Printable View
Just thinking of a name to keep on the radar. 12 years at Oklahoma with 12 NCAA tournaments, and a Final 4. Went to Indiana and was ousted after some NCAA allegations. Been out of the college game until this season, and is now the coach at Houston.
Seems like an attainable guy with some big time experience. I think he would be similar to a jackie sherrill type hire.
Thoughts ?
My thoughts are that an administration that interviewed some of our own former players about the recruiting practices of our former coach would not consider Sampson for 1 second
No, I don't like the lax way Stansbury ran the program and all of the drama and lack of discipline within his program but what was the issue with his "recruiting practices"? Whatever they were I wish we should bring them back. Stans was the best recruiting HC we've ever had bar none and never had an issue with the NCAA in his 14 years running the basketball program. Whatever he was doing was getting results and we weren't getting in trouble for it so what was the big deal? And for whatever we were doing on the side nobody can deny that Stans busted his ass in his recruiting efforts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
And to add, I'm not trying to start another thread getting veered off on Stans but it very much concerns me when I read this stuff where it sounds like maybe for all post-Stans HCs we have we are going to make them recruit with one hand tied behind their back.
This. If you ain't cheating, you ain't trying.Quote:
Originally Posted by maroonmania
And boy was he trying.Quote:
Originally Posted by bluelightstar
Not getting into our previous coach or how you should recruit but concerning Sampson he had a 5 year show cause for his tremendous amount of violations and lies. And his problems began at Oklahoma, long before he arrived at Indiana. Until he shows he has cleaned up his act for 3-4 years at least, I wouldn't touch him. Heck the man was the head of a committee dealing with these types of infractions that he was flagrantly committing. I have a lot of issues with the NCAA but he needed to be slapped down. Heck of a coach that if he does it right and stays clean could get another shot but he has a lot to prove before then.
Hey, if you drive 65 in a 55 for 14 years and never get a ticket is there a problem? College basketball recruiting is like speeding in that pretty much everyone is skirting the rules to some degree. If you don't you are not in the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by starkvegasdawg
But he was going 120 all the time. Even in the rain. And whether you get a ticket for speeding is not the only problem. You have an accident going over the speed and hurt someone, you tell me if the attorney is not going to go after you and your insurance. Just because law enforcement never catches you doesn't mean there are no consequences for your actions. Always have hated the speeding analogy. There is always consequences. And again he wasn't going a little over. He was recklessly going over the speed limit. Big difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by maroonmania
I never said I had a problem with it. I just said he was really trying.Quote:
Originally Posted by maroonmania
Well I wasn't privy to the specifics of Stansbury's recruiting tactics, but, for the sake of argument, let's say I take your word for it he was THAT much worse than the other recruiters he was competing against. The "bending of the rules" when speeding analogy is sort of obvious to people when talking recruiting but I guess I'm not following how in recruiting you crash and hurt someone? or have an attorney go after you and your "insurance" (whoever that would be in this extended analogy)? Stans' problem with his program wasn't his recruiting issues, it was his inability to be able to manage and mentor guys in his program. You can't convince me there was ANYTHING that Stans would do in the recruiting game that Calipari hasn't done 100 times over everywhere he's been but Cal doesn't have a constant soap opera within his program like Stans did.Quote:
Originally Posted by Really Clark?
Re-read my original post in this thread. I wasn't even talking bout Stansbury or anyone else but Sampson. Sampson was flagrant and the show cause was justified with him. He was going 120 in a 55.Quote:
Originally Posted by maroonmania
With the analogy, the speeding thing that everybody uses is a little over the speed limit and never getting a ticket. The problem is that is not the only problem when you speed. Your chances of getting in an accident goes up and that is a variable that never gets mentioned. A ticket is NOT the only possible consequence of speeding, there are many more with some having a much higher consequence than just a ticket, so the analogy is not a good one. In no way was I cimparing someone getting hurt to recruiting. The object lesson is about ALL consequences when you do something. Not just the least painful..like a ticket.
ETA. With concern with your analogy, because of the filthy nature of basketball recruiting as it is today, the law enforcement is giving you 10 mph over the speed limit anyway. They know it's dirty and are letting you go anyway. Sampson was over the top.
A little episode I witnessed behind the scenes at the SEC tournament in 2010, among other bits of information here and there, indicates otherwise. I think Cal deals with the drama aspect better than Stansbury did towards the end because Cal's pre-madonnas cycle out of the program faster.Quote:
Originally Posted by maroonmania
OK, guess we crossed wires. Since you were responding to my post about Stans I thought you were talking about Stans as well. Didn't realize you were referencing Sampson. Agree that if a guy has a show cause against him then that is a different can of worms to evaluate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Really Clark?
