SEC West Hot Seat Rankings

[Statecoachingblows**]

Freeze is named directly in a level 1 infraction and there are 3 more level 1s under freeze's watch. The ucla assistant was named in a level 2 and got a show cause. If freeze doesn't get a show cause, i would file a lawsuit against the NCAA if I were the ucla assistant

UCLA: Offensive line / associate head coach Adrian Klemm has received a two-year show-cause and UCLA was fined $5,000 due to Klemm paying for two prospects to receive private training, the NCAA announced. That’s in addition to self-imposed recruiting penalties and a two-game suspension that took effect last year. Klemm remains on staff as OL coach, but UCLA must submit a plan for compliance to the Committee on Infractions.

How the hell does he stay on staff with a show cause? doesnt that defeat the purpose?

[msstate7]

Oh I certainly agree he deserves one. But giving a head coach in the SEC a show cause vs. an assistant will require much more balls on behalf of the NCAA. Freeze would definitely be the highest profile coach to ever receive that level of reprimand from the NCAA, even moreso than Pearl for sure.

Which is exactly why I think the NCAA does it. The NCAA needs to send a message and hitting an sec team is the perfect opportunity. And let's face it, om (we're in same boat) isn't an sec team that the sec office is going to go fully to bat for. Oh and the sec lost slive, so who knows how much influence left with him

[HSVDawg]

Which is exactly why I think the NCAA does it. The NCAA needs to send a message and hitting an sec team is the perfect opportunity. And let's face it, om (we're in same boat) isn't an sec team that the sec office is going to go fully to bat for. Oh and the sec lost slive, so who knows how much influence left with him

I can certainly see that side of it. But as odd as it sounds, I can almost see other league coaches and maybe even Sankey lobbying behind the scenes against a show cause due to the precedent it would set. Because if you take an honest look, nobody's house is 100% in order in the SEC. And giving the NCAA that kind of power to singlehandedly dismantle a program might be a shaky proposition and give a lot of coaches an uneasy feeling just because they could also get hit in the future on things where they truly don't know what all is going on.

To me what it boils down to is how much they can tie from the Tunsil texts back to Freeze. If they can show beyond reasonable doubt that the head coach was complicit in arranged payments to players, then I don't see any way they can get around it. But just the situation with the booster on the visit might not be enough. But this is the NCAA we are talking about, so who really knows either way.

[Lumpy Chucklelips]

I can certainly see that side of it. But as odd as it sounds, I can almost see other league coaches and maybe even Sankey lobbying behind the scenes against a show cause due to the precedent it would set. Because if you take an honest look, nobody's house is 100% in order in the SEC. And giving the NCAA that kind of power to singlehandedly dismantle a program might be a shaky proposition and give a lot of coaches an uneasy feeling just because they could also get hit in the future on things where they truly don't know what all is going on.

To me what it boils down to is how much they can tie from the Tunsil texts back to Freeze. If they can show beyond reasonable doubt that the head coach was complicit in arranged payments to players, then I don't see any way they can get around it. But just the situation with the booster on the visit might not be enough. But this is the NCAA we are talking about, so who really knows either way.

And if they don't give Freeze a showcause, it will also set a precedent to coaches that they can ignore rules up to and including taking a booster on a recruiting visit and not get punished personally.

They wrote into the rules that coaches would be held responsible for actions of their assistants even if they didn't know what was going on. No way in hell they're going to go lightly on a head coach who was named in allegations personally. Unless the NCAA just likes investigating schools, because if they don't pop Freeze, they'll have schools left and right doing the same things ole miss is doing.

[scottycameron]

How the hell does he stay on staff with a show cause? doesnt that defeat the purpose?

I guess they show cause. Never understood that asshat phrase to start with. Either ban a guy from coaching or don't. What is the show cause bullshit?
I promise you OM will show cause or show whatever else they need to to keep freeze coaching even if he does get a show cause, which I'm almost certain he won't.
Dumb rule.

[Bothrops]

I think the evidence is gonna be pretty overwhelming.

[HSVDawg]

And if they don't give Freeze a showcause, it will also set a precedent to coaches that they can ignore rules up to and including taking a booster on a recruiting visit and not get punished personally.

They wrote into the rules that coaches would be held responsible for actions of their assistants even if they didn't know what was going on. No way in hell they're going to go lightly on a head coach who was named in allegations personally. Unless the NCAA just likes investigating schools, because if they don't pop Freeze, they'll have schools left and right doing the same things ole miss is doing.

It's not that black and white though. There are large gray areas in between "show cause" and "no show cause". The NCAA can suspend coaches just like they can players. Freeze could get, say, a 6 game suspension and the NCAA could claim enforcement and embarrass Freeze without totally mandating that he be fired. They could also just decide to impose postseason bans and scholarship reductions so severe that it won't matter if he gets a show cause or not. He'll still be toxic by association and therefore won't get hired anywhere else, and won't have the resources available to win at OM without players. And in the short term, he won't have anything to show for winning with the players he does have currently if there is a postseason ban.

[msstate7]

It's not that black and white though. There are large gray areas in between "show cause" and "no show cause". The NCAA can suspend coaches just like they can players. Freeze could get, say, a 6 game suspension and the NCAA could claim enforcement and embarrass Freeze without totally mandating that he be fired. They could also just decide to impose postseason bans and scholarship reductions so severe that it won't matter if he gets a show cause or not. He'll still be toxic by association and therefore won't get hired anywhere else, and won't have the resources available to win at OM without players. And in the short term, he won't have anything to show for winning with the players he does have currently if there is a postseason ban.

If the NCAA had in their minds to not go after freeze and om with avengence, why continue investigating and offering immunity?

[drunkernhelldawg]

We might lose one of those by 80 points. I fully expect Freeze to throttle us in the Egg Bowl. He won't stop and I won't blame him. It could be his last SEC game.

Our job will be to stop them. Maybe by then, we'll be up to it. I think we will.

[HSVDawg]

If the NCAA had in their minds to not go after freeze and om with avengence, why continue investigating and offering immunity?

Well I fully expect them to get hammered one way or another. But we're just talking specifically about the show cause. They can get hit pretty hard without Freeze getting a show cause. That's all I was saying. In fact, you could argue that going even heavier on scholarship cuts in lieu of a show cause might be an even worse penalty for Freeze. That way, Freeze has to sleep in the bed he made for himself. If OM wins 9 or 10 games this year and gets another prestigious bowl game, Freeze can get a show cause and he goes out almost as a folk hero. He sits out for a few years, then some other decent program may pick him up in 5 years remembering how he put OM on the map. That's exactly what happened with Bruce Pearl. But if he stays, he has to eat all the resulting losses and dissent from the program on his watch. Then he gets fired for lack of production due to sanctions that he brought on, and he really is untouchable.