With one-and-done it is even less important to Nike and Addidas. Which is why I think you missed the point of one of my previous posts ... the scandal that has Addidas name on it now is NOT about Addidas. It is about a person associated with Addidas doing things to help themselves. It is influence pedaling USING the association with Addidas, not because of Addidas. The reason the FBI is involved is because of the wide spread fraud, again not because of Addidas but because people in the flow get greedy and see a chance to move dollars and influence FOR THEIR OWN GAIN. If I know an AAU coach or "mentor" of a high profile athlete that is choosing among colleges, that inherently puts me in position to "sell MY influence". It does not mean that it is a marketing strategy of Addidas, Nike or UnderArmor to pursue such influence - they have NOTHING to gain (or so little to gain that it would not move the needle on stock value). Brian Bowen Senior has gone on record that while his kid did get offered by Louisville.... Arizona, Creighton, Texas and Oklahoma State, all NIKE schools, offered his son cash to play. He did however say he "can't recall" if oregon offered his kid anything. "Can't recall" is apparently a legal answer under oath these days. He hasn't denied oregon didn't offer, just that he can't recall. I suspect he got a quick offer for memory care by someone connected somehow with the dux when word got out that his kid was under scrutiny for accepting money from the dux.
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Mar 27, 2019 19:27:09 GMT -8
To strengthen your argument, maybe you should learn to spell Adidas. Sincerely, Nyke P.S- Here’s how I remember It’s All Day I Dream About Sex not All Day Duck Idiots Are Stupid Thanks for the correction. Enjoy the rest of your day. You have to admit that’s a pretty egregious error. It even shows up on spell check on my phone!
|
|
|
Post by green85 on Mar 28, 2019 8:39:39 GMT -8
Ok, this is tiresome, but I'll try one more time. Tell me, what value is it to Nike of having Zion WIlliamson go to a Nike school? Here's a little help on answering - check this link: www.google.com/search?q=zion+williamson&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwj7sdKUo6PhAhXpxYsBHUh3Cy0Q_AUIECgD&biw=1661&bih=937Notice something? Yep, the Nike logo is visible in virtually ever image. What's the value to Nike of that kind of brand impression? What's the value of those images not having a competitor logo instead? Many, many millions. You better believe Nike was VERY involved in determining what school he went to - maybe they don't care if it's Duke vs. UNC (although I'm sure they actually do even to that level), but I guarantee they care a ton that he doesn't go to say Kansas or Notre Dame. Do not believe Nike leaves their brand's influence to chance - it is insulting to those employed there. Nike is first and foremost a marketing company - so if you really believe this happened by chance means you have no idea why Nike is so successful. As for those greedy folks in trouble with the FBI, sure, it's just a few bad apples, corporate is totally innocent! Yea, sure. Yes, they may have taken advantage of their position and gotten sloppy, but you better believe plausible deniability is part of any sketchy initiatives - it's no different from oil companies bribing foreign officials; is just simply how the business gets done. Look, I have friends that are execs in the sports apparel industry, so there's other info that influences my perspective. However, I'm only speaking here to things that are obvious and public. Believe what you want to believe though, I'm just telling you it doesn't even match up with the basic 'follow the money' analysis. Thank you for making my point ... NIKE's logo is on the uniform of DOZENS and DOZENS of university uniforms in multiple sports. Having the DUKE contract is the key ... not having a particular athlete go to that school. Seriously, think about how many high profile schools have the Nike logo. Do you wonder why? Is it possible that Nike has been one of the most successful sports apparel and equipment companies globally for decades? Nike does not just make quality stuff, they PAY the schools big contracts to use their stuff to get exactly the exposure you show in the images of Zion. Again, Nike does not have to have a particular player sign with a Nike school to be successful. Their logo has the highest chance of being displayed on great players on great teams on TV and in March Madness compared to other brands.
|
|
|
Post by green85 on Mar 28, 2019 8:47:03 GMT -8
Funny thing is that Nike can do absolutely nothing regarding a single player signing with ANY school and still have a great chance to sign them to an endorsement deal / shoe contract simply by their current position in the market. Nike has lots of ways to influence a pro athlete to sign with them, not the least of which is their success with athletes as spokespeople. It is NOT naive to think that Nike's corporate strategy has NOTHING to do with where a particular player signs to play in college. With one-and-done it is even less important to Nike and Addidas. Which is why I think you missed the point of one of my previous posts ... the scandal that has Addidas name on it now is NOT about Addidas. It is about a person associated with Addidas doing things to help themselves. It is influence pedaling USING the association with Addidas, not because of Addidas. The reason the FBI is involved is because of the wide spread fraud, again not because of Addidas but because people in the flow get greedy and see a chance to move dollars and influence FOR THEIR OWN GAIN. If I know an AAU coach or "mentor" of a high profile athlete that is choosing among colleges, that inherently puts me in position to "sell MY influence". It does not mean that it is a marketing strategy of Addidas, Nike or UnderArmor to pursue such influence - they have NOTHING to gain (or so little to gain that it would not move the needle on stock value). Brian Bowen Senior has gone on record that while his kid did get offered by Louisville.... Arizona, Creighton, Texas and Oklahoma State, all NIKE schools, offered his son cash to play. He did however say he "can't recall" if oregon offered his kid anything. "Can't recall" is apparently a legal answer under oath these days. He hasn't denied oregon didn't offer, just that he can't recall. I suspect he got a quick offer for memory care by someone connected somehow with the dux when word got out that his kid was under scrutiny for accepting money from the dux. Bowen did not sign with the Ducks, so I highly doubt "his kid was under scrutiny for accepting money from the dux."
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Mar 28, 2019 9:13:59 GMT -8
Brian Bowen Senior has gone on record that while his kid did get offered by Louisville.... Arizona, Creighton, Texas and Oklahoma State, all NIKE schools, offered his son cash to play. He did however say he "can't recall" if oregon offered his kid anything. "Can't recall" is apparently a legal answer under oath these days. He hasn't denied oregon didn't offer, just that he can't recall. I suspect he got a quick offer for memory care by someone connected somehow with the dux when word got out that his kid was under scrutiny for accepting money from the dux. Bowen did not sign with the Ducks, so I highly doubt "his kid was under scrutiny for accepting money from the dux." Dude, pay attention to the news. You’re trying to weasel your way out of this because I chose my words poorly and didn’t say “under scrutiny for potentially being offered cash for play by several schools, including the dux.” Either way, that FBI investigation occurred and the dux name, along with the names of several other NIKE schools, was prominent in it. Pitino is out at Louisville and the kid never played a minute of college ball, the player and coach may have been eventually cleared, but they were certainly investigated.
|
|
|
Post by green85 on Mar 28, 2019 11:20:50 GMT -8
Bowen did not sign with the Ducks, so I highly doubt "his kid was under scrutiny for accepting money from the dux." Dude, pay attention to the news. You’re trying to weasel your way out of this because I chose my words poorly and didn’t say “under scrutiny for potentially being offered cash for play by several schools, including the dux.” Either way, that FBI investigation occurred and the dux name, along with the names of several other NIKE schools, was prominent in it. Pitino is out at Louisville and the kid never played a minute of college ball, the player and coach may have been eventually cleared, but they were certainly investigated. Oregon is NOT under investigation by the FBI. A bunch of other schools are, but Oregon is not. The fact that someone says "Oregon" does not make the school or basketball program guilty of anything. And if there was even a hint of Oregon or someone associated with Oregon being directly involved you can count on the fact that they would be listed as a defendant.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2019 13:09:26 GMT -8
Dude, pay attention to the news. You’re trying to weasel your way out of this because I chose my words poorly and didn’t say “under scrutiny for potentially being offered cash for play by several schools, including the dux.” Either way, that FBI investigation occurred and the dux name, along with the names of several other NIKE schools, was prominent in it. Pitino is out at Louisville and the kid never played a minute of college ball, the player and coach may have been eventually cleared, but they were certainly investigated. Oregon is NOT under investigation by the FBI. A bunch of other schools are, but Oregon is not. The fact that someone says "Oregon" does not make the school or basketball program guilty of anything. And if there was even a hint of Oregon or someone associated with Oregon being directly involved you can count on the fact that they would be listed as a defendant. Convicted as a scumbag program in my mind, and that's what counts. I will watch just enough of Virginia erasing the green stain off this years NCAA tourney to make me happy and then you will probably not be around for a few months. Later
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Mar 28, 2019 14:04:55 GMT -8
Dude, pay attention to the news. You’re trying to weasel your way out of this because I chose my words poorly and didn’t say “under scrutiny for potentially being offered cash for play by several schools, including the dux.” Either way, that FBI investigation occurred and the dux name, along with the names of several other NIKE schools, was prominent in it. Pitino is out at Louisville and the kid never played a minute of college ball, the player and coach may have been eventually cleared, but they were certainly investigated. Oregon is NOT under investigation by the FBI. A bunch of other schools are, but Oregon is not. The fact that someone says "Oregon" does not make the school or basketball program guilty of anything. And if there was even a hint of Oregon or someone associated with Oregon being directly involved you can count on the fact that they would be listed as a defendant. I cannot say whether the FBI is currently investigating oregon or not, not privy to that information... but apparently they have given the NCAA to investigate oregon and a slew of other teams... Interesting reading from January of this year... www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/25210341/ncaa-gets-approval-investigate-schools-college-basketball-corruption-case
|
|