Printable View
Funny you say it that way. That is precisely the way smu decided to self impose the dp.Quote:
Originally Posted by bdfan09
They could have played, but the sanctions would have been dangerous for the remaining players bc of a he players that transferred.
I think the NCAA really imposes just enough to allow for the attrition of the entire team.
It's funny that they could lose the equivalent of a while signing class, 2 bowls, and their head coach and half this board will be griping. Manage expectations people.
The first NOA warrants this....Quote:
Originally Posted by preachermatt83
DP
I'll be surprised a little if not actually
It's a moving target. They won't stop cheating long enough for us to tally up the penalties.
https://cdn0.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/NQi...NCAAArrest.jpg
My point exactly. The sanctions I mentioned are program crippling. Anything above that is gravy.Quote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mimi's Babies
A show cause would definitely do it. I believe it is if any NCAA violations committed by Freeze will get them out of the buyout, because that shoudl justify cause for termination. So when the COI rules and Freeze is levied with NCAA violatuions, then OM could fire him with no buyout. Not sure they go that route though, because he may still know where some unmarked bodies are still buried.
This pic is pure gold. Needs to be saved for judgment day.Quote:
Originally Posted by DancingRabbit
If you go by the matrix... a thing that is not supposed to be optional or arbitrary...you are talking about at least 15 Level 1 violations, perhaps a couple reduced to Mitigated, but also at least a couple increased to Aggravated.
So let's just say we average it out to 15 level 1's, standard. The matrix calls for 1-2 years bowl ban for each one. Technically speaking that's 15-30 years! Don't see how they could actually impose that. The matrix includes the phrase, "Competition penalties may be used singularly or in combination". I'm guessing that means the same as being able to sentence a convict "concurrently", meaning they could limit the total number of years. But how much less could they go?
The matrix also stipulates scholarship reductions of 12.5-to-25% per level 1. The NCAA allows 25 per year, subject to a maximum of 85 at any given time for a team not under penalty. My math says that's a total of approximately 3-6 per year per Level 1 violation, for a total of 45-90 total scholarships! I see nothing in the matrix that allows for any deviation. It looks like the only remedy is for UNM to convince the COI a huge chunk of these Level 1's should be greatly reduced or dismissed.
In case the scholarship reduction percentage is supposed to be taken against the max total of 85, you're looking at 11-21 reduced scholarships per Level 1...which would then be 165 - 330 for 15 level 1's. But I suspect it's the former.
But how does the NCAA actually handle this? How do you take away as many scholarships as the matrix appears to call for in this case...extending the years? But how many years can you extend, say 17 scholarships a year before the Dp is better? Mathematically, if it's 45-90 and we go for the middle, that's about 68, so it looks like they'd have to take 17 away per year for 4 years.
Then how do you handle the bowl ban? Just can't see how they could impose 15 years. Again, DP would be much better.
I realize this sounds steep, but it's not even considering a couple of Level 2's and some level 3's that are required to be considered. Now consider...by the stipulation of the matrix, it could technically be even worse.
It does seem to make a real case for the DP, as the way the matrix is set up, the maximum punishment would be worse than a 2 year DP.
Great breakdown.Quote:
Originally Posted by blacklistedbully
What people need to realize is that we are SUPPOSED TO BE in a new era of NCAA infractions due to the penalty matrix.
This is the first large case under the new matrix, so what happens?
Is the NCAA going to abide by the matrix?
Will the NCAA mitigate numerous penalties to make the punishment fit?
Or will the NCAA just give the death penalty and eliminate the necessity of having to abide by the matrix?
These are real questions. I don't think OM gets the death penalty, but, the alternative could be argued is worse than the death penalty?
Will the NCAA look for a way out?
These are real questions
Manage expectations also sounds like a slogan for losers in life. If Mullen decided to "manage expectations" we'd be pissed.Quote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
What's the risk? That OM fans are going to laugh at us after their program is decimated?!? You are worried about the opinion of people whose opinions don't matter. Their cooked!!! Read the matrix.
Great breakdown Black. This is what I've been SCREAMING for over a year. DP would be the most merciful thing the NCAA could do without destroying their credibility.
Only other thing I can think of at the moment is if the new penalty matrix means the 25% reduction is only against the 25 per year allowed, and only applied to 1 year per violation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reason2succeed
If that's the case, the 25% of 25 is about 6 scholarships lost per violation. If they applied 2 level one violations per year + the level 2's mixed in for good measure, that would mean about 13 scholarships lost every year for 7 years.
Let's say their lawyers are phenomenally successful, and get a third of the Level 1's reduced to Level 2's. The resulting penalties would still be the most devastating since SMU, and much worse than what USC got.
They are in big, big trouble.
There has never been a time when the NCAA needed to show their strength more than now. After the Penn State scandal, the Baylor scandal, UNC, Miami, USC, and the Louisville scandal the NCAA needs to send a powerful message to stop the corruption in collegiate athletics or they willlose all control and credibility. OM has put themselves in position to be the example.Quote:
Originally Posted by gravedigger
Don't forget David Saunders and his 3 stints at OM....
http://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/s...ach/326010001/
The NCAA Committee on Infractions found Saunders helped five recruits receive fraudulent ACT scores at Wayne County High, lied to the NCAA about his involvement and failed to cooperate with an investigation. He also gave a total of $6,500 to a player over two semesters while at Louisiana-Lafayette, the committee said.Saunders received an eight-year show-cause, which requires an NCAA institution that intends to hire him before Jan. 11, 2024 to argue before a panel why he should be hired without restriction. He joined Louisiana-Lafayette?s coaching staff in January 2011 after his third stint at Ole Miss.
Ole Miss became linked to the investigation when NCAA enforcement staff interviewed Saunders on Dec. 16, 2013 about ?events that took place while that assistant was employed? elsewhere, according to the Committee on Infractions? report, which added a football player ?that institution recruited? was also part of the interview. (NCAA was already at OM)
?During the interviews, the enforcement staff believed the former assistant football coach may have known of or may have been involved in NCAA rules violations concerning academic issues while at another member institution,? the Committee on Infractions? report read.
After reading this article I would have several questions as to where some of the OM players took their ACT test. Lets not leave out the Education Center....
Where are all the former Om coