I've got to REACH for some sort of explanation in order to cope with some of the recent news surrounding UofL Basketball. Fuller's departure doesn't add up too much for the reasons David8577 stated in the comments to this thread here. Ditto the recruits leaving, seemingly since Fuller is leaving - in some cases immediately after RP chats with them - said by many (why leave the program because a measly recruiter is leaving?!).
Others have probably stated similar stuff elsewhere on the Chron - I'm still trying to get caught up after training where I couldn't access a computer or the Internet for several weeks, but anyway:
The circumstances behind the personnel leaving (namely fuller and the resulting recruits) almost makes me wonder if CRP found out about some shady tactics utilized in their recruitment and decided to find an easy way out for all involved and in a method that would not punish any involved - if at all possible. In some cases RP or others were listed as recruiters of one player or the other and several have hinted that there is a method to the madness that is RP talking to kids and them leaving - hinting that RP was making room for some stronger commitments from some stronger players and needing to make those scholarships available to better athletes. The latter just doesn't seem like the MO of RP. While the "easy way out" explanation I just proposed almost seems to me like a plausible explanation when NOTHING else does, I know its still far fetched, but bear with me...
If recruits were recruited by shady means do not play, there is no harm/no foul, correct? If Fuller - or any of the others whose positions were vacated for that matter - is no longer employed and is guilty of unethical behavior while at UofL but is no longer employed and had little to no impact on the program at all, there is no harm/no foul, correct? If those recruited right the wrong somehow before playing, then no harm/no foul, correct? This seems like an almost plausible explanation that if true might also cause no undue smudges/smears that would mar the Louisville brand. I know it's a stretch and all, but I'm at a loss for any other explanation.
I've recently learned RIC and all but if this "stretch" was actually similar to what might be going on, if none of the shadiness came to fruition, would UL be held accountable? Would these actions be better than self reporting and dealing with the consequences - even if none of the players played in a UL uniform or if they did, corrected any wrongdoing before playing? I don't know, but I'm trying to find some sort of explanation. I know from experience that 17-19 y/o kids are EASILY influenced but can also grow up and mature exponentially in a year - or possibly less. I'm not familiar at al with the intricacies or rules of recruiting either though - hence the "correct" questions. This was just something that was making me go HMMM. Would appreciate any clarification as well though too.