Originally Posted by
Dawgowar
And June 10th the COI hears cases. A possibility -
UNM may very well have sent their written response to the Committee. Just because they are releasing it, allegedly, on or about the 5th of June does not mean it has not been sent to the NCAA. The timeline is obviously vague. If the written response is in the COI's hands then the 10 June hearing is in play.
If the Bears are going to the 10 June COI then the NCAA drops the proverbial big one before fall semester.
If the written response is the only step taken on or about 5 June then barring another curveball they go in August. A third addendum, letter, whatever we are supposed to call it would be the only delay I can see at that point. Honestly, in terms of payback for our probation and to the rest of the conference this is a better timeline. It will guarantee another crap recruiting year. That means the two classes that will be the first post-probation leaders are going to be All-Amercian/Sunbelt/Conference USA talent. I would like that to be the condition of their program BEFORE sanctions bite. Transfers and penalties will do the rest.
From the time they launched on Jackie until Dan's second season we endured 8-9 bad years of football. Our actual penalties were 8 scholarship losses. (After Jackie's 3 last years of crap football due in some part top the UNM instigated NCAA visit) Yet because of Jackie's inability to attract good, law abiding, stable, talent, we suffered far greater damage than we needed to. Would be really nice to see UNM deal with a few extra years of the same. It would destroy them to sweat out beating Marshall or Wake Forrest for a player.
They have too much red in the ledger so to speak. We will succeed whether or not they go on probation. I just want the scales of completion balanced and their dishonesty publicly acknowledged AND for them to get the same 8-10 years of futility our fanbase had inflicted from them.
And as I always say - because they did it to themselves. 100% their own damn fault.