Duke's turn to get investigated?

[Russ Smith]

Yahoo broke the story. Lance Thomas, a starter on the 2010 national title team is being sued by a jeweler who specializes in high end bling for athletes. Seems in 2010, while a senior at Duke, Lance "bought" 100K worth of jewelry from the guy.

He made a 30K down payment, and got 67K of credit for the rest. he never paid the balance so the guy is suing him.

Duke fans so far are saying not against the rules to take a loan on future earnings potential(actually it IS against the rules Dukies), his parents are not poor(yeah I'm sure they felt after 4 tough years at Duke loaning him 30K to buy bling was a good idea), maybe a friend bought it for him or used his name like identity theft(yeah that's the ticket).

I have no idea what happened but the overwhelmingly obvious most likely one is the guy figured he'll make enough money as a pro to pay me back. And that my friends is an amateurism violation.

 

[Dback Jon]

Yup - saw that. Dookies need to go down.

 

[Southpaw]

Is it too late to investigate Duke for Carlos Boozer?

 

[Russ Smith]

Yup - saw that. Dookies need to go down.

I seriously doubt anything will happen there's plenty of ways a guy with reasonably well paid parents can spin it as a normal loan based on his parents earnigns even though it's clear the guy likes to sell to athletes.

About the only way I can see the NCAA coming down is if the guy tells them he made the deal based on Thomas telling him he'd pay it back when he turns pro.

 

[MigratingOsprey]

Which would be hard to do given the terms of the loan

1/3 down with the remaining 2/3 due within 15 days

the bigger question is how'd he get the initial $30k - if you're going to find the violation, that would be it ...... the hype of the loan is a bit irrational

 

[Russ Smith]

Which would be hard to do given the terms of the loan

1/3 down with the remaining 2/3 due within 15 days

the bigger question is how'd he get the initial $30k - if you're going to find the violation, that would be it ...... the hype of the loan is a bit irrational

Right but the guy waited nearly 2 years to sue Thomas so the counter argument would be he didn't really expect to get paid in full in 15 days he figured when the guy got pro basketball money he'd be repaid. When Thomas had played half a season in the NBA and still hadn't paid it off, he sued.

The reason for the loan mention is that the NCAA rule says if the student athlete gets benefits that aren't available to the typical student, it's a violation(or the student athletes family). In this case the argument is would a 21 year old unemployed Duke student be able to walk into the jeweler make a 30K downpayment and get 70K in credit? That would be up to the NCAA to determine. the standard answer might be yes, if the student was about to graduate into a lucrative field that would easily allow him to repay the loan. the problem is the NCAA doesn't allow future earnings to be the basis of a loan to a student athlete. They don't care if a Computer Science major gets a loan based on future earnings, they do care if a basketball player does.



one of the NC area papers has a story that basically says if Thomas, Duke and the jeweler just refuse to talk to the NCAA in 15 months the statute of limitations will run out on the violation. Not sure how that would work UNC got hit in part in football because people refused to talk to the NCAA so the NCAA said we're taking that as an admission of guilt.

NO idea how long such a lawsuit would take but one assumes the smart thing for Thomas to do is settle out of court and assume it will all be sealed so the NCAA can't have access to the information in the settlement.

 

[MigratingOsprey]

I understand the issue with the loan - but I don't think it's unreasonable for someone with $30k in cash to say they'll have another $70k shortly - doesn't have to be tied to future earnings, but it could have been tied to wherever that first 30k came from

also from what has been reported the store has a minimum of 25% of the total purchase value to be held when making a loan - they exceeded that standard in this case ...... think it's a long stretched out road to try to bind a violation to the loan itself

 

[Russ Smith]

I understand the issue with the loan - but I don't think it's unreasonable for someone with $30k in cash to say they'll have another $70k shortly - doesn't have to be tied to future earnings, but it could have been tied to wherever that first 30k came from

also from what has been reported the store has a minimum of 25% of the total purchase value to be held when making a loan - they exceeded that standard in this case ...... think it's a long stretched out road to try to bind a violation to the loan itself

OK I get your point.

I'm looking at it from the if he's just a random 21 year old that comes in with a 30K downpayment are they really going to assume he can get another 70K in 15 days?

The lawyer said something about if he came in on a motorcyle with tattered jeans no he probably doesn't get that loan. I guess the question is do they require him to provide some proof that he's a good loan risk or not. I don't honestly know.

The stuff Duke fans are saying about the parents could have loaned him the money or a wealthy uncle etc makes no sense, why wouldn't they just pay off the full amount rather than let him wait 2 years and get sued? If they're wealthy enough to give the kid 30K for a downpayment on bling why not buy the whole thing?

The whole thing makes no sense you assume there almost has to be more to it than we currently know.

 

[Gaddabout]

Can't we just put Duke on probation for having a student so dumb as to think 100k of jewelry was worth the time, effort, and money?

 

[Russ Smith]

Can't we just put Duke on probation for having a student so dumb as to think 100k of jewelry was worth the time, effort, and money?

Note I don't think Duke did anything wrong here although I do find it hard to believe that a guy spends 100K on bling and then doesn't show it off, that makes no sense. So someone had to have seen it, but I can believe none of the coaches saw it.

The whole issue here is did Duke play with a player who should have been ineligible after he got that deal, and if they did, do you vacate?

They didn't with Maggette becuase he was already in the NBA, and the NCAA said there was no reason for them to have known. But Maggette took 2K, not 70K and that was before Derrick Rose and the NCAA bringing up strict liability.

Memphis had a lot more reason to suspect Rose than Duke did Thomas but the strict liability set a precedent that could easily lead to the conclusion Thomas was ineligible.

 

[Russ Smith]

Lance Thomas settles out of court, no surprise.

And now it comes out 10 days after Duke won his senior year, he was sued for $825 for not paying rent. Seems the Duke fans saynig he could have easily had the 30K downpayment need to explain how he then couldn't pay his rent.

 

[MigratingOsprey]

saw the settlement, but don't think it changes a whole lot

as for the rent, maybe he spent it all on jewelry?

or it could be a situation where he was a crappy tenant and they were just trying to get him out - so when he came late (which would be plausible if he was not around due to the tournament) they decided to take action

kids that age aren't the most responsible - I had a good buddy (legitimately smart kid, ivy educated, now an attorney who at the time was working for a pretty well known group in NYC) - i mentioned how I was doing some online sports betting, nothing major but just making my sports packages more interesting ...... so he played a couple of NBA games - he made a decent sized wager on the mavericks and they lost ... so he was going to win it back by making a "safe" wager on the mavericks again - they were going to Denver (who was horrible), were big favorites and no way they'd drop consecutive games .......... he was going to make it safe by just playing the money line to recover his previous wager .... since it was a large spread he had to lay a significant amount to get back his prior

i had NBA league pass so I was watching the game - he was following it on the espn play by play thing ..... game went in to OT and he was freaking out ..... basically it was all of his living money for the next few months (his mid-town apartment was costing about $2,200 a month) ......... game was decided by a point and when it ended I gave him a call and made innocent comments like "well that was a sweat", "you still alive over there", etc ...... he flips out and starts screaming and swearing at me (not his personality at all) ....... he thought I was being a jerk crapping on him after taking a loss

in reality the mavericks won on a late bucket - however, the espn play by play didn't update that and it showed the score as final with denver still up by a point ... so he thought he lost, was crushed and then thought I was calling to give him crap

it cured him of wagering and ended up OK ........ but one missed shot and one of the more responsible, smart kids I know would have been finding a way to pay his rent and living expenses ....... although his dad was a Dr and could have helped out that wouldn't have been an option given how the money would have been lost

shoot, maybe Thomas was involved in gambling and that is how he came up with the initial amount and a couple bad beats are what kept him from coming up with the balance

could be a hundred different things - definitely worth looking into, but a bit early to draw anything substantial as far as conclusions

 

[Russ Smith]

saw the settlement, but don't think it changes a whole lot

as for the rent, maybe he spent it all on jewelry?

or it could be a situation where he was a crappy tenant and they were just trying to get him out - so when he came late (which would be plausible if he was not around due to the tournament) they decided to take action

kids that age aren't the most responsible - I had a good buddy (legitimately smart kid, ivy educated, now an attorney who at the time was working for a pretty well known group in NYC) - i mentioned how I was doing some online sports betting, nothing major but just making my sports packages more interesting ...... so he played a couple of NBA games - he made a decent sized wager on the mavericks and they lost ... so he was going to win it back by making a "safe" wager on the mavericks again - they were going to Denver (who was horrible), were big favorites and no way they'd drop consecutive games .......... he was going to make it safe by just playing the money line to recover his previous wager .... since it was a large spread he had to lay a significant amount to get back his prior

i had NBA league pass so I was watching the game - he was following it on the espn play by play thing ..... game went in to OT and he was freaking out ..... basically it was all of his living money for the next few months (his mid-town apartment was costing about $2,200 a month) ......... game was decided by a point and when it ended I gave him a call and made innocent comments like "well that was a sweat", "you still alive over there", etc ...... he flips out and starts screaming and swearing at me (not his personality at all) ....... he thought I was being a jerk crapping on him after taking a loss

in reality the mavericks won on a late bucket - however, the espn play by play didn't update that and it showed the score as final with denver still up by a point ... so he thought he lost, was crushed and then thought I was calling to give him crap

it cured him of wagering and ended up OK ........ but one missed shot and one of the more responsible, smart kids I know would have been finding a way to pay his rent and living expenses ....... although his dad was a Dr and could have helped out that wouldn't have been an option given how the money would have been lost

shoot, maybe Thomas was involved in gambling and that is how he came up with the initial amount and a couple bad beats are what kept him from coming up with the balance

could be a hundred different things - definitely worth looking into, but a bit early to draw anything substantial as far as conclusions

Sorry I didn't explain better. The same Duke fans were saying over and over that Thomas has a wealthy uncle who ran his whole recruitment and probably gave him the 30K(Jeff Goodman wrote it in a story I assume that's where Dukies got it from).

So now we have wealthy uncle gives him 30K but then lets his nephew face not one but 2 lawsuits for failing to pay, one of them for a paltry $825 when he has already loaned him 30K?


I was just poking holes in the prevailing Duke fan spin on why it was perfectly reasonable for him to have been able to come up with 30K. If he had that kind of money readily available in Dec, why couldn't he get 825 bucks in April?

I still say it's because the guy never expected him to pay back the money in 15 days he knew all along it would take longer, until Thomas made money playing pro ball.

 

[MigratingOsprey]

There could be a hundred reasons though of why he missed his payment and why the landlord moved quickly that could have zero to do with available finances

Maybe he just vacated on bad terms and didn't want to pay the guy due to some personal dispute

I wouldn't tie too much into those two issues

Even if he did have some strong family money behind him it doesn't mean he would necessarily reach out in every instance or maybe he didn't see a lawsuit coming over a rent dispute given that the amount wasn't that large

college athletes do goofy things