Oregon, Will Lyles, and the Slow Unraveling of a Scandal
by Peter Bean on Jun 22, 2011 1:02 AM CDT
in Texas Longhorns Football
Email
PrintUPDATE, July 1st: Will Lyles Opens Up, Implicates Oregon Recruiting Scandal
Imagine if your humble site editor got audited by the IRS and as part of that audit they combed through all the expenses that I reported for Burnt Orange Nation. Imagine further that I took a $25,000 deduction for a payment I made to Stats Research, Inc., which I explained was a business expense related to providing me statistical data that I and my co-authors use to help us produce the site's content.
On its face, such an expense is clearly legitimate, but what if upon following through on the investigation the IRS agent looked carefully at the documentation and discovered that the data that I purchased contained stats related to Idaho and Rutgers football in 2007.
Do you suppose that would be the end of it? I imagine that would raise a slew of concerns for the investigator, and far from confirming the purchase as a legitimate business expense would raise questions as to what I was really doing with that money.
What Did Oregon Buy, Exactly?
That appears to be precisely the case at the University of Oregon following the release of a large number of documents related to the $25,000 that the university paid to Will Lyles, the review of which revealed that the Texas-based "consultant" provided information as relevant to Oregon's 2011 recruiting as would be random statistical data from other schools to Burnt Orange Nation:
[O]f 140 players profiled in [Lyle's] booklet, none were identifiable as members of the 2011 recruiting class. At least 115 were from the class that graduated from high school in 2009. Three were from 2010 and one was from 2008. Class year was not available for several players.
In other words, either Oregon is randomly throwing around money for things like useless data... or that payment was for delivery of a different product entirely. Occam says: something's amiss.
Especially given Mr. Lyle's reputation, it's hardly a leap to conclude that Oregon was paying for something very different. Where expending $25,000 for useless, outdated recruiting information looks like an inexplicable waste, for the delivery of a top prospect like Lache Seastrunk, the purchase price seems much better to fit.
Indeed, the only reason not to conclude that Oregon was purchasing a player -- rather than information about players -- is that the former is against the rules, while the latter is not.
Oregon's Increasingly Dangerous Problem
Were there no documents -- were the expense report related to some ephemeral "consulting" contract with no tangible work product -- it would be much easier to conclude that this potential scandal would just fizzle away. But today's revelations about the contents of the documents Oregon claims to have purchased feel like a turning point in this story. In fact, it feels a lot like when it was revealed that Jim Tressel not only knew about his players' misconduct, but covered it up and then lied about it.
To begin with, the timing couldn't be worse for Oregon, as journalists are pursuing scandals with vigor that had not meaningfully existed until recently. Jim Tressel was done in as much by the fine work done by the Columbus Dispatch as his transgressions themselves. With Tuesday's report, one gets the sense that the Oregonian is similarly devoted to getting to the bottom of this particular story, as well.
Second, and related, the Oregon-Lyles story has had multiple opportunities to fade away, but has not. The sustenance of the story illuminates the danger Oregon is facing:
(1) If Oregon's actions were completely clean, this story almost assuredly would have disappeared by now, and even if they were the spotlight is now markedly on the program, increasing the risk that other, untold violations may be uncovered.
(2) Similarly, if Oregon's actions amounted only to minor misconduct, it has still created further problems by not immediately being forthright -- at the very least inviting a rigorous examination of all its recruiting practices (and of the compliance of its entire football program, really).
(3) Finally, if Oregon has committed a major violation(s), with the continued shining of bright spotlights by an increasingly motivated media (to say nothing of the NCAA), the odds of its skeletons staying in the closet are not what they were in the very recent past.
All told, this is an increasingly dangerous situation for Oregon that even in the best case scenario presents difficult-to-control dangers due to its prior attempts to brush off its relationship with Lyles as non-problematic. It is still at least possible that the relationship was, in fact, purely appropriate, but at this point the story is erupting with choking plumes of smoke, such that even if Oregon's claim of innocence on this particular matter is ultimately vindicated, there is now assured to be an intensified search for fire, which could very well lead to discoveries of misconduct -- perhaps wholly unrelated -- that carry substantial consequences of their own.
Again, though, I maintain that if I were a fan of Oregon football, much more frightening than the potential collateral damage is the increasingly ominous shape that this particular controversy is taking. If Oregon's on the up-and-up in this instance, it's entirely possible -- and perhaps probable -- that the tangential digging would lead nowhere interesting, the media would soon lose interest, and everyone would move on as the excitement of the 2011 season took hold.
But what if Oregon's guilty? What if, like Jim Tressel at Ohio State, they were guilty of misconduct with Will Lyles? What if the misconduct was relatively mild -- perhaps an inappropriate purchase of crap product from someone simply because he's friendly to the program, such charitable purchase not meant in any way to create an understanding that recruits were to be delivered? However partially defensible in an extremely limited, extremely questionable capacity, such a practice is at best unseemly, an obvious compliance problem, and an utterly reckless practice that invites huge trouble.
And if the misconduct was worse than that? If Oregon was buying a sham product with an implicit understanding that Lyles would say nice things to recruits about the Ducks? Slopping a bit of lipstick on the pig wouldn't change the fact that such conduct would be a clear, major, blatant recruiting violation. And if it were even worse than that, which it might well have been? If Oregon was simply funneling money to Lyles in an explicit, knowing, arranged agreement to trade cash for letters of intent? That's as flagrant and reprehensible a violation as it gets -- an embrace of the perverse ethics of the worst of the worst in the SEC. It's lawlessness no different than Barry Switzer's Oklahoma.
Once The Sweatervest Begins To Unravel...
I'm cynical enough to believe that with Nike's interest/investment in Oregon athletics the severity of the consequences it might face -- even in the worst of circumstances -- may somewhat be limited. But if I were a fan of the Ducks the two things that would worry me most right now are the way and the timing/atmosphere in which this story is unfolding. Although Oregon's response to this issue would have been entirely prudent and practical even two short years ago, today not only is that response not being taken at face value, but the insufficient explanation is as potentially explosive as the underlying issue itself.
Whether this is the beginning of a paradigm shift in compliance or a relatively short-lived uptick in vigilant regulation, the timing could not be worse for Oregon. And what would worry me most as a Ducks fan would be the steady drip of damning information, which at this point in time will increasingly amplify the scrutiny its program will face, consequently increasing the chances it will get busted for bad, penalty-producing behavior -- for this particular, as well as unrelated, misconduct.
But most troubling of all, Oregon's response is on the record. The most difficult aspect of regulating pay-for-play cheating is the challenge in finding proof. It's one thing to be accused of shady dealings with Will Lyles, and another to be in a position to be proved guilty of such malfeasance. A legal inquiry could get there with discovery and subpoenas, but the NCAA has nothing even remotely approximating such investigative powers.
And that's why today's news feels momentous. Because Oregon is on the record. They claimed to have paid for a legitimate product and we now know -- definitively -- that this product was literally worthless. Which means that they lied. We may not (yet) know -- definitively -- what, precisely, they were hiding, but we know that the explanation they offered was inadequate.
Sound familiar? Time will tell, but if I were a supporter of Oregon football, I'd be awfully concerned by today's news. It's starting to look like another slow unraveling of a scandal.
As Jim Tressel found out the hard way, once you lie, it's hard to stop the unraveling...
151 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
And, too, as former Rep. Anthony Weiner found out.
once you lie, it’s hard to stop the unraveling…
PB, outstanding IRS audit analogy which puts this story into perspective. I, too, will be interested in watching if this tip of the iceberg leads to Phil Knight. In my opinion, he has flaunted his financial support for this program in a manner that has seen many a wayward booster tumble.
Burnt Orange Nation
Follow Along on Twitter @TXStampede
The NCAA takes a lot of flak for not using its teeth to investigate and punish violations
However, as PB points out in this article, the teeth are false. The NCAA doesn’t have legal powers that the DOJ, the judicial system, and other actual governmental bodies have. Finding smoke is one thing; actually finding proof that would hold up against subsequent lawsuits in response to a perceived heavy and haphazard hand is another. I can’t help but wish there were a way to lower the bar so that the NCAA could investigate and punish more authoritatively. Maybe there is such a way, but my mind’s a blank.
Does anyone think Mike Belotti might’ve seen all this coming, and that it might’ve had something to do with why he resigned as AD?
This is like O. Henry and Alanis Morrisette had a baby, and named it "This Exact Situation."
by burntorangehorn on Jun 22, 2011 7:25 AM CDT reply actions
Mike Bellotti was forced out as AD
the new University president wanted an experienced administrator in that position
--Dave
Addicted to Quack, your friendly, neighborhood Oregon Ducks blog
$25,000
That’s a lot of money, enough to catch the eye of an auditor. Being a Watergate baby, my instinct is to follow the money. Did some office of the University authorize this expenditure? What kind of account did it come from? Where did the money come from? Pull those threads, and who know what you’ll find.
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. If they get mad, you're a mile away AND you have their shoes.
I appreciate the objective nature this thread hsa for the most part
and I am certainly not trying to troll or anything, but our athletic department is independent of the university itself, aside from sharing licensing revenue pretty much. This money came from the athletic department, not the university itself.
The O is the new U
The money "came from" Phil Knight . . . errr, Oregon's illustrious football tradition and boosters.
Mike Belloti spent over a decade building a decent program and then bailed on it in March of 2009 just before Oregon starts contending for national prominence. Makes me go “hmmmmmmmmmm”.
…aaaaand now we’re talking about things about which we have no idea. This is devolving really quickly. It’s a shame too, this started as an intelligent discussion about the issue. You clearly have no idea of any of the goings-on regarding Mike Bellotti or Phil Knight’s influence here; just espousing the same, tired, thinly-veiled jealousy that everyone else does.
The only reason any of you are mad is because we’re taking—no, FINDING—some of the best talent in your state. Our 3- and 4-star recruits out of Texas are more successful at Oregon than your 5-star ones are at UT, and that just chaps your asses, doesn’t it? Just go ahead and admit that so we can continue. Because I don’t see LSU fans up in arms, nor West Virginia, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Utah, whoever. The only fanbases that are rabid about this are Oregon State and Texas. Makes me go “hmmmmmmmmmm”.
The O is the new U
Click on some of the links in this very article
The authors of this blog were all over tOSU and Jim Tressel well before the seriousness of those infractions came to light as well. This is not a “hey, you’re stealing our recruits” type of fanbase. I completely understand your defensive nature, considering the implications, but no, we’re not jealous of the players you got from Texas. Your comment just comes across as a petulant child pointing the finger away from where it needs to be pointed.
by GoHorns on Jun 22, 2011 8:06 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Because the authors of this site
report on issues of general interest to college football fans as well as Longhorn news. Tressel, the BCS, the shadiness of the Fiesta Bowl, the sanctions on UNC and USC, etc. It’s news. No one is “mad” at Oregon or has it out for them here. Most of us cheered for you in the national championship game, actually, and you can look at the game thread from then to see that. If there was any sort of bitterness over recruits, that would have come out then, because people talk about all kinds of ridiculous reasons for hating/loving a school in these threads. You’re really seeing something that is not there. At all.
Whoever said laughter is the best medicine had clearly never tasted Scotch.
by LonghornEm on Jun 22, 2011 8:32 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
This issue is begin discussed on here because it is college football news during the offseason
no other reason.
Now, if you want to discuss if Recruitocosm’s hard-on for Will Lyles is related to the fact that Lache Seastrunk chose Oregon instead of texas, you might have something there.
Has Oregon beaten Texas out for anyone Texas has offered?
I’m unable to remember any, although it could be a lapse.
This is like O. Henry and Alanis Morrisette had a baby, and named it "This Exact Situation."
by burntorangehorn on Jun 23, 2011 7:04 AM CDT up reply actions
I don't believe any players from the state
have committed to Oregon over Texas over the last several years. Seastrunk doesn’t count because his offer wasn’t committable much past his junior season.
Follow me on Twitter: @GhostofBigRoy
Burnt Orange Nation
by Wescott Eberts (GoBR) on Jun 23, 2011 1:40 PM CDT up reply actions
That's what I was thinking
Except I wasn’t sure that Seastrunk even made it far enough to receive an offer.
This is like O. Henry and Alanis Morrisette had a baby, and named it "This Exact Situation."
by burntorangehorn on Jun 23, 2011 6:46 PM CDT up reply actions
"NCAA doesn’t have legal powers ..."
While it’s true the NCAA doesn’t have the legal powers of government isn’t it also true they don’t have the burden to prove their case as does the government in a court of law?
Has the NCAA been sued by a member for penalties issued? If so, was the school successful? Certainly that’s possible & perhaps probable for Oregon/Knight in todays legal environment but I seem to recall reading about a ruling that being part of the NCAA was voluntary & that impacted the final result.
Outside of Knightschool, the school that would seem to legaly contest any penalty was SMU circa 1980’s.
PB, as always, terrific, concise & logical article. Thank you.
I think heavier-handed and more frequent penalties would probably bring about more anti-trust problems for the NCAA
And that’s one of a number of reasons I think they’ve kept penalties against the haves so minimal.
This is like O. Henry and Alanis Morrisette had a baby, and named it "This Exact Situation."
by burntorangehorn on Jun 22, 2011 8:29 AM CDT up reply actions
It’s well established precedent that the NCAA’s tribunals have lower standards for proof than courts of law do. Take the Reggie Bush case.
The heavy penalties on USC largely stem from the NCAA’s stance that former RB coach Todd McNair “knew or should have known” about the benefits Bush was getting and did nothing in response. The evidence towards this consisted of 1) records showing that McNair and benefit provider Lloyd Lake had phone conversations, 2) a photo with both men in it, and 3) the testimony of Lake. There was no paper trail proving that McNair knew though, so in a theoretical courtroom USC could have gotten off by discrediting the witness (I think, correct me if I’m wrong, lawyer-folk). It didn’t work with the NCAA.
As for suing the NCAA over rulings, it’s happened before. Jerry Tarkanian sued the NCAA successfully in claiming he didn’t get due process, which led to changes in the disciplinary process. Rick Neuheisel sued the NCAA over its investigation of him at Washington, and with evidence appearing to be in Neuheisel’s favor, the NCAA settled.
McNair himself has sued the NCAA for essentially convicting him without enough proof, so that would be the case to watch in this regard. I don’t think any schools have sued the NCAA over rulings though.
Team Speed Kills -- SBNation's SEC Blog
If you're so inclined, follow me @Year2
If I am not mistaken the NCAA
said that McNair should have known something was up when Bush rolls up to school in a $60,000 vehicle when his mom did not make $40,000 a year and then he changed his legal address to a posh neighborhood. As his position coach, McNair spent many many many hours with Bush and should have seen the hand writting on the wall. In stead of seeking out the fishy smell, he went ostrich.
by RQ on Jun 22, 2011 9:16 AM CDT up reply actions
The car that Reggie Bush has was a 1996 Chevy Impala ( Blue Book about $17,000 at the time ) and the house that his parents were living in was anything but posh it was a very nice tract home in San Diego ( in most parts of the country $700,000 buys a mansion but sadly not in SoCal ). For what Reggie and his parents did USC deserved sanctions but to get more than what Alabama got for paying Albert Means $400,000 was wrong. In closing, even though SC lost to the Longhorns in that epic game at the Rose Bowl the Texas fans were very classy and I had fun hangin with them before and even after the game!! By the way when you come out to the Rose Bowl this year Beat ucla!!
And if it were just the Reggie Bush problem
USC probably wouldn’t have been hit so hard. However, USC’s transgressions spanned multiple sports, which led to the reasonable conclusion that there was a Lack of Institutional Control over the behavior of the coaches and the boosters.
My opinion is entirely based on hearsay, but
Years ago I had a long discussion with an old seasoned trial attorney who had been a NCAA athlete of some reknown at his alma mater and was helping his school prepare for, cope with and bring forth evidence concerning a NCAA investigation at his college. He said it was one of the most frustrating expereiences he had ever been through.
He told me that you can totally throw out the rules of evidence. Once the NCAA got it in its mind that an infraction might have been committed, any witness which might be brought to them by the college to support a finding of ‘no infraction’ was deemed to be testimony from an unreliable source; while any testimony, even if hearsay, was readily accepted by the NCAA as quite damning.
Granted (a) some of the collegiate powers in Texas which might have had some stroke with the NCAA would have enjoyed seeing penalties against this college, (b) this was a long time ago, and © the NCAA does not have formal governmental powers, however, since the NCAA is cop, prosecutor, judge and appeals court, they can throw the book at a school which the NCAA believes is not adequtely assisting in the investigation.
Pardon the typos. Where is the splchec?
All new states are infested, more or less, by a class of noisy, second-rate men who are always in favor of rash and extreme measures, but Texas was absolutely overrun by such men. --Sam Houston--
They claimed to have paid for a legitimate product and we now know — definitively — that this product was literally worthless. Which means that they lied. We may not (yet) know — definitively — what, precisely, they were hiding, but we know that the explanation they offered was inadequate.
