IT'S HERE -- Freeze to Resign in the Morning

[Political Hack]

He's in hot rocks now!

Smoot, they received the NOA prior to the day of the video. The clock on the 90 days started a week or so ago. COI hearing will be in June, which leaves them another 3 months to hand down penalties.

[Todd4State]

He's in hot rocks now!

Smoot, they received the NOA prior to the day of the video. The clock on the 90 days started a week or so ago. COI hearing will be in June, which leaves them another 3 months to hand down penalties.

I may not understand the process as well as some so forgive me but...

After the COI makes their ruling I would guess that Ole Miss would appeal the findings which would stretch things out into the season potentially. Correct? Or is the COI the final step in the process.

[BrunswickDawg]

Looks like Preachermatt needs to handover the title of "Our own Rosebowl" to RealHastings.

[JoseBrown]

He's in hot rocks now!

Smoot, they received the NOA prior to the day of the video. The clock on the 90 days started a week or so ago. COI hearing will be in June, which leaves them another 3 months to hand down penalties.

He may need to make the list for the week....

They certainly received it earlier than they said. And I wouldn't be surprised if something else is in the hopper. It just wouldn't surprise me if they don't get their COI meeting this year For some reason.

[RougeDawg]

He's in hot rocks now!

Smoot, they received the NOA prior to the day of the video. The clock on the 90 days started a week or so ago. COI hearing will be in June, which leaves them another 3 months to hand down penalties.

If recruits knew about this latest COA, they had to have at least received before signing day. So they are already approaching the 30 day window at minimum.

[blacklistedbully]

I may not understand the process as well as some so forgive me but...

After the COI makes their ruling I would guess that Ole Miss would appeal the findings which would stretch things out into the season potentially. Correct? Or is the COI the final step in the process.

The Division I Infractions Appeals Committee serves as the final step in the infractions process. Any school or individual who is penalized or named in a finding of violation may appeal a Committee on Infractions decision. The appeal is not a new hearing that provides a second chance to argue the case.

After committee reviews a written appeal or holds an in-person hearing, it can reverse or modify a Committee on Infractions ruling. In order to change a ruling, the school or individual must prove one of the following: the ruling by the committee on infractions was clearly contrary to the evidence; the individual or school did not actually break NCAA rules; there was a procedural error that caused the committee on infractions to find a violation of NCAA rules; or the penalty was excessive.

[blacklistedbully]

Frequently Asked Questions
Is the Committee on Infractions part of the NCAA?
No, the Committee on Infractions is an independent body that decides if NCAA rules have been broken and what the appropriate penalties should be. Each case is reviewed by a panel of committee members to find the facts of the case. After a hearing with members from the school, other involved individuals and the NCAA enforcement staff, the committee concludes whether violations occurred and prescribes penalties.

How does the new penalty structure provide greater predictability and consistency?
There are many aggravating and mitigating factors that can impact how the committee imposes penalties. For example, multiple Level I violations, lack of institutional control, unethical conduct or other factors could result in tougher penalties. The committee could consider self-reporting of violations, cooperation during the investigation, meaningful corrective measures and other factors actions that could lessen the prescribed penalties.

[blacklistedbully]

Division I Committee on Infractions

Legislation: The Board of Directors shall appoint a Committee on Infractions comprised of not more than 24 members to act as hearing officers in infractions proceedings of the Association. The Board of Directors shall also appoint one member of the committee to serve as chair and another member to serve as vice chair. If at any time the chair is unavailable to act as such, the vice chair is empowered to exercise the functions of the chair. There shall be no subdivision restrictions except that all nonpublic members may not be from the same subdivision. The committee shall reflect the Association's commitment to diversity. To the extent reasonably possible, the Committee shall include members from each of the following categories: (a) Current or former college or university presidents, chancellors or other senior institutional administrators (no more than three years removed from employment by a member institution or similar service at the time of his or her initial appointment); (b) Current or former directors of athletics (no more than three years removed from employment by a member institution or similar service at the time of his or her initial appointment); (c) Former NCAA coaches (no more than 10 years removed from employment by a member institution or similar service at the time of his or her initial appointment); (d) Representatives from conference offices; (e) University staff or faculty, including but not limited to faculty athletics representatives; (f) Athletics administrators with compliance experience; and (g) Members of the general public with formal legal training who are not associated with a collegiate institution, conference, or professional or similar sports organization and who do not represent coaches or athletes in any capacity.

Liaisons: Shepard C. Cooper, Joel McGormley, Dino Pollock, Matt Mikrut, Jim Elworth
Chair: Gregory Sankey (Sep 2014 - Aug 2019)
Vice-Chair: Eleanor W. Myers (Sep 2014 - Aug 2018)


*Eligible for reappointment
Division Committee Positions Title Name & Institution Conference Term
Expiration
FBS Chair Commissioner Gregory Sankey
Southeastern Conference Southeastern Conference AUG 2019
FBS Member Deputy Director of Athletics Melissa L. Conboy
University of Notre Dame Atlantic Coast Conference AUG 2017
FBS Vice-Chair FAR Eleanor W. Myers
Temple University American Athletic Conference AUG 2018
FBS Member Former President Michael F. Adams
University of Georgia Southeastern Conference AUG 2017*
FBS Member Provost and Vice President for Academic Joyce McConnell
West Virginia University Big 12 Conference AUG 2019*
FBS Member Senior VP for Student Affairs Thomas Hill
Iowa State University Big 12 Conference AUG 2018*
FBS Member VP for Athletic Compliance David Roberts
University of Southern California Pac-12 Conference AUG 2018*
FCS Member Professor/Dean Alberto Gonzales
Belmont University Ohio Valley Conference AUG 2017*
FCS Member University Counsel Sankar Suryanarayan
Princeton University The Ivy League AUG 2019*
DI Member AD Greg Christopher
Xavier University Big East Conference AUG 2018*
DI Member Chancellor Gary L. Miller
University of Wisconsin-Green Bay Horizon League AUG 2018*
DI Member Deputy Commissioner and Chief Operating Officer Vincent Nicastro
Big East Conference Big East Conference AUG 2019*
Member Attorney Jill Pilgrim
Pilgrim Associates AUG 2017*
Member Attorney John Black
National Federation of State High School Associations AUG 2017
Member Attorney Stephen Madva
Montgomery, McCracken, Walker & Rhoades, LLP AUG 2019*
Member Attorney William Bock III
Kroger, Gardis & Regas LLP AUG 2019*
Member Executive Director Britton Banowsky
College Football Playoff Foundation AUG 2017
Member Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Larry Parkinson
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission AUG 2017*
Member Former AD Joel Maturi
AUG 2019*
Member Former Head Coach Joe Novak
AUG 2017*
Member Former President Carol Cartwright
AUG 2019*
Member

[Quaoarsking]

Tick tock

[Todd4State]

The Division I Infractions Appeals Committee serves as the final step in the infractions process. Any school or individual who is penalized or named in a finding of violation may appeal a Committee on Infractions decision. The appeal is not a new hearing that provides a second chance to argue the case.

After committee reviews a written appeal or holds an in-person hearing, it can reverse or modify a Committee on Infractions ruling. In order to change a ruling, the school or individual must prove one of the following: the ruling by the committee on infractions was clearly contrary to the evidence; the individual or school did not actually break NCAA rules; there was a procedural error that caused the committee on infractions to find a violation of NCAA rules; or the penalty was excessive.

That's what I thought. And I would be shocked if Ole Miss doesn't appeal.

[LockeDawg]

Frequently Asked Questions
Is the Committee on Infractions part of the NCAA?
No, the Committee on Infractions is an independent body that decides if NCAA rules have been broken and what the appropriate penalties should be. Each case is reviewed by a panel of committee members to find the facts of the case. After a hearing with members from the school, other involved individuals and the NCAA enforcement staff, the committee concludes whether violations occurred and prescribes penalties.

How does the new penalty structure provide greater predictability and consistency?
There are many aggravating and mitigating factors that can impact how the committee imposes penalties. For example, multiple Level I violations, lack of institutional control, unethical conduct or other factors could result in tougher penalties. The committee could consider self-reporting of violations, cooperation during the investigation, meaningful corrective measures and other factors actions that could lessen the prescribed penalties.

At what point does the NCAA Enforcement Staff deliberate and review the findings of the Allegations presented in the NOA?

[PassInterference]

This is a two fold problem and they have two options:

1) Fire him now. You are probably doing this to help sanctions levied by the NCAA. Good move, except who is gonna take your job? You aren't getting a good HC.

2) Keep him, but take the harsher penalties. And to me this one makes more sense to OM. He knows the network and how it functions, which means he knows better than anyone how to modify it to not get caught in the future. It's too big an operation to shut down, so they will just modify how it operates. What better person to spearhead that than Freeze? Plus, instead of paying players all the involved boosters will now just send their money to the university to expedite the initial recovery process.

Now the only wrench here in plan 2 would be a Freeze show cause. That screws them big time. But they weren't going to a good bowl the next two years anyways. Why not keep Freeze in place, take the extra penalties, and just modify the network with Freeze in charge? Logistically that to me makes the most sense for them.

A wise AD, who is now famous in part for not hiring Hugh Freeze, said "what should be done eventually, must be done immediately".

[msbulldog]

Vitter = Pickett , Freeze & Bdork = University Greys, Archie = Robert E. Lee , NCAA = Union Army at Gettysburg ........ CHARGE!!!!!!

And we know how that turned out.

[msbulldog]

He's in hot rocks now!

Smoot, they received the NOA prior to the day of the video. The clock on the 90 days started a week or so ago. COI hearing will be in June, which leaves them another 3 months to hand down penalties.

Unless 1 of the other parties named in the 2nd NOA requests an extension like they claimed in the 1st NOA. That adds another 30 days, past June and probably pushes the COI into the fall.

[Tbonewannabe]

What happens if it was push it into the fall and Freeze then gets the suspension or show clause?

[blacklistedbully]

At what point does the NCAA Enforcement Staff deliberate and review the findings of the Allegations presented in the NOA?

During the COI. Think of the NCAA Enforcement staff as the prosecutor, UNM as the defendant and it's legal defense team, and the COI as the jury in a trial.

After the "trial", UNM can appeal, but the appeal would be to another set of people like the COI, and it would not be a new trial. This "appellate jury" would read, or hear UNM explain why, in their opinion the COI's ruling was clearly contrary to the evidence; the individual or school did not actually break NCAA rules; there was a procedural error that caused the committee on infractions to find a violation of NCAA rules; or the penalty was excessive.

[Saltydog]

NT

[Dawgology]

How DARE someone bring rumors and not facts to a message board!!!!!!!!1 !!!

[RougeDawg]

Supposedly in the works but delayed a bit. So not completely false.

[Dolphus Raymond]

Just got text about a possible news conference this afternoon. Can't confirm and no idea what about. May be nothing.