Next week Alabama school officials will meet with the Alabama High School Athletic Association to look into the issues surrounding Eric Bledsoe’s eligibility. Today, John Clay points out that just because the talk around Eric Bledsoe has slowed down, doesn’t mean there’s no need for concern.
I think Clay did a great job laying out the situation we find ourselves in. This is something we’ve discussed on “[URL=”http://www.nationofblue.com/morning-drive-episode-34-colin-cowherd-jamaal-magloire-mopeds-1407/?amp;=”]The Morning Drive[/URL]” and I know many UK fans refuse to acknowledge that UK could be in some serious trouble.
Below is an excerpt from the article, but before you read it, keep in mind that this is not a “Hate on UK” article. It just points out the facts surround the issue, and one of those is Calipari. We all love our coach, but as Clay put’s it, “your head would have to be buried deeply in blue sand” if you don’t recognize the possibility of UK being liable for playing a player that was ineligible.
[QUOTE]Oh, the jokes have already started. One example: Kentucky had so much fun celebrating 2,000 wins, it’ll get to do it again.
See, that’s the thing. It doesn’t matter that the NCAA has never implicated Calipari of any wrongdoing. There is an accumulating effect. What matters is that he is the only coach to have two Final Four trips from different schools “vacated” from the record books. Because of that, a sizable amount of the general public perceives the Kentucky coach to be operating on the dark side of the rules.
With perception comes scrutiny, something that was predicted when Calipari took the Kentucky job in the first place. In fact, many, myself included, argued the coach would know to mind his recruiting p’s and q’s given the program’s fishbowl aspect.
There wasn’t one red flag. There were a collection of red flags.
And how many times can Calipari say, “I didn’t know”?
Even if UK didn’t know what was going on, you have the Rose case in which the NCAA used “strict liability” to rule that Memphis, with Calipari as coach, was responsible for playing an ineligible player, and thus forced to “vacate” its 2007-08 season and Final Four.
We’re a long way from that at this point, but your head would have to be buried deeply in blue sand to deny at least the possibility of “strict liability” coming into play again.
[/QUOTE]You can read the [URL=”http://wstock.info/b/John-Clay-Recruiting-red-flags-and-Calipari-144894-url-aHR0cDovL3d3dy5rZW50dWNreS5jb20vMjAxMC8wNS8zMC8xMjg1MjQyL2pvaG4tY2xheS1hbGFybXMtcHJlY2VkZWQtYmxlZHNvZS5odG1s”]complete article here..[/URL]
In my opinion (and yes I know what that’s worth nothing 😉 ), Calipari is responsible because he’s the head coach.
Then you can look at Mitch Barnhart. He’s ultimately responsible because he knew the risk (and so did the rest of Big Blue Nation) when he hired Calipari. Therefore, he is responsible for ensuring that his employees do not put the University at risk.
If you’re in a leadership position at your job, and one of your employees does something that hurts the company, you’re ultimately responsible. Especially if you knew your employee has a history that could put the company at risk. Why would we treat this situation any different… Just saying.