Really? When did this happen? I’ve followed the situation pretty closely, and I have not heard one peep of the University claiming this. Sure, a lot of Duck fans have seemed to assume this, but that is a far different accusation. After the story initially broke, here is the main statement from the UO.
UO spokesman Dave Williford did not dispute that Oregon made the payments, but said both had been vetted by the school’s compliance office and were within NCAA rules.
While this could very well be splitting hairs, Oregon never claimed that they received a “legitimate product,” just that their payments were permissible by NCAA rules.
Is this all shady as hell? Oh yeah. But you can’t lie about something when you don’t open your mouth.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
They don't have to say it
They don’t have to issue a statement, in fact their “statements” much like Tressels, would be the last thing I would believe. There were invoices with the $25,000 dollars attaching it to a product. The description doesn’t match the actual product, yet it was paid for.
Then Lyles gave interviews explaining what he did for Oregon for that money. Barely any of it is true.
you can’t lie about something when you don’t open your mouth.
You may be right in this argument. Unfortunately it may not matter for Oregon because the important part is this
Is this all shady as hell? Oh yeah.
"A lot of people look for the easy way to do anything, in swimming there is no easy way." - Eddie Reese
That’s all true. My main point is that, at least to me (and yeah, I’m going to be biased) it doesn’t feel like the Tressel thing, which seemed to be what Peter was saying. In Tressel’s case, there was active cover up and denial. Oregon has claimed they haven’t broken any NCAA violations, and that’s it. They have seemingly made no effort to deny or cover anything up. And with how they’ve handled the media (with a big middle finger, as they’ve always done), they’ve done themselves no favors.
There are definitely reasons to be worried as an Oregon fan, and Peter gives many good reasons regarding the current NCAA environment. But I would not call this situation “unravelling.” Well, not yet anyways.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
Thanks for the clarification
I do think it might be splitting hairs a bit, but if Oregon’s been completely silent about this, then this would seem to come down to whether or not they did anything wrong. If not, perhaps this fizzles. But like I said, the spotlight’s now on them.
You ain't hurt...
I would agree
Right now. I think it might be a bit early to call it “unraveling”. But then Peter knows more than me.
But the spotlight Peter mentions, if it illuminates other instances of shady practice with all of those other Lyles kids (Wallace, etc) and an investigation takes off, it could get there.
Oregon has, like you said, not been pushed to the point with questions, where they were forced to either lie, or admit wrong-doing. But if this persists, they might get to that point soon. And given the time that has passed, even if they come clean with any wrong-doing now, it will seem (like Tressel) as too little, too late.
"A lot of people look for the easy way to do anything, in swimming there is no easy way." - Eddie Reese
I think you definitely can assume a lie here
they said it was determined to be in compliance with NCAA rules. I would assume that the NCAA rules do not prohibit purchasing recruiting information from these types of people. I am skeptical that it is complying with NCAA rules to purchase a player indirectly or purchase a person to recruit actively for your school and influence a player’s decision. It is clear they did not actually purchase legitimate recruiting info so that begs the question of what it was that they were purchasing. Given the insane rules they have regarding contact with players, I seriously doubt it is ok to purchase someone’s services when those services entail actively convincing a player to go somewhere. Even if no money went to the recruits, I don’t think you can purchase agents in this way to act for you and likely exceed the permissible contact rules
I like orange and I am a dog person
if you look at the phone records
the amount of calls Kelly made to Lyles is ridiculous. If he called any recruit this much he would be in deep trouble and I find it hard to believe that this wasn’t a way around contact rules (at least). I am not sure what they could have been talking about all those times, but it is clear it wasn’t about the awesome info they just purchased
I like orange and I am a dog person
Chip Kelly only called Lyles once, for 3 minutes.
http://www.registerguard.com/web/sports/26427040-41/lyles-kelly-text-sent-coaches.html.csp
The O is the new U
what about all this?
http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://media.oregonlive.com/ducks_impact/other/kelly-campbell-phone-records.xls.pdf
I like orange and I am a dog person
Gary Campbell = Chip Kelly?
And Gary Campbell is our running backs coach…he had every right, and a professional interest in speaking to those who know recruits the best to determine their character and other facets that don’t show up on Scouts and Rivals, no?
The O is the new U
i think you miss my point
you are only focusing on one part. even so, i am not sure that it matters which coach was calling. It might even be worse that numerous coaches may be involved. If they were speaking to him about who the best recruits are, then why would they think he has this information based on the product that they got?
It is obvious all of your coaches had a professional interest in learning about recruits, but if they were just using him as a go between and paying him for that service that is a problem
I like orange and I am a dog person
Agreed.
I just fail to see any direct link. Granted, I’m not looking too hard either haha, but I am being objective about the matter, and looking at it through a legal scope.
In today’s world of USC, Ohio State, North Carolina, Alabama, Auburn, et al. and all their violations, a one-time payment of $25,000 is kind of a pimple on an elephant’s ass, don’t you think?
There just isn’t a way to show the money was for anything but a purely innocuous intent.
The O is the new U
yeah it is pretty ridiculous right now with everything going on
but this would be the worst time to say “oh they didn’t do anything quite as bad” so we will let it slide. That would also be a terrible reason for indifference.
Given the paper trail and NCAA’s worry that FB could turn into BB recruiting, I would be very surprised if they didn’t want to try and make an example here. At the very least it will lead to change in the rules to close any loophole like with Cam Newton.
I like orange and I am a dog person
even without the calls
the paying for influence over players cannot be legit. You may call it “access,” but that is really semantics to me. I would assume UO has greater access/influence over its HS players and coaches even without anything improper going on, but paying someone for that effect is certainly a different matter
I like orange and I am a dog person
Frankly
The fact that a Texas blog is so up-in-arms over this just tells me their stranglehold on Texas recruits and their use of high school coaches as street agents are both becoming obsolete…there’s no other reason. We don’t play each other anytime soon or recently, except in the 2000 Holiday Bowl. We’re not in the same conference, and I don’t think either school plans on going to the Alamo or Holiday Bowl anytime soon.
The O is the new U
haha I am definitely much more of a TN fan so please don't think poorly of them based on anything you may disagree with about what I am saying
I think you are assuming too much there though. There are a hundred reasons why Texas fans could be up in arms about this. One of the big ones would be Lyles’s comments about Texas and their use of “street agents.” I am not sure how much credibility anything he says has at this point, but come on. I am sure tons of Texas high school coaches grew up loving Texas and like being able to see their kids playing with that jersey on. I don’t think you can assume that Texas is giving improper benefits for their influence based on anything out there yet. I see no evidence that Texas is paying coaches money to get their kids to go to Texas, but there is at least some evidence that Oregon did this
I like orange and I am a dog person
Oh no
I am no way suggesting Texas pays HS coaches or anything like that. Sorry if it seemed that way. It’s just that it’s more of a de facto thing. Mack Brown does visit high schools and consult coaches though, so could that not be classified as an in-kind payment? (I’m using dumb-ass NCAA logic here of course, which is unfortunately what we all have to go on)
The O is the new U
BTW
Went to Knoxville last year and had a blast…you guys do college football right.
The O is the new U
Thanks, I met a lot of your fans and you seem to have an awesome fanbase
the great experiences definitely led me to pull for/pay attention to Oregon a lot more. I would agree that we do most of football right, but we seriously need to work on how we end games
I like orange and I am a dog person
You're equating
Mack Brown coming in and being friendly and remember the coach’s wife and kids’ names to paying $25,000 for a worthless list of outdated football players, the overwhelming majority of which were not even good enough to play Div II college football? Yeah, that makes sense. Real objective.
Misinformation
Since we don’t give out 32 scholarships a year I’m not seeing that stranglehold. Sure we pick ‘em but they don’t all come here, never have. The guys you have pulled from TX were not high on our lists. Personally you can have all the Lache Seastrunks from Texas that you want. Good luck with that and whatever it brings you.
As for using high school coaches for street agents….geez. I guess that implies compensation of some sort. I hope you’re not relying on Lyles’ statements to make this accusation. Do you or Lyles have any evidence? No, because we don’t have to pay Texas HS coaches.
We have a 12th man and he's Bryan Harsin
by SpiritOfTheFedora on Jun 22, 2011 3:11 PM CDT up reply actions
Stuff like this gets pretty tiresome
The fact that a Texas blog is so up-in-arms over this just tells me their stranglehold on Texas recruits and their use of high school coaches as street agents are both becoming obsolete…there’s no other reason. We don’t play each other anytime soon or recently, except in the 2000 Holiday Bowl. We’re not in the same conference, and I don’t think either school plans on going to the Alamo or Holiday Bowl anytime soon.
Or maybe, the members of this Texas blog actually give a rip on what’s going on in a sport they love and has nothing to do with our personal feelings towards Oregon or anyone else. Heck, let’s try this:
“The fact that an Oregon fan comes to a Texas blog so up-in-arms over the fact that his football program is being critiqued tells me that they know something is amiss and are scared… there’s no other reason.”
Now, how was that?
by TheElusiveShadow on Jun 22, 2011 4:25 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
This.
Follow me on Twitter: @GhostofBigRoy
Burnt Orange Nation
by Wescott Eberts (GoBR) on Jun 22, 2011 10:35 PM CDT up reply actions
UT and the entire State of Texas should be upset
Lyles is a Texas-based trainer, gave his interview to a Houston radio station, reportedly offered Texas A&M Patrick Peterson if they would pay $80K and allegedly sent a top Texas prospect packing to Oregon in the incident under investigation. Lyles has also been linked to other top prospects in Texas who have wound up in Oregon. If the top athletes in Oregon were being shipped out to Texas because Texas colleges were paying street agents in Oregon wouldn’t you be a bit peeved.
Pardon the typos. Where is the splchec?
All new states are infested, more or less, by a class of noisy, second-rate men who are always in favor of rash and extreme measures, but Texas was absolutely overrun by such men. --Sam Houston--
even if UO has not said it got a great product
Lyles, the other party to that transaction, has used those exact words. So this does not really help the impressions there
I like orange and I am a dog person
The interesting thing about the lack of an Oregon reaction
is that the school hasn’t tried to distance itself from Lyles. Unless there was a ton of video provided, the school didn’t even get close to $25,000 worth of information from Lyles because what the school released that he did provide was a load of garbage that wasn’t worth a hundred bucks.
I find it hard to believe that the school doesn’t have any idea where the videos he supposedly provided went. Depending on what Oregon has or possibly will tell the NCAA about how they ended up not knowing which videos Lyles sent along could be dangerous for the Ducks. Bu that either hasn’t happened or went on behind closed doors.
The bottom line is that the school clearly either got something from Lyles that wasn’t a part of the crap pile they are on record as receiving or they flat-out got ripped off. If just making a mistake was a supportable position, it would have made sense for the university to have already taken it. Perhaps Oregon is still trying to figure out how to spin this publicly or where it goes from here in the media..
Ultimately, though, what happens behind the scenes with the NCAA is what is important and there’s clearly some meat here, which is the main point PB was making.
Follow me on Twitter: @GhostofBigRoy
Burnt Orange Nation
by Wescott Eberts (GoBR) on Jun 22, 2011 10:33 PM CDT up reply actions
They actually did distance themselves from Lyles back in March. If I recall, I believe there were rumors that they would not be continuing their services with him, they were not satisfied with what they got, and Kelly wanted to distance the program from him quickly. Or something like that. I don’t remember, and I’m too tired/lazy to find a link now.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-S-N-A-R-K-Y"
"If Lache Seastrunk is the POTG against LSU, I will formally quit ATQ." - Axemen23 on 6/21/2011
They have 25,000 reasons to expect a legimite product
and I bet Mr Knight does not want his money paying for garbage like that.
If I claim to the IRS a 1 million purchase of beach front property in Nebraska from a known Russian mobster, I would have an easier time explaining that than Oregon paying for this.
by RQ on Jun 22, 2011 9:46 AM CDT up reply actions
Biased party chiming in!
Oregon likely didn’t pay for a product, at least not in the common sense. Oregon paid for access, especially access to recruits from Texas.
Programs that are isolated from from the fertile states that produce high caliber recruits, like Oregon, rely on services to gain access to recruits and information regarding them. It’s the only way they can have annual success at a national level in the modern game.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-S-N-A-R-K-Y"
"If Lache Seastrunk is the POTG against LSU, I will formally quit ATQ." - Axemen23 on 6/21/2011
Really? In the electronic world, Oregon is isolated? BS
At the least, there are 10 schools in the state you could play. That’s the traditional way to get access and be noticed.
(TX, A&M, Tech, Baylor, TCU, SMU, Houston, Rice, UTEP, UTSA)
Except when we try and recruit players and Texas high school football coaches tell Oregon recruiters to go screw themselves, a la Adrian Peterson. That’s why we need access.
The O is the new U
Fuck a duck, bubba.
I bet if you were to gain, say, $100k for each recruit you contacted, you’d find a way.
HS coaches only have control when the player is at school for a given number of hours. HS coaches may have some school bias but most are merely protective. In the case of AP, everyone knew he was going one of two places, neither being Oregon.
So you might have to do a little detective work, check out FaceBook or the local phone book or any other clue you could ferret out. You act like a blind man in a desert (no offense to desert dwelling blind persons).
And don’t give me beery sobs and sloppy generalizations that HS football coaches have something against Oregon. Virtually all of them are happy to see their players get attention from major schools. It is generally in their best interest to do so in terms of their own coaching credentials. Sure, some may have a bias toward their alma mater but the coaches don’t make the final decisions; that is up to the kids and their parents/caretakers.
I'm not referring to information isolation, but recruitment isolation due to distance - which one of the largest determining factors for recruits.
In a 2009 study by Sports Illustrated, the average distance a University of Texas player was from the university was 191 miles. The average distance for Oregon was 843 miles.
This is a clear advantage that Oregon cannot have.
An SI study of 2004-08 recruiting data for the 65 BCS-conference schools and Notre Dame revealed that programs which draw at least 50 percent of their players from within 200 miles or from within their home state stand a far better chance of winning consistently than those that did not. Of the nine schools that won 50 or more games from 2004-08, seven signed more than half their recruits during that span from within their state or from within 200 miles of campus: Texas (93.2% from in-state, 71.8 percent from within 200 miles), USC (72.0, 61.0), Georgia (63.6, 70.1), Florida (62.3, 47.9), Ohio State (55.8, 66.3), Virginia Tech (54.3, 44.0) and LSU (50.4, 56.5). Oklahoma barely missed the cut, with 49.1 percent from within 200 miles.
Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/andy_staples/01/20/recruiting/index.html#ixzz1Q3E8fyyj
It goes on to say:
Those data complement the findings of a trio of economists who, in 2005, designed a model to predict the college choices of sought-after recruits. The model created by Mike DuMond, Allen Lynch and Jennifer Platania — rabid college football fans who met while Ph D. candidates at Florida State — found that among heavily recruited players choosing from among only BCS-conference schools, distance from home is the most important factor in a recruit’s choice.
Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/andy_staples/01/20/recruiting/index.html#ixzz1Q3HLj4pK
Programs that have had great traditional success, are more often located in areas with the best recruits. USC, Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Florida State, Miami, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Michigan (via State of Ohio). This isn’t just for exposure. Imagine the Texas coaching staff would have to fly to New York, Chicago and Seattle several times a year to have house-visits, high school contact, and in-person scouting for the vast majority of of their potential star athletes. This is what it is like for Oregon. To do so just to figure out who their targets are? I couldn’t even imagine the fiscal and chronological costs to accomplish that.
Traditional methods can allow maybe for triennial or quadrennial success for distant programs like Oregon. It can also better to be lucky than good, but I’d rather be good than lucky.
Without Oregon’s national-scale recruiting, including their recruiting in Texas, Oregon will never go to the National Championship – this includes this last year’s appearance.
I understand the Texan pride. I’ve been to Texas on several occasions. Everyone in the country knows football is an established religion in the state. High schools in Texas have previously not allowed any player access to Oregon recruiters. I believe this is within their right and capability. For Oregon’s future and success, this is not an acceptable answer, which is why they have hooked up with recruiting agencies. They are able to get what Oregon recruiters are unable to get. This isn’t an attempt to give defense for Lyles, street agents, or Oregon’s use for them, but an answer to why Oregon has found the need to use them.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-S-N-A-R-K-Y"
"If Lache Seastrunk is the POTG against LSU, I will formally quit ATQ." - Axemen23 on 6/21/2011
Notre Dame recruits all over the country because they don't have one market
where they have strong recruits. I don’t think it fits on your list.
Whoever said laughter is the best medicine had clearly never tasted Scotch.
Just to be clear
are you saying it is OK for schools in remote places to pay people to influence recruits? I don’t think anyone is saying that you can’t pay for recruiting information
I like orange and I am a dog person
so you're saying there is a hierarchy
and that there is clear chain of command for college recruiting and that God clearly sits at the top of that chain of command because everyone else is "on down".
"If winning isn't everything, why do they keep score?" - Vince Lombardi
I don't make the rules
I was just fortunate enough to have Irish-Presbyterian blood, which allowed me to praise the glory of God whilst wearing burnt orange, in front of the GODzillatron instead of Touchdown Jesus.
