Morning Five: 09.20.10 Edition

Posted by rtmsf on September 20th, 2010

  1. Christmas in September?  Remember when Kansas forward Tyshawn Taylor was banned from The Facebook mid-season by Bill Self after a series of embarrassing screeds that put himself and the program in a bad light?  Well, he’s back.  Bill Self has allowed the talented but enigmatic guard back on the social networking medium (also on Twitter!), and America flutters in anticipation of what will happen next.  He says he’s grown up after several diarrhea of the mouth incidents last year and now “thinks about it” before putting something online.  Taylor has the skills to become a fantastic player at KU, but his immaturity and inconsistency has to date held him back; it’ll be interesting to track his social networking accounts throughout the next few months to get a sense as to his mood, as he doesn’t seem to be the kind of guy to handle adversity well.
  2. The Pittsburgh Panther team, from top to bottom, believes that they are on the verge of a special 2010-11 season in the Steel City.  And they might be right.  Although it’s true that, historically speaking, NBA-level talent almost unquestionably wins national championships, a team like Pitt can get to the Final Four with a bunch of really good college players.  With Ashton Gibbs, Brad Wanamaker and Gilbert Brown leading the way, Jamie Dixon’s team has plenty of those.
  3. More Bruce Pearl: Gary Parrish suggests that Pearl wasn’t necessarily acting out of turn in lying to the NCAA about hosting recruits at his home, but rather in choosing what would otherwise be a fairly minor issue over which to lie about.  In other words, when you’re going to lie to the NCAA — make it count (academic fraud, paying players, etc.).  Meanwhile, Gregg Doyel believes that the lie should cost Pearl his job at Tennessee, although it seemed that the target of his ire was more focused on UT athletic director Mike Hamilton than Pearl.  We’re of the opinion that Pearl should be heavily sanctioned here, but he shouldn’t lose his job over this.  This, of course, assumes that there isn’t more evidence of significant wrongdoing lurking around the corner.  But nobody asked, least of whom, Mike Hamilton.
  4. This article is a little old, but it represents a home run of a thought: Bob Knight (when not being roasted for charity) should use his loud mouth and irritable persona to get on the pulpit and clamor for changes impacting the betterment of the game of college basketball.  We don’t always agree with some of his tirades, but people will listen to what he has to say, and generally speaking, his heart is in the right place.  The game needs a saber-rattler-in-chief, and right now Knight is as good a candidate as any.
  5. Bobby Hurley may be broke, but he still knows a thing or two about the game of basketball.  He’s now helping his younger brother Danny rebuild Wagner College from the bottom up, as Seth Davis wrote about in a piece on Friday.  And bottom up is no exaggeration — Wagner was 5-26 last year and ranked in the bottom twenty teams in America in both KenPom and RPI.  The Hurley boys have their work cut out for them.
rtmsf (3954 Posts)

Share this story

3 responses to “Morning Five: 09.20.10 Edition”

  1. Matt B. says:

    Is Bobby Hurley himself actually broke? I know that his stable went bankrupt, but isn’t his personal wealth a separate issue? He would obviously lose whatever personal stake he had in the business, which could be a lot, but I don’t know. I would assume the same thing to be true with Laettner. Even if Shawne Merriman successfully sues Laettner’s company, I don’t think that he could touch Laettner’s Vitamin Water money. Do you guys have other knowledge of their personal situations, because I can’t find any.

  2. rtmsf says:

    Matt – it’s unclear whether the foreclosure of the Devil Eleven Farm in Florida was part of Hurley’s personal wealth or his business. All we know is that the article about it said that Hurley was being foreclosed upon and sued to pay off a $900k loan. Not his company. If we can take that at face value, it would be reasonable to assume he was in financial trouble; but only he knows for sure.

  3. Matt B. says:

    Thanks for the link. I thought it was like the Laettner and Davis case where the company was sued, but I guess the situations are different.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *