Tunsil Thoughts

The righteous have spoken and there are no new allegations involving Tunsil. According to Forde's article, Bjork said no "new" allegations, but did not say whether previous ones were "expanded".

Did the NCAA find nothing to add to Tunsil bc he had no obligation to speak with them after declaring for the draft? Or, do you expect previous allegations on Tunsil to be expanded in the updated NOA?

With 13 total level 1's, probably doesnt matter. But just curious.

a third letter is coming

I saw somewhere that Tunsil refused to speak with the NCAA after draft night. After all, what are they going to do to him? He doesn't have a Heisman or any other award from his NCAA career to vacate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coldsleeve Jr.

The righteous have spoken and there are no new allegations involving Tunsil. According to Forde's article, Bjork said no "new" allegations, but did not say whether previous ones were "expanded".

Did the NCAA find nothing to add to Tunsil bc he had no obligation to speak with them after declaring for the draft? Or, do you expect previous allegations on Tunsil to be expanded in the updated NOA?

With 13 total level 1's, probably doesnt matter. But just curious.

---

My guess is he refused to cooperate, and they basically had a lot of stuff that they believed but raised credibility issues because of the source (estranged family) and they didn't have a good way to corroborate anything. Rather than put in something reliant on Miller's testimony that would be susceptible to attack, they went conservative and only included things that UM would have trouble disputing. No need to give UM a life raft from a PR perspective where they could latch onto claims that relied on testimony that could be attacked as unreliable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coldsleeve Jr.

The righteous have spoken and there are no new allegations involving Tunsil. According to Forde's article, Bjork said no "new" allegations, but did not say whether previous ones were "expanded".

Did the NCAA find nothing to add to Tunsil bc he had no obligation to speak with them after declaring for the draft? Or, do you expect previous allegations on Tunsil to be expanded in the updated NOA?

With 13 total level 1's, probably doesnt matter. But just curious.

---

My first guess is that Tunsil refusing to be interviewed further prevented the NCAA from adding it to the official allegations. I'd suppose that the NCAA decided that press conference questions under duress did not count as legitimate admission of guilt in the case. Rather than open a door that could be exploited by OM attorneys, they decided not to include the draft night stuff in spite of the admission of guilt.

My second guess is that the NCAA has enough evidence on Farrar already in the actual allegations (even without the draft night stuff included), and they will act accordingly on that info.

My third guess is that OM will be punished assuming all the stuff on draft night actually happened, regardless of whether it is listed in the official NOA. And this fact is indisputable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coldsleeve Jr.

The righteous have spoken and there are no new allegations involving Tunsil. According to Forde's article, Bjork said no "new" allegations, but did not say whether previous ones were "expanded".

Did the NCAA find nothing to add to Tunsil bc he had no obligation to speak with them after declaring for the draft? Or, do you expect previous allegations on Tunsil to be expanded in the updated NOA?

With 13 total level 1's, probably doesnt matter. But just curious.

---

If you watch the video, Bjork says that there are eight new allegations and one that was expanded. He then proceeds to discuss the new allegations, but says nothing about the expanded one. My guess is that the expanded one pertains to Tunsil (since he was listed in the original NOA) and that it's pretty damning stuff since they didn't mention it.

What blows my mind is that they expanded their own self-imposed penalties to include a one year bowl ban, but they didn't self-impose any more scholarship reductions. Sheer lunacy that they think the NCAA will accept that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TXDawg

If you watch the video, Bjork says that there are eight new allegations and one that was expanded. He then proceeds to discuss the new allegations, but says nothing about the expanded one. My guess is that the expanded one pertains to Tunsil (since he was listed in the original NOA) and that it's pretty damning stuff since they didn't mention it.

What blows my mind is that they expanded their own self-imposed penalties to include a one year bowl ban, but they didn't self-impose any more scholarship reductions. Sheer lunacy that they think the NCAA will accept that.

---

I thought he said the expanded one was the one with Freeze and adding LOIC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HSVDawg

My first guess is that Tunsil refusing to be interviewed further prevented the NCAA from adding it to the official allegations. I'd suppose that the NCAA decided that press conference questions under duress did not count as legitimate admission of guilt in the case. Rather than open a door that could be exploited by OM attorneys, they decided not to include the draft night stuff in spite of the admission of guilt.

My second guess is that the NCAA has enough evidence on Farrar already in the actual allegations (even without the draft night stuff included), and they will act accordingly on that info.

My third guess is that OM will be punished assuming all the stuff on draft night actually happened, regardless of whether it is listed in the official NOA. And this fact is indisputable.

---

All of this. The NCAA found what they needed. No reason to draw it out longer and investigate more. Based on what they have found evidence for, and the LOIC charge, they will assume all the other stuff also happened.