Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Kantar To Take Legal Action
Word on the street is that if Kantar is not granted his eligibility that he may pursue legal action against the NCAA. I have two thoughts on this. 1. He likely wont win against the NCAA. 2. I hope he does go through with it so that it somehow starts the fall of the NCAA. The 6 BCS conferences need to come together and start there own governing body to eliminate the NCAA and there shot form the hip decision making.
Monday, December 20, 2010
Enes Kantar
By now everybody in the Country is aware that Kentucky is waiting on the news from the NCAA on weather or not Enes Kantar is going to be allowed to play basketball this season. "FREE ENES" are the words in everybody's mouth. Even the Duke, Carolina loving Dick Vitale thinks that he should be freed. Well, so do I.
The Cam Newton situation has changed the game as far as Kentucky is concerned. I guess they are going to go with the approach that the elder Kantar made all of the decisions and that Enes had no ideal what was going on because he was a kid. Common sense tells me that the elder Kantar most likely did make all of the decisions, but I am not naive enough to think that Enes knew nothing of what was going on in his life. Same goes for Cam Newton, I am sure he new what his Dad was doing the whole time. Does this mean that they shouldn't be allowed to play college sports. NO!
One thing people tend to forget about college athletes is that they are just kids. They are easily convinced to do the wrong thing. How hard would it be to have money put in your face and turn it down. Now imagine having money put in your face, and your Mom and Dad are struggling to make ends meet. This is the situation that 65% of college athletes face. Most come from poor neighborhoods and are very susceptible to taking money. People pray on them. So for me it is kind of hard to get mad at a kid for taking money when his family is struggling.
Back to the Kantar situation.The NCAA is a flawed business. On one hand they will let Josh Shelby play because he was able to pay back all of the money that he took from an acquaintance of Carmelo Anthony. In my mind this is much more serious then the Kantar situation. Selby took money knowing he was doing the wrong thing, this would mean he had the intent to be a professional, according to the NCAA. However as long as Shelby paid back the money, he would only get a 9 game suspension and a slap on the hand.
Kantar is offered a 1.5 million dollar a year contract, not once, but twice, and the Kantar family turned it down so that he would be eligible to play college basketball in the states. So Kantar has the intent to be a Amateur. The NCAA says, that what matters is weather or not you had the intent to be an amateur. Sounds to me that Kantar had the intent and Shelby did not. (Although I still think Shelby should be allowed to play.)
So my question is, If Shelby can pay back the money he took, why can't Kantar. What makes him different then Shelby, or Cam Newton for that matter.
The Cam Newton situation has changed the game as far as Kentucky is concerned. I guess they are going to go with the approach that the elder Kantar made all of the decisions and that Enes had no ideal what was going on because he was a kid. Common sense tells me that the elder Kantar most likely did make all of the decisions, but I am not naive enough to think that Enes knew nothing of what was going on in his life. Same goes for Cam Newton, I am sure he new what his Dad was doing the whole time. Does this mean that they shouldn't be allowed to play college sports. NO!
One thing people tend to forget about college athletes is that they are just kids. They are easily convinced to do the wrong thing. How hard would it be to have money put in your face and turn it down. Now imagine having money put in your face, and your Mom and Dad are struggling to make ends meet. This is the situation that 65% of college athletes face. Most come from poor neighborhoods and are very susceptible to taking money. People pray on them. So for me it is kind of hard to get mad at a kid for taking money when his family is struggling.
Back to the Kantar situation.The NCAA is a flawed business. On one hand they will let Josh Shelby play because he was able to pay back all of the money that he took from an acquaintance of Carmelo Anthony. In my mind this is much more serious then the Kantar situation. Selby took money knowing he was doing the wrong thing, this would mean he had the intent to be a professional, according to the NCAA. However as long as Shelby paid back the money, he would only get a 9 game suspension and a slap on the hand.
Kantar is offered a 1.5 million dollar a year contract, not once, but twice, and the Kantar family turned it down so that he would be eligible to play college basketball in the states. So Kantar has the intent to be a Amateur. The NCAA says, that what matters is weather or not you had the intent to be an amateur. Sounds to me that Kantar had the intent and Shelby did not. (Although I still think Shelby should be allowed to play.)
So my question is, If Shelby can pay back the money he took, why can't Kantar. What makes him different then Shelby, or Cam Newton for that matter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
