Breaking: Major press conference tomorrow , more names/schools in Nike scandal

#51

bamawriter

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
19,135
Likes
7,996
#51
The government used what seems like twisted logic here... The government's case against Dawkins and the two Adidas execs was the notion that they were "defrauding" Louisville because their actions made a player (Brian Bowen) ineligible. It's a twisted way of rooting out cheating in a collegiate sport... Probably fair to say they should have better things to do with their resources, I guess.
That logic has always bugged me. If Louisville was under the mistaken belief that Bowen was eligible when he, in fact, was not, isn't that on Bowen for signing the grant-in-aid which attests to his own eligibility?
 
#52

05_never_again

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2006
Messages
9,579
Likes
5,891
#52
The government used what seems like twisted logic here... The government's case against Dawkins and the two Adidas execs was the notion that they were "defrauding" Louisville because their actions made a player (Brian Bowen) ineligible. It's a twisted way of rooting out cheating in a collegiate sport... Probably fair to say they should have better things to do with their resources, I guess.
Yeah, that's...interesting logic to put it mildly. They clearly are coming down extremely hard on them and slapping on every possible charge under the sun.

I guess I understand this better now. The wire fraud charge is based on a technicality, and it also opens up the money laundering charge. If you disguise the origins of proceeds obtained from a wire transfer where the ultimate recipient wasn't listed (wire fraud), I mean, I suppose that technically is money laundering. The bribery comes in evidently if you are an employee of a public university. A lot of these charges appear to be based on highly technical factors.

Here's another question - does this mean that if a coach at a private institution, say, Duke or Villanova, took bribes in exchange for directing a player to an agent, that's perfectly legal?
 
#54

bamawriter

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
19,135
Likes
7,996
#54
Here's another question - does this mean that if a coach at a private institution, say, Duke or Villanova, took bribes in exchange for directing a player to an agent, that's perfectly legal?
One of the coaches facing charges is from USC, so I guess the bribery statutes still apply. Perhaps it has to do with accepting federal funding.
 
#57

Firebirdparts

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
351
Likes
253
#57
Here's another question - does this mean that if a coach at a private institution, say, Duke or Villanova, took bribes in exchange for directing a player to an agent, that's perfectly legal?
Everything is legal until somebody passes a law against it. These actions are going to have to be prosecuted using racketeering and money-laundering sorts of charges. There's no reason any legislative body would pass a law against giving money to a student. The question of appropriate coach influence is not something they want to take up either.

Racketeering is very open-ended.
 

VN Store



Sponsors
 

Top