Freeze as victimized leader or "look the other way" facilitator?

[blacklistedbully]

From Skarbinsky's recent article:

Ole Miss portrays Lewis as an inconsistent, biased and unreliable witness and Farrar as the bogeyman who skirted the rules to help land him.

"Farrar purposely and actively circumvented the University's monitoring system and disregarded his head coach's repeated directives," the Ole Miss response says.

In summary, according to the university, Freeze regularly told Farrar not to break NCAA rules but Farrar broke them anyway.

Farrar's attorney released a response to the Ole Miss response directly refuting that allegation: "Coach Farrar wants it to be known by the alumni, friends and fans of Ole Miss that he did not 'purposely and actively circumvent the university' nor did he 'disregard (coach Freeze's) repeated directives.' "

So which is it? Freeze as a champion of NCAA rules who trusted the wrong staffer? Or Freeze as a see-no-evil head coach who wanted results but not details?

How about this question:
If Freeze is the innocent victim of a rogue Farrar, and otherwise ran a tight ship....what about the other allegations, some already admitted to, that are not explained by "Farrar being rogue"?

If, as Skarbinsky points out, it's either A or B, how is it possible for Freeze to be Farrar's victim, the "champion of NCAA Rules", yet still have multiple violations not attributable to Farrar?

[RocketDawg]

Perhaps a better question ... why did Freeze have to keep warning Barney if he didn't know he was cheating? There'd be no reason for "repeated directives" directly to him. It doesn't sound like he (Freeze and OM) mean the normal compliance reminders in a staff meeting.

[Mimi's Babies]

From Skarbinsky's recent article:

Ole Miss portrays Lewis as an inconsistent, biased and unreliable witness and Farrar as the bogeyman who skirted the rules to help land him.

"Farrar purposely and actively circumvented the University's monitoring system and disregarded his head coach's repeated directives," the Ole Miss response says.

In summary, according to the university, Freeze regularly told Farrar not to break NCAA rules but Farrar broke them anyway.

Farrar's attorney released a response to the Ole Miss response directly refuting that allegation: "Coach Farrar wants it to be known by the alumni, friends and fans of Ole Miss that he did not 'purposely and actively circumvent the university' nor did he 'disregard (coach Freeze's) repeated directives.' "

So which is it? Freeze as a champion of NCAA rules who trusted the wrong staffer? Or Freeze as a see-no-evil head coach who wanted results but not details?

How about this question:
If Freeze is the innocent victim of a rogue Farrar, and otherwise ran a tight ship....what about the other allegations, some already admitted to, that are not explained by "Farrar being rogue"?

If, as Skarbinsky points out, it's either A or B, how is it possible for Freeze to be Farrar's victim, the "champion of NCAA Rules", yet still have multiple violations not attributable to Farrar?

Freeze was made aware of 2016 allegations.
1. Why did he wait until December 2016 -- to terminate Farrar?
2. Why did Freeze not stop the other recruiters from their violations?

Freeze was made aware of 2017 allegations (amended) [Farrar is gone at this point]
1. Why did Freeze allow recruiting violations to CONTINUE into the 2017 recruiting class
2. Why did Freeze allow recruiting violations to CONTINUE into the 2018 recruiting class

OM recruiting violations had not stopped as of May 26, 2017...
WHY does HF not have CONTROL of his employees? Repeat directives mean automatic termination in the public sector.
WHY do OM Boosters not understand that "DO NOT" means just that DO NOT...
Freeze is NOT the 'champion of the NCAA Rules" for sure... Just ask some of the bears boosters....