Fred Van Fleet named in Yahoo Investigation

[Stickboy46]

Not under today's rules.

You broke a rule. Stop trying to rationalize it.

If this spreadsheet from a 24 year old trying to impress his boss is true (nothing to indicate any money actually changing hands yet ) .. and it might end up being true. If it is proved true, then Van Vleet broke a rule yes. Nothing even hints at the fact that anyone on staff knew. The fact that the loans came during his senior year (4 years after he committed) seems to indicate he made a dumb choice on his own when he started getting NBA attention.

If so.. WSU should vacate any wins after he took the payment. That's the rules even though it's completely impossible to be enforced by the school without access to players and their parents bank accounts. But it's still the rules. Past that, unless there is proof that WSU knew or helped then there shouldn't be any repercussions to the program (minus the vacated wins)

[Khan4Cats]

Part of the equation is time frame. Did this benefit come during the season or after the season? From reading multiple articles, a number of these dinners/meals benefit violations may have occurred after the season. Still a violation, but not something that will result in win vacation/bans, etc.

Now Sean Miller......

[bleach]

I want the rules enforced as much as possible to keep the big money schools from that advantage. I do not see how a player getting a loan from an agent AFTER his playing days impacts anyone negatively is beyond me.

[sivert]

It depends on how widespread it is (and similar "loans") within an institution and how willing players are to express it to recruits. If it was standard practice for boosters to make those types of "loans" (I know- with FVV is was an agent, but it could be anyone) and players tell recruits, "Hey, when I have a good game, I get a 'loan.' It's pretty sweet. No guarantees, but I was told that when I came." Or "Hey, when your playing days are done, there will be 'appreciation.' We call them 'loans.' No guarantee and we don't talk about it but it's pretty sweet."
Those types of understandings would affect decisions. So no, I don't buy the "After playing days it doesn't matter idea."

[Stickboy46]

It depends on how widespread it is (and similar "loans") within an institution and how willing players are to express it to recruits. If it was standard practice for boosters to make those types of "loans" (I know- with FVV is was an agent, but it could be anyone) and players tell recruits, "Hey, when I have a good game, I get a 'loan.' It's pretty sweet. No guarantees, but I was told that when I came." Or "Hey, when your playing days are done, there will be 'appreciation.' We call them 'loans.' No guarantee and we don't talk about it but it's pretty sweet."
Those types of understandings would affect decisions. So no, I don't buy the "After playing days it doesn't matter idea."

Interesting scenario. I'm not sure I've ever heard about that scenario happening

[bleach]

It depends on how widespread it is (and similar "loans") within an institution and how willing players are to express it to recruits. If it was standard practice for boosters to make those types of "loans" (I know- with FVV is was an agent, but it could be anyone) and players tell recruits, "Hey, when I have a good game, I get a 'loan.' It's pretty sweet. No guarantees, but I was told that when I came." Or "Hey, when your playing days are done, there will be 'appreciation.' We call them 'loans.' No guarantee and we don't talk about it but it's pretty sweet."
Those types of understandings would affect decisions. So no, I don't buy the "After playing days it doesn't matter idea."

I did say AFTER his playing days. That kind of prohibits your scenario.