I assume you are talking to me...
In hopes to avoid a semantic argument, I will say influencing a recruit is dangerous (In the sense of flirting with disaster) but okay as long as it is based on balanced information. Paying someone to steer a recruit towards a school is not okay regardless of their location.
Steering a recruit, outside of some few exceptions, is a violation itself and is probably the most unenforced bylaw, regardless of any payments.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-S-N-A-R-K-Y"
"If Lache Seastrunk is the POTG against LSU, I will formally quit ATQ." - Axemen23 on 6/21/2011
I am not sure how you influence based on balanced information
please explain what this means.
I like orange and I am a dog person
True enough, but they are still located near Ohio, which is a leading state in recruiting. Though, your point is valid either way, though because of their fairly unique situation.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-S-N-A-R-K-Y"
"If Lache Seastrunk is the POTG against LSU, I will formally quit ATQ." - Axemen23 on 6/21/2011
Right, but Ohio usually only makes up a maybe a quarter of their recruiting class
And that’s an improvement since Brian Kelly got there.
Whoever said laughter is the best medicine had clearly never tasted Scotch.
If Oregon wants access to that information
there are services that are far more legitimate than Lyles that can provide it. And, in my understanding, Oregon uses them, too. Now, if you want players closely associated with someone who is known is pretty much every circle as a street agent, then you pay $25 large for “access” to several specific players that happened to end up there after. In Lache Seastrunk’s case, it was a pretty shady recruitment. If you go back into the archives here, you’ll see that there was a lot of talk about what was going on long before Oregon came heavily into the equation.
Add in LaMichael James and the relationship between Kelly/Anthony Wallace/Baron Flenory and there starts to be a pattern.
Follow me on Twitter: @GhostofBigRoy
Burnt Orange Nation
by Wescott Eberts (GoBR) on Jun 22, 2011 10:38 PM CDT up reply actions
I recall reading conversations and articles about Seastunk before he signed his LOI, and many of them were based from Texas sites. Burnt Orange Nation may have been one of them. It feels like ages ago to me.
I know Oregon used Elite Scouting Service, a more… reputable company. When Lyles was gone from there, apparently Oregon followed. I don’t really know all the details about that at the moment though.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-S-N-A-R-K-Y"
"If Lache Seastrunk is the POTG against LSU, I will formally quit ATQ." - Axemen23 on 6/21/2011
From Andy Staples:
“Why did Lyles wait more than 10 months after Oregon’s check arrived to send the first batch of material? According to emails released by the school, the Louisiana and Texas spreadsheets arrived Feb. 17, 2011. The North Carolina and South Carolina spreadsheets arrived the morning of March 3, 2011, only hours before multiple news outlets published stories detailing the $25,000 payment.”
"If winning isn't everything, why do they keep score?" - Vince Lombardi
Hadn't seen that.
Makes it look more like Lyles sent that information simply to cover his tracks.
Follow me on Twitter: @GhostofBigRoy
Burnt Orange Nation
by Wescott Eberts (GoBR) on Jun 22, 2011 10:40 PM CDT up reply actions
texas
I have seen multiple people on here and other texas sites say texas needs to look at recruiting the west, cali in particular. If something happens here I think this is a huge opportunity for texas. Usc and possible ducks on probation. That is the 2 lead dogs in recruiting out there. If you are going to make in roads this the time. Not to mention playing in LA this year. Not on topic, but my thots on how it couyld be relevant to horns fans
by codaxx on Jun 22, 2011 10:22 AM CDT via mobile reply actions
Lyles blames Brown and Texas for his fall from grace. Neat guy.
Shelton: Do you think there are any scouting services that have ever been paid to influence a kid to go to Texas?
Lyles: I guarantee there’s been high school coaches who have. I don’t know about scouting services. I know they deal with a few scouting services themselves. They actually used to be a client of mine when I was with MSLSports.net in 2007.
And when I didn’t want to steer kids their way [to Texas] that’s when the relationship became strained. That’s when they [Texas] began the vendetta against me personally.
What we have here is a failure to execute.
With all due respect, if you don't think some Texas High School football coaches are equivalent to "street agents"...
College Park High School’s Richard Carson, president of the Greater Houston Football Coaches Association, said he expects the group’s board of directors to discuss the issue at its next meeting.
“We want to deal with college coaches, and they want to deal with us,” Carson said. “I’ve talked to college coaches from (Texas coach) Mack Brown on down.”
The hierarchy seems pretty clear.
To Alcohol: The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems!
I'm not exactly sure what you're getting at here
The quote is about high school coaches discussing street agents, not about high school coaches being equivalent to street agents. And what does his mention of Mack have to do with anything? It certainly wasn’t establishing an “heirarchy,” but merely that they’re discussing this with college coaches, and Mack is the most visible and well-known college coach in the state.
by TheElusiveShadow on Jun 22, 2011 11:12 AM CDT up reply actions
It seems to me
that the statement: “we want to deal with college coaches, and they want to deal with us” is a pretty clear chain of command for college recruiting in Texas.
Mack Brown clearly sits at the top of that chain of command because everyone else is “on down”.
Therefore, when a third party starts recruiting in that area and recruits begin to leave the state, the status quo is threatened.
The reason Oregon started using these types of services is because when they tried to recruit Adrian Peterson his high school refused to send any video or contact information because, as they were told, “he’s not leaving Texas”. (Of course, he ended up at OK).
Pretty well known that UT likes to keep a tight lid on in-state talent and I recall a story that Mack Brown was pretty upset that JaQuizz Rogers was overlooked at ended up at OSU. Now Oregon is mining Texas soil with LaMichael James, Darron Thomas, Seastrunk, Josh Huff….
It seems entirely plausible to me that UT wants to stop this and the way to do that is to go after the third parties that make it possible by vilifying them and labeling them “street agents”.
To Alcohol: The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems!
you better start prepping now for the LSAT
it looks like the LR & RC sections might give you some trouble.
"If winning isn't everything, why do they keep score?" - Vince Lombardi
No need for insults...
I have family in Austin who are all big time Texas fans. I know the passion. Just as I’m willing to accept that Oregon is playing in a grey area to gain access to Texas recruits, I think it’s equally easy to see that UT wants to put a stop to it.
To Alcohol: The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems!
"On down" doesn't establish any heirarchy
For that to hold, that would mean the other college coaches here—Sherman, Patterson, and Tubberville for starters—would also answer to Mack. Obviously, they don’t. You could even argue that for some of them, having “third parties” (which, from what I can tell, you simply define as entities from out of the state) compete with UT is a good thing, since some top prospects who would otherwise go to UT may choose to leave the state.
Of course Mack wants to keep in-state talent. That’s a no brainer. That doesn’t mean he’s trying to go on a smear campaign illegitimiately to combat kids leaving. That’s a huge leap of logic, nor does it explain the fact that talented kids have left the state of Texas since, well, forever. Could it be that this guy is actually a crook and Texas is calling a spade a spade?
I am not familiar with Oregon’s past struggles in recruiting in Texas, but paying $25,000 for useless scouting information so that someone can help you get a kid, which may have happened here, is not a “gray” area. That would be, if true, a flat violation, and nowhere in the ballpark of college coaches developing relationships with high school coaches, which any smart coach would do.
by TheElusiveShadow on Jun 22, 2011 11:40 AM CDT up reply actions
The quote from the Greater Houston Football Coaches Association referred to above
implies that those high school coaches consider Mack Brown the top. I’m not saying other college coaches in Texas answer to him. Clearly they don’t.
Lyles says Mack Brown is out to get him because of his recruiting. Is that true? I don’t know, but I’m not willing to simply discount it. I believe a major college football program that just started its own TV station with ESPN might be willing to do most anything to help keep its place. I can think of only a few programs with as much pressure to win as UT.
As for the grey area…Stewart Mandel at SI summed it up best I think:
And as for proving authoritatively that Oregon paid for Seastrunk — unless one of the parties involved testifies as such (not likely), that’s a hefty accusation to levy solely because "this looks fishy." Ultimately, it may be that Kelly successfully did what a lot of competitive coaches do: found a loophole and exploited it.
I’m not comfortable with Oregon’s dealings with Lyles. We’ve had two violations in 60 years and I want a clean program. That said, the correct course of action is to stay quiet and let the NCAA do its thing.
To Alcohol: The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems!
He likely said "from Mack Brown on down [the list]" because Mack Brown is the head of the main school in Texas and is the most well know.
Sure – he implied that the coaches at SMU, UH, Texas State, and UT- San Antonio are less noteworthy than Mack Brown – but to do otherwise would be kind of odd.
I imagine a high school coach in Oregon would think the Chip Kelly was the coach worth mentioning – instead of Nigel Burton.
by Texas Wahoo on Jun 22, 2011 12:28 PM CDT up reply actions
Beergut will disagree with your premise that “Brown is the head of the main school in Texas and is the most well know.”
Prepare for the Aggie meltdown.
What we have here is a failure to execute.
by dimecoverage on Jun 22, 2011 12:56 PM CDT up reply actions
You guys will get a kick out of this:
Job posting for teaching A&M athletes how to read. Seriously.
The O is the new U
The link took me to the employment page but not the job listing. Please, please, please tell me how to find this gem. We need off-season entertainment.
What we have here is a failure to execute.
by dimecoverage on Jun 22, 2011 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions
Thanks.
What we have here is a failure to execute.
by dimecoverage on Jun 22, 2011 7:03 PM CDT up reply actions
No worries bro. Hope you guys can use that to full effect in your off-season fun. Only 73 more days…
The O is the new U
No worries sis?
"A lot of people look for the easy way to do anything, in swimming there is no easy way." - Eddie Reese
You're talking to a lady there, bro.
Whoever said laughter is the best medicine had clearly never tasted Scotch.
hmmmmm, a job opening for teaching dyslexic athletes
the horror, the horror
Looks to me like you need help with reading comprehension…..
Here are some links to an article about this story and a part of one of the stories appears below
http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/43401/more-documents-more-questions-for-uo
http://www.registerguard.com/web/sports/26432982-41/oregon-lyles-kids-ducks-films.html.csp
The gist from the Register-Guard:
The newest information from Lyles that Oregon put out came in the form of spreadsheets that listed high school sophomores in North and South Carolina, juniors in Louisiana and "east Texas" and sophomores in the east Texas area. Thus, none of the latest recruits listed could be considered as potential members of the 2011 recruiting class, the purported basis of a "2011 National Package" of recruits that Oregon paid $25,000 for with a check dated March 30, 2010, to Lyles. The lists of underclassmen also were delivered to the UO almost a year after that payment to Lyles.
Pardon the typos. Where is the splchec?
All new states are infested, more or less, by a class of noisy, second-rate men who are always in favor of rash and extreme measures, but Texas was absolutely overrun by such men. --Sam Houston--
PB: You really nail it when you equate
The Oregon newspapers with the Columbus Dispatch doing legwork on Tresselgate.
The Eugene paper and those in Portland are much more into investigative work than the Columbus, newspaper. These reporters and editors are already dealing with the Lyles info like a puppy with a new stuffed animal. (I spent time in Portland this week, and the Lyles Report was treated like Watergate-Washington Post, circa 1973.)
I’ll repeat something I’ve posted several times since January: As time passes, TCU’s 2010 team is going to look awfully good when compared to Auburn and Oregon.
Over 300 Recruits a year in Texas
& Lyles & others say Mack/UT don’t want them to leave the state. Max schollies one can give a year is 25; eight to ten programs in state. I didn’t major in math but I don’t think those numbers work.
In 2012 class, there are 781 from Texas.
32 or 4% of them are 4 stars or higher.
211 of 27% of them are 3 stars or higher.
I think it’s safe to say Texas, as well as the majority of programs, would want as many of those 32 players as they can get.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-S-N-A-R-K-Y"
"If Lache Seastrunk is the POTG against LSU, I will formally quit ATQ." - Axemen23 on 6/21/2011
Naturally.
I was just pointing out that while there may be tons of recruit talent in Texas, the top ranked talent that the big programs gun for make up a very small minority of the total number of recruits.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-S-N-A-R-K-Y"
"If Lache Seastrunk is the POTG against LSU, I will formally quit ATQ." - Axemen23 on 6/21/2011
TO BE FAIR
High school coaches in Texas effectively act as street agents for University of Texas football, and while there is no documented evidence of this, I defy all of you to suggest otherwise. If there are folks within the state that kindly remind recruits—wink, nudge—that there are, in fact, other schools aside from the University of Texas, then I’m inclined to be indifferent toward it since it merely levels the recruiting playing field in Texas.
Don’t get me wrong, I love the Texas program and I am also not suggesting that paying recruits is cool, but it wouldn’t exactly be providing a school like Oregon an advantage in Texas recruiting—UT still rules the roost.
Plus, given that LaMichael James was only a 3-star recruit, I doubt anybody would pay $25,000 for his signature (in hindsight, of course, but at the time NO). And $25,000 for Seastrunk is too little below his “value”, I would think.
To prove such a violation would involve connecting the dots, and while said dots could very well form a straight line, they appear to be on different, adjacent sheets of paper. I feel like Stuart Mandel’s take is best, and most reasonable: Chip Kelly seems to have found a loophole and has exploited it.
The O is the new U
Bad Analogy
Texas high school coaches are not being paid by UT or any other organization to steer players to Texas. As a street agent, Lyles was paid to steer a player to Oregon.
Now, no one is naive enough to think that Texas high school coaches don’t recommend UT, A&M, etc., but the vast majority of the time I believe that is done with the best interests of the player in mind or due to their own personal biases. Believe it or not, there are high schools in the state where players seem to be specifically steered away from UT due to personal bias by some member of the schools staff.
As a street agent, Lyles was paid to steer a player to Oregon.
Shouldn’t we let the facts get out before we jump to conclusions? I have just as much proof that UT pays high school coaches to steer recruits to Texas as you do Willy Lyles to Oregon, and that is to say, none.
The O is the new U
Listen to the radio much lately?
You should.
I wish I could play little league now... I'd kick some fuckin' ass.
Never heard of him
We’ve had Lyles’ essential admittance in a Houston radio interview playing here for the past 2 days.
Jason Whitlock also steered things in this direction initially. That is a national radio show.
If you honestly are going to play like Lyles’ work with Oregon was legit, I have multiple bridges to sell you.
I wish I could play little league now... I'd kick some fuckin' ass.
He’s like the Glen Beck of SEC radio…if that makes sense. Err, well his topics and callers are reminiscent.
I don’t claim it was legit; clearly it was not. But I also do not believe we broke any NCAA rules expressly. Rules that may be implemented after this ordeal, sure, but ex post facto my friend.
I personally think this was another Oregon innovation, that’s all.
The O is the new U
Finebaum is terrible, I went to law school at Alabama and it drove me insane how many people worshipped him
It was a sad day when he got expanded to national coverage
I like orange and I am a dog person
there is definitely a difference between no evidence and circumstantial evidence
I like orange and I am a dog person
True.
But neither proves guilt, complicity, or any other of these words being prematurely thrown around.
Don’t get me wrong, I hate this cloud over us and if it meant not getting Seastrunk to avoid it then so be it (he’s not proven anything…yet), but it is what it is, and obviously we’re doing fairly well right now so the spotlight is on us, but I think people are being awfully quick and vicious in jumping on the dog-pile
The O is the new U
It proves it to me
And the NCAA doesn’t have to “prove” it to the legal standard. If they believe the proof or the lack of cooperation, then you get penalized. Just wait and see.
Good thing you’re not a judge. Otherwise our legal system would be akin to the witch-burnings of old.
The O is the new U
FYI: In our legal system
There is no difference in weight between circumstantial evidence and direct evidence. That is the law. So circumstantial evidence can in fact prove guilt.
Also, NCAA evidence standards are far below those of the legal system.
Whoever said laughter is the best medicine had clearly never tasted Scotch.
Wait.
So you are “effectively” calling Texas high school coaches street agents, but you don’t want to call the street agent a street agent? Call him what he is, bro. Will Lyles is a street agent. Say it with me. Everyone in Texas knows this. Seriously. I cover recruiting, I know people who cover recruiting. Will Lyles is a street agent. Texas high school football coaches are not. Ridiculous.
Follow me on Twitter: @GhostofBigRoy
Burnt Orange Nation
by Wescott Eberts (GoBR) on Jun 22, 2011 10:46 PM CDT up reply actions
There are undoubtedly some Texas HS coaches who are given to speaking positively of UT to their players
But that really appears to be a credit to the recruiting network, strategy, and personal relationships Mack and company have built. In other words, I agree: the coaches aren’t de facto street agents.
This is like O. Henry and Alanis Morrisette had a baby, and named it "This Exact Situation."
by burntorangehorn on Jun 23, 2011 7:15 AM CDT up reply actions
You cannot prove the nonexistence of something
Are you really studying to be a lawyer? This is basic logic at the high school level.
You have made an assertion, specifically that “High school coaches in Texas effectively act as street agents for University of Texas football, and while there is no documented evidence of this, I defy all of you to suggest otherwise.”
The burden is upon YOU to prove its existence, not upon US to prove its nonexistence.
I’m not studying to be a lawyer…what made you posit such?
I guess I’m mostly confused why all the butthurt. Is it because we took LMJ, Seastrunk, Thomas, Huff, etc. from “your” turf?
I drew the comparison with high school coaches because there exists every bit as much PROOF of that as there does of any Oregon wrongdoing…you’re basing your butthurt on assumptions, hearsay, and inference, not any direct link. The fact is, it will be impossible to prove the allegations you’re leveling against a school you have no real reason to be mad at…except unless you’re mad we’re making fairly heavy inroads into Texas recruiting.
The O is the new U
The “butthurt” is about the fact that your school, among others, funds scum like Will Lyles in Texas. I won’t make claims one way or the other about whether or not Oregon paid for Seastrunk, but I will brook no opposition to that fact that Lyles is scum and you guys subsidize his activity.
Personally, I don’t mind at all that you guys took a few players out of the state. If talented players don’t want to stay here, I’d much rather them go to Pac 10 country than Oklahoma.
Which brings me to another point: what about Oklahoma? If Texas high school coaches are informal street agents for the University, how does Oklahoma operate so well within our borders? They’ve dominated the Big 12 for the last decade, largely with Texas talent. We have a lot more reason to fuck Oklahoma over than Oregon and yet, they seem to do pretty well and they don’t do business with Lyles and his ilk.
Now, I’m not arguing that many Texas high school coaches don’t look favorably on UT, they do. But that’s true of any flagship university in its home state. In fact, I would argue Texas’ in-state pull is nothing compared to some SEC schools; LSU’s stranglehold on Louisiana, for example.
I guess what I’m saying is I don’t think your implied stance that Oregon was just trying to level the playing field in Texas holds much water. You want Texas recruits? Don’t pay assholes like Lyles; let your coaching staff come do the legwork themselves. You don’t like the in-state bias in Texas? Then recruit in goddamn Oregon.
I wasn’t suggesting that Oregon was trying to level the playing field in Texas recruiting, I was suggesting that, de facto, this is what Will Lyles does, and that it doesn’t seem to bug anyone else except for the Longhorn fans.
Of course Oklahoma can make inroads in Texas…it’s just geography. Come on now.
I have no problem with the in-state bias in Texas, because we can clearly circumvent that.
The O is the new U
There is proof that oregon paid for out-dated recruiting information, so one of 2 things has happend:
A. It was to cover up something insideous
B. It was a gross misallocation of public funds
Happy to hear which you believe it was
by codaxx on Jun 22, 2011 5:47 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
It doesn’t matter which it was (and also, it should be known that our athletic department is self-sufficient and, though our new basketball arena was financed primarily with state bonds, we do not get state money allocated to it, nor does the university funnel money into it). No matter what you might infer, you can’t show a direct link. The burden of proof is on the accuser in this country…now I am well-versed in Texas history and know how fiercely independent the republic is, but surely you all adhere to that principle as well there too, right?
The O is the new U
You forget U of Oregon is a state institution. So any waste if funds is wasting tax payer money. What the hell does Texas principles have to do with oregon? First this isn’t a puvlic court case. 2ndly, you didn’t answer my question. Why did oregon pay 25k to a man for what has proven to be worthless information?
by codaxx on Jun 22, 2011 7:18 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
You seem to neglect, or conveniently forget, that our athletic department has cooperated fully in this and has not lied one iota. Plus, I mean, $25,000? We find that in the Casanova Center couches up here. If we were buying recruits we would be doing WAY better in that regard.
The O is the new U
You conveniently forget that this isn’t the legal system and the burden of proof is much lower. Rightfully so, since they have no subpeona power.Now it is 25k isn’t much money. So you are saying if it was 100k then it is a crime. Way better? Gone from nowhere to beating USC in some rexruiting battles. Your last two arguments are just grasping at straws
by codaxx on Jun 22, 2011 7:13 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
The burden is upon YOU to prove its existence, not upon US to prove its nonexistence.
Go ahead and do that for any NCAA violation you clearly suggest we committed. I’ll wait.
The O is the new U
Wow
There are almost 100 comments on this thread and nearly a third of them are from you…. and you are calling longhorn fans “butthurt”?
They paid a shady person $25K for some shady stuff, and now your are under scrutiny, If more shady stuff is turned up it could be trouble for Oregon.
The main reason we have interest in this is because that shady guy lives in our backyard, and we would rather him not get paid.
"A lot of people look for the easy way to do anything, in swimming there is no easy way." - Eddie Reese
So you don't like Lyles operating in your backyard?
I think that sums it up pretty nicely.
To Alcohol: The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems!
I agree.
I don’t like him getting paid to influence teenagers. Maybe you do? If so, a group of us could get him a plane ticket to Oregon. He can manipulate your kids for money.
He would still be $hitty, but at least there wouldn’t be the proximity.
"A lot of people look for the easy way to do anything, in swimming there is no easy way." - Eddie Reese
I have a technical question for those more familar with NCAA rules
Assume a school is using a paid freelance recruiter. What are the rules that govern this relationship? What are the rules that govern the freelance recruiter’s contact and interaction with recruits?
If Lyle is a paid freelance recruiter, is he bound by the same rules that apply to assistant coaches or other university reps?
if you mean he is a recruiter as in he is recruiting for the school and influencing the recruit's choice
then they a re a booster and it is very bad. If they are just giving information like the rivals site then I don’t think there is much to worry about
I like orange and I am a dog person
If they are paid $25K for info.,
and that info. is outdated by 1-3 years, then more questions need to be asked. At best, you guys got fleeced. At worst, the invoice says you got the worthless product when you actually bought the prospect.
haha I am not an Oregon fan. I agree that there is too much smoke here
I like how the UO people keeping changing the word “influence” to “access.” It sounds a lot better that way and it lets them justify the payment even if they got no actual recruiting information.
I like orange and I am a dog person
Again, I don’t really want to get into a semantic argument. But there are definitive differences between “influence” and “access”.
Much like people will call someone arrested a “criminal” when they are formally referred to as the “accused”.
We know Lyles provided “access”, we assume he provided “influence”.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-S-N-A-R-K-Y"
"If Lache Seastrunk is the POTG against LSU, I will formally quit ATQ." - Axemen23 on 6/21/2011
That's a false dichotomy
The whole point of a street agent is to provide “access” to one party (i.e. the school) while exerting “influence” over another (i.e. the recruit). Lyles is a street agent. Oregon paid him for his street agent services. As I said above, the only real question is whether Lyles fleeced UO or not.
I would be interested to know what your definition of access is
I know you keep saying you want to avoid a semantic argument but I think the whole flaw in your reasoning comes down to that. I can’t think of any way it would make sense the way it keeps getting used.
I was under the impression he was selling “information” about top recruits that he was familiar with. “Access” is just code word for influence because they can still send him letters and call his house. These recruits are not in the witness protection program. The “legitimate” service these guys are supposed to provide is evaluating players that coaches just don’t have the time to come watch. Given how many HS players graduate every year they need these services.
Purchasing someone’s influence over a certain recruit is completely different than purchasing someone’s observations and knowledge about a ton of recruits. Oregon clearly only did one of these things (at most).
To be honest your criminal example is kind of poor and I am not really sure how those things are similar at all
I like orange and I am a dog person
When I say “access”, I mean the ability to have contact with recruits in the region, and become aware of the athletes in the region. As silly as it may sound, this has not always been obtainable for Oregon, even in recent history. To send a recruit letters and to call his house, you need their address and phone numbers.
While they may not be in the witness protection program, high schools, which to my knowledge is typically where that information is gathered from, have been unwilling to share information that with schools like Oregon in the past. The larger the talent, the more tight-lipped the schools have been. I don’t know why Oregon went with Lyles and not with a different service.
My criminal example was purely metaphorical to try and illustrate the difference between an assumption and a formality. Clearly it was a failed metaphor. (To my defense, I worked a 15 hour day, and I’m mentally exhausted!)
To me, when I read “influence” I make the assumption that they are referring to a person influencing (or steering) a recruit’s decision towards a particular school. This is based on circumstantial-at-best information, and not on any direct evidence. This is sufficient for many, and it may be sufficient for the NCAA.
Personally, I try to be a skeptic of anything that is not direct in all aspects. I’ve been lead astray on faith alone too many times.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-S-N-A-R-K-Y"
"If Lache Seastrunk is the POTG against LSU, I will formally quit ATQ." - Axemen23 on 6/21/2011
Indeed. And the questions are being asked. If the NCAA has any competence at all, they asked that question back in March. (The information was sent to the NCAA back then, it’s been made public recently via Freedom of Information Act)
I sure hope this isn’t a loophole or whatever, but I was looking at some of the documents, and I was noticing that the only detail of services to be rendered from payment was a national package of film and highlights. Supposedly this gave access to an online library thought hat is not detailed. Just a statement that has previously been commented on.I’ve been hoping someone with more contractual law could interpret the required obligations from a PO only transaction.From what I can tell, I see no contractual obligation for Lyles to even provide the out of date booklet with the recruitment information. That is somewhat disturbing to myself.
I am not an expert or a person qualified for assessing the value of services, but $25k for videos and highlights does sound like a lot of money.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-S-N-A-R-K-Y"
"If Lache Seastrunk is the POTG against LSU, I will formally quit ATQ." - Axemen23 on 6/21/2011
True, but that isn’t enough because all I really have is a differential in pricing. That doesn’t show what the differential is with the service or product compared to their pricing.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-S-N-A-R-K-Y"
"If Lache Seastrunk is the POTG against LSU, I will formally quit ATQ." - Axemen23 on 6/21/2011
haha the product is exactly what is at issue though
the pricing is roughly 5x times what his services were being sold to others for and I think more than 5x times what other recruiting services charged (and they gave good info). This extreme discrepancy makes you ask what exactly the service or product was
I like orange and I am a dog person
I don’t disagree. In fact, that’s somewhat my point.
Just because Oregon spent 5x times more, doesn’t MEAN they didn’t get 5x the service or product.
I have four different prices. What Oregon paid, what Cal paid, what LSU paid, and what is more typical for scouting services.
I have a part of one product and I agree with the assessment that what has been illustrated is likely not a sufficient answer to the cost. But I’m not an expert in this field, so it’s only my opinion which isn’t even worth a 1998 US Nickle.
I’m not trying to say or imply that I have my head in the sand. By all means, this is something the NCAA should be required to look into, and likely needs to make some changes.
I’m saying that when hearsay, “he said, she said”, and circumstantial evidence is removed and you are only left with empirical data where no assumptions are made, there isn’t much remaining.
I’m not making excuses for Oregon or Lyles.
If violations were made by Oregon, then they should have consequences.
If no violations were made possible via a loophole, rules and procedure need to be changed.
If no violations were made, and Oregon was just made a sucker, Oregon has inherent image consequences and the NCAA should look into scouting services regardless.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-S-N-A-R-K-Y"
"If Lache Seastrunk is the POTG against LSU, I will formally quit ATQ." - Axemen23 on 6/21/2011
what I think you're missing is
Here in Texas, we’ve known about Will Lyles for years.
We’ve been discussing Will Lyles and his sleaze on the Longhorn internet for a long time before yahoo sports made his name public.
Lyles being dirty is a known fact and is treated as fact on Longhorn websites. No benefit of the doubt to be found in these parts because that ship has sailed.
I’m not missing that. It is way newer to me, but I understand that folks in Texas have known Lyles for a long time. I first heard about Lyles from UT blogs while I was looking up who this Seastrunk guy was.
I saw the term “street agent” but the only people I saw referring to him that way were UT blogs and fans. As far as I knew, that was like calling democrats “dirty liberal baby killers”.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-S-N-A-R-K-Y"
"If Lache Seastrunk is the POTG against LSU, I will formally quit ATQ." - Axemen23 on 6/21/2011
I am not sure why you think circumstantial evidence is unimportant
Just because it is not direct does not make it any less valuable. The only difference is that if there is direct evidence, then there is no arguing with it. As someone else pointed out, there is no greater weight given to direct evidence in our legal system, and the NCAA does not even have to use legal standards. Your implicit assumption that circumstantial evidence can just be thrown out is unreasonable.
Even in criminal law where the burden is beyond a reasonable doubt, jurors are allowed to make inferences based on someone paying too much. Like in a conspiracy where a hotel owner rents to prostitutes. If the owner makes any more than he would off of a normal customer, then he can be convicted of conspiracy to commit prostitution. There is no question that you can infer a lot from the grossly inflated price he paid. I have read several places that this is the most by far that any school has paid someone like Lyles. You cannot simply ignore this. Either he gave the MOST AMAZING report ever, or something shady was going on. Given the portion that has been made public, I find it hard to believe that anything legitimate he provided was truly worth such a ridiculous sum
I like orange and I am a dog person
I just read
the “2010 scouting report” in question.
http://www.everydayshouldbesaturday.com/2011/6/22/2238112/complete-scouting-servicess-2010-national-scouting-package#storyjump
I don’t see how Peter can imply Oregon did not get value for money. This is clearly important information on players not covered by other scouting services.
.
by Longhorn in Canada on Jun 23, 2011 1:31 PM CDT reply actions
Exactly
I don’t think we’ve heard the last quack from this duck, either. As Butch Davis is finding out at North Carolina, you need to be careful with whom you associate.
It wouldn’t have taken a huge investigation on Oregon’s part to find out what kind of person they were getting involved with, just eyes not deliberately shut. Which begs the question, were their eyes shut, or did they know exactly what they were getting? Seems like the latter is the more likely.
.
by Longhorn in Canada on Jun 23, 2011 4:33 PM CDT up reply actions
The comments to this post are hilarious and ridiculous
The Duck fans remind me of reading the posts from the tOSU fans in the days/weeks leading up to the beginning of tatoo gate and end of Tressel gate. It is so damn obvious to any person with half an ounce of sense that tOSU paid $25,000 for the commit and delivery of Lyle’s “housemate” -the running back from Temple-who is a punk and does not deserve to be named. Yes, Texas is starting to report opportunists like Lyles who are profiteering off of players, jeopardizing players’ eligibility, and taking advantage of folks that may not know the ins and outs. I hope we keep doing it. Schools like UO should stop this nonsense and abide by the rules and not pander to scum like Lyles.
These street agent scum need to get run out of the game. Screw the Will Lyles of the world. He is not licensed. He is not getting a schollie. He doesn’t give a shit about these kids once he gets his check. It is terrible that UO would even participate in it.
Lyles is a NOBODY. He is not a coach. He is not a legit scouting service. It is obvious what happened. He moved in like a tick on a skunk (and even into his freaking house—which is just gross). and the skunk rb is such a punk that he whored himself out for it. I have no idea how this is anything diffrent than Lyles being an “agent.” The skunk knew exactly what was going on….loving it, playing it, wearing his USC gear with UT gear and LSU gear at 7 on 7 games. He is a db and a half. Even his friend from LSU got sick of his crap. We revoked his offer and didn’t want him near us.
The fact that the skunk running back was flying to Auburn every weekend and bringing fellow players like Ahmad Dixon with him is even more ironic and telling about the two disgusting teams that managed to play for the title last year. 2010 is the year of the scuz.. But, at least AU and UO cheated to get ahead. Poor old tOSU was cheating left and right and still not in the MNC.
That said, the NCAA is actually the most to blame for this b.s. They are incompetent, and complete and total hypocrites.
The NCAA said that USC had an increased duty to monitor its high profile athlete like Bush and banned USC from future bowl games. (A few noticeable years late) Yet, the NCAA was clearly informed about Pryor and the tatoo gang, yet they gave them a pass and allowed them to play in the Tostito Bowl to line their own pockets. That has to be one of the most ridiculous rulings ever. It was absurd.
So, with Nike’s money and backing there is no reason whatsoever to think that the NCAA will take any serious action against UO. Clearly the payments to Lyle to land his “roomate” ICK (if they were both adults and boyfriends I wouldn’t care, but Lyles was a grown adult man and he was living and shraing a room with a HS student – that is not appropriate-no way, no how). That was some creepy as shit. If any duck or goose thinks it wasn’t about money they are just, well, an Ostrich.
The 2010 BCS Championship is a tarnished game of cheaters.
And the damn Sooners call the Longhorns “arrogant” because we don’t do the hard sell to land a recuirt like the skunk. That is so stupid. Thank GOD that Mack knows our program will do just fine without breaking basic rules like paying to land a recruit. Screw them,
Mack Brown has stated that he does not recruit and offer kids if he doesn’t meet with their parent or guardian. Thank GOD. That is a good rule.
The skunk apparently only had a g’ma helping him out which may explain why a pro con man like Lyles was able to pimp him and also why the skunk made such an ass out of himself during the Auburn “Tiger Prowl,” which was also a NCAA violation. But, the skunk is street smart. That kid knew/knows exactly what he was doing.
Don’t you know my name, biatchh??
Don't be such a baby.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Burnt Orange Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