We probably did cross up. It's cool. I thought the post you responded to with that analogy was referencing Sampson's cheating.Quote:
Originally Posted by maroonmania
Didn't Pearl have a show cause case against him up until this year?
With the number of times Stans put us on probation with his recruiting antics, our administration is not going back down that treacherous road.
I don't believe Stans was doing anything more than any other college program. The way we get called out if we so much as jaywalk in football.... I don't believe for a second that Stans was that rogue. Godfried and OM would have blown the whistle in a millisecond.
Not taking up for Stans, but the one program where we played the game like everyone else does and we shut that down like its the devil. Hired the next coach and basically told him he couldn't play the game at all. I just don't get it, we self impose handicap our self better than anyone it seems.
Are you surprised? You are talking about the same department that apparently LOVES Bracky.Quote:
Originally Posted by quickstrike2
I think somebody posted one time " 90% of the schools recruit legally the rest are ranked ".
What exactly are you saying? Or is this just par for the course?Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
And when will this post be deleted just as every single other post with any innuendo of recruiting violations? I'll wait.
Another check in the idiocy column. I'm keeping a spreadsheet and its going to be classic when it's done.
You weren't the one who veered this one off on Stansbury.Quote:
Originally Posted by maroonmania
Stansbury is just an easy target here. Way too difficult to make a valid argument when you can take shots.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maroonthirteen
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDogFather
I think my statement was pretty clear. Former players were interviewed about Stands recruiting practices. This is a fact
They would have had to go thru Mike Slive first- and we all know that wasn't happeningQuote:
Originally Posted by Maroonthirteen
When SS hired Ray he had lunch with Richard Williams in Jackson and there was open discussion about whether you could run a successful basketball program with out cheating. Williams said no but SS did not seem to care. Everyone is cheating end of story. Things changed when Ray joined. People wonder why Hood left, he left because the terms of his "scholarship" changed greatly when we switched coaches.
this guy knows what he is talking about. College basketball is the dirtiest out there. And our #Network is on vacationQuote:
Originally Posted by Rayburn8
I'll never forget the Josh Gray interview after Ray was hired- in summary Gray said something to the effect "I'm just wondering who is going to show me love now"....about the most blatant "I wonder where the money is going to come from now" quote I have ever seen
What about the second question?Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
Another post which due to insinuating content would normally be deleted here. But this thread continues because it disparages our former coach. Definitely going on the spreadsheet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rayburn8
No on Sampson. No no no no no no. No.
Sampson got fired and given a suspension because he talked on the phone like a junior high girl with recruits. Hugh Freeze is much worse with the phone than Sampson. I'd be fine with Sampson getting the job. 12 NCAA's in 12 years is damn impressive!
No he got fired for not complying to sanctions he was already under for his violations at Oklahoma. Among other things, the NCAA said Sampson did not comply restrictions imposed for the violations at Oklahoma, that he lied to the NCAA, and that he failed to promote an atmosphere of rules compliance within the IU basketball program. Two schools and he wouldn't stop something that was easy to control. Not to mention the various off campus recruiting violations. And even with all that it's like anything else, it was the lies and cover ups that got him fired. 5 year show cause is because of MAJOR violations. Don't fall for it was just some extra calls. And to top it off he headed a committee overseeing these type of coaching violations. No to Sampson.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg61
Cal leaves every place he has been on probation.
Would you turn him down, too?
Does he technically have any violations to his name? No Is there a tremendous amount of smoke to his career? Yes and he is a slime ball and we all know he is dirty. They all are but Sampson thumbed his nose at the NCAA, the conference, and two schools, lied about it and had the audacity to lead a committee that had to censure and suspend him because of what he was doing and wouldn't correct his behavior. Flagrant and in your face about it. Cal at least had enough sense to keep some stuff from being tied to him and leaving before hand. Would I hire Cal? Yes but you are also not comparing like coaches either. Much greater track record of success with Cal but you better do it understanding that everywhere he has left he has left it in shambles and you had better be prepared for a downturn after a championship.Quote:
Originally Posted by THE Bruce Dickinson
ETA. If you reread my first post about this I also said Sampson has not had enough time to prove himself. Big difference between hiring him now and in 2 years if he has cleaned up his act. And by that it's not just the violations at all. He was rouge and you can't have that at the school. If it wasn't phone calls it would have been something else. He had a show cause because you had to treat him almost like an addict. He wasn't going to stop or he would have shifted to something else. The NCAA will allow things to go on a certain degree just because basketball recruiting is so dirty. Don't think they don't know what's going on. As long as the bulk of it appears like its on an even play field they will stay out of it.
and NO!Quote:
Originally Posted by smootness