So, the NCAA would have been satisfied with OM firing Freeze?

[Gridirondawg]

Statue outside DWS?

Possibly on his knees in reverence to the Rosebowl statue standing in front of him?

[Drugs Delaney]

Well, Freeze is the root of all evil

[sandwolf]

However, remember where we were a little over a year ago. The NCAA had enough in the 1st NOA to sink Danny Hugh. If Ole Miss had stepped up in their response and cleaned house and then recommended 9 over 3 or whatever it was - it is plausible that the NCAA would have been satisfied. The head of the snake would have been cut off, OM would have been punished, and everyone moves on until the Network got too big for their britches again in about 10 years. I think the NCAA knew most of what was added in the amended COA when the original was issued - they wanted to see how OM responded. When OM went all-in for Danny Hugh, and then had the Draft Night fiasco, the NCAA decided to go all Marsellus Wallace on their ass.

It's like some have reportedly said about the Jackie probation for us - "the charges don't show much, but we were guilty of so much more." Well, we took our punishment and said "thank you sir may I have another" by hiring Sly. The NCAA left town, we moved on, and finally started to rebuild. OM gave them two middle fingers and then upped the ante with the '16 class. Bunch of idiots.

I agree that if OM had stepped up and cleaned house that they would be in a much better situation today. But again, the NCAA is setting precedent for the new system with this case and in just the original NOA OM had 8 Level 1 Violations (and I think 13 total violations)......so if they gave them 9 over 3, they would completely discredit their newly restructured system. So in my opinion, it is not plausible that the NCAA would have been satisfied with that.

Something else to consider is that even in the original NOA, there were a multitude of boosters named and the allegations spanned multiple coaches and AD's....which is indicative of a more wide spread problem with the program's culture as opposed to a problem that is isolated to the head coach. So while I do think that the NCAA wants Bucky's head, I do not feel like they would have felt like the head of the snake had been cut off.

[Ezsoil]

lets look at since 2005, much of the slime associated with Ole Miss has one common thread... Hugh Freeze ...going back to the Oher adoption and his subsequent hire in 2005. Then in his position as recruiting coordinator, the genius of the Wayne County testing center issues started with the Powe recruitment. Throw in the whole BYU distance learning scam, and you have a butt hurt NCAA and the "one that got away". So when Archie decided to put the band back together in 2012, you know the NCAA was ready and set up on campus almost immediately...and after they landed the 2013 class coming of the momentous Birmingham Bowl victory ..it was game on.

[BrunswickDawg]

I agree that if OM had stepped up and cleaned house that they would be in a much better situation today. But again, the NCAA is setting precedent for the new system with this case and in just the original NOA OM had 8 Level 1 Violations (and I think 13 total violations)......so if they gave them 9 over 3, they would completely discredit their newly restructured system. So in my opinion, it is not plausible that the NCAA would have been satisfied with that.

Something else to consider is that even in the original NOA, there were a multitude of boosters named and the allegations spanned multiple coaches and AD's....which is indicative of a more wide spread problem with the program's culture as opposed to a problem that is isolated to the head coach. So while I do think that the NCAA wants Bucky's head, I do not feel like they would have felt like the head of the snake had been cut off.

You are probably right. The penalties would have been then what they are now, but the matrix does dictate more than 9 over 3. However, the school could have argued that they "mitigated" some of those charges by cleaning house. I don't know that it would have worked, but it could have at least called the NCAA dogs off the hunt. The NCAA was obviously willing to settle for less (since none of the infractions in either occurred after Jan 2016/time of 1st NOA) in hopes OM would do the right thing. When they didn't, they dropped the hammer.

[Tbonewannabe]

However, remember where we were a little over a year ago. The NCAA had enough in the 1st NOA to sink Danny Hugh. If Ole Miss had stepped up in their response and cleaned house and then recommended 9 over 3 or whatever it was - it is plausible that the NCAA would have been satisfied. The head of the snake would have been cut off, OM would have been punished, and everyone moves on until the Network got too big for their britches again in about 10 years. I think the NCAA knew most of what was added in the amended COA when the original was issued - they wanted to see how OM responded. When OM went all-in for Danny Hugh, and then had the Draft Night fiasco, the NCAA decided to go all Marsellus Wallace on their ass.

It's like some have reportedly said about the Jackie probation for us - "the charges don't show much, but we were guilty of so much more." Well, we took our punishment and said "thank you sir may I have another" by hiring Sly. The NCAA left town, we moved on, and finally started to rebuild. OM gave them two middle fingers and then upped the ante with the '16 class. Bunch of idiots.

Is Hugh the gimp or the dirty cop?

[Leeshouldveflanked]

What is on the NOA is what the NCAA feels they can 100% prove... there is prolly a lot more that they know that they can't prove..

[DeviousDawg]

The first NOA was released when it was for several reasons...

1. The Women's basketball team and Track and Field teams were ready to move on from their own scandals, the NCAA not releasing their allegations because they were still investigating the football team would have been cruel. The WBB and Track and Field programs had already cleaned house, no need to make them suffer because of the football team. Both programs have already gone before the COI and are on the path to recovery.

2. While releasing the WBB and T&F allegations, they might as well release the football allegations that they already had nailed down sitting on a shelf. Namely the ACT scandal, but also thanks to Lindsey Miller's cooperation, they could set the table to hit Freeze with a multi year show cause with the 2nd NOA and throw a Level II failure to monitor in there for Tunsil's stuff so that they could easily upgrade it to a Lack of Institutional Control with the added stuff from the 2nd NOA. I would bet when the released the 1st NOA, they knew they already had enough for the 2nd NOA to give a LOI and Freeze a head coach responsibility charge. They just wanted to be sure that they had enough proof before releasing it all with the original NOA to be sure that OM couldn't weasel there way out of it, thus the immunity interviews. The immunity interviews were to solidify the allegations they already had, not create new ones.

3. They knew OM was attempting to load up on the 2016 recruiting class to weather what OM thought was going to be survivable sanctions from what they had in just the 1st NOA, so the NCAA released it so that the 2016 class would have a chance to know what is coming before signing day. Well, OM lied to those recruits, throwing all the blame on previous coaching staffs, WBB and Track and Field. Surely, the NCAA did not like this, and this probably once again led to the immunity interviews, and it was once again OM's fault.

The NCAA was never planning on just getting rid of Freeze. Freeze is replaceable, and not the problem, in fact, they probably liked that he was still there after the 1st NOA, because he is naive enough to continue allowing the cheating and further burying OM and the bigger problem, the Network, in a hole. This is why Freeze wasn't directly charged with anything in the NOA, they wanted him to stay, and continue to 17 up. Now, they have caught OM in a pickle, if they can Freeze at this point, they have no leg to stand on regarding Lack of Institutional Control. The LOIC and Head Coach responsibility charge go hand and hand. It's either both, or neither for the COI. If they found that Freeze knew of none of it and it was all rouge coaches and boosters, then the Lack of Institutional Control would no longer Apply. However, if they find that Freeze knew of everything that was going on, and continued to allow it without acting immediately, firing anyone and everyone involved, then that in itself constitutes Lack of Institutional Control. The NCAA and OM both know one fact at this point, they are either guilty of both the LOIC and Head Coach Responsibility, or innocent of both. OM isn't fighting for Freeze, they are fighting for Freeze because if they don't, they can't fight for the big one, Lack of Institutional Control.

The NCAA has them in check mate, and Ole Miss is looking for any possible move out of it. As we will eventually find out, the NCAA could care less if OM looks for a way out, they know they have Check mate and it's over.

All of the little Level III violations that "were no big deal" make a whole lot of sense now for the NCAA's case. They might just be the nail in the coffin actually, because they help build the case against Freeze for a Head Coach Responsibility charge, thus building the more important case against OM as an institution lacking institutional control. All five of the Level III violations were used in the Head Coach Responsibility violation and have their own sub violations supporting the case that Freeze did not promote an atmosphere of compliance in his program.

-Allegation #6(freeze allowed a GA to create an illegal recruiting video)
-Allegation #7(Freeze knowingly allowed a recruit to take a hunting trip with boosters on an official visit)
-Allegation #10(Kiffin allowed a recruit to stay at his own residence, and Freeze did not take proper action)
-Allegation #12(Freeze had impermissible contact with a recruit)
-Allegation #13(Kiffin had impermissible contact with a recruit and Freeze did not take proper action)

They seem small when originally reading the NOA and their own separate allegations, but all five have their own sub allegation in the Head Coach Responsibility allegation, each beginning with, "Regarding Allegation No. X, Freeze did not demonstrate that he promoted an atmosphere of compliance within the football program". Also, they are all 5 directly referenced in the Lack of Institutional Control charge.

Point being, the NCAA wasn't just throwing these Level III allegations in the first and amended NOA because they might add a scholarship or two combined. They were added for one reason only, to help set up the case for the Head Coach Responsibility and Lack of Institutional Control. The NCAA has had a plan with all of this, and they are setting up to crush OM.

[MSUDawg99]

Damn! I already gave you rep points DD. I can't give anymore.

[sandwolf]

However, the school could have argued that they "mitigated" some of those charges by cleaning house. I don't know that it would have worked, but it could have at least called the NCAA dogs off the hunt.

Agreed.

[BrunswickDawg]

As usual DD - we should all bow to your facts. Checkmate Danny Hugh. Check. 17'n. Mate.

[Spiderman]

Heard on local sports radio yesterday - Wimberly maybe? - that it seems the NCAA is leaking out through its media contacts that it would have been satisfied at the very beginning of this ordeal with the firing of Hugh Freeze. They would have taken the self-imposed penalties and all would have been well. But, since om has garbed themselves in the cloak of indolence and covered their faces with the veil of duplicity and have not cast the false prophet from their flock nor repented, the NCAA is going to smite them with unimaginable wrath.

I heard Wolken say that on Not A Fan Neal's podcast. Pretty sure Forde has said the same.

[archdog]

Maybe we should name the restrooms on the visitor's side of DWS after him.

Like the Lane Kiffin Municipal Cesspool.

[Political Hack]

Yeah your probably right Hack, but the NCAA wanted Freeze, period. OM decided, for whatever reason, to side with him. The NCAA didn't want to spend the money or the man hours for this shit. Now, they are pissed off and mad about it. Getting rid of Freeze would have saved the NCAA time and money. They knew he was dirty and had proof. But, now om has continued the shenanigans all the while claiming compliance and cooperation. The NCAA is going to make them an example: When we ask you to fire your head coach, we mean it.

Bottom line though: After the first NOA canning Freeze and co. would have saved OM from a major hit to their football program. They had their one chance to come clean and do the right thing. They blew it. Now they deserve everything that happens to them.

There's no doubt they want him and I agree the penalties would've been lessened, but I just don't think they would've gotten their self proposed penalties accepted.

[Mjoelner34]

There's no doubt they want him and I agree the penalties would've been lessened, but I just don't think they would've gotten their self proposed penalties accepted.

I agree. I think their 'lessened penalties' would have been on par with USCw.

[Mimi's Babies]

Guys, the NCAA damn well would have taken the firing/resignation of Hugh Freeze with a few scholarships and maybe a one year bowl ban at the beginning of this. No muss, no fuss.

But ole miss said 17 you and the horse you rode in on. They passed out the kool aid to the faithful and have gone all in with Danny Hugh. Any lenient treatment from the NCAA now is not invoking the death penalty.

I am at the point where "TAKING the DEATH PENALTY" just might have been a "LIGHTER" sentence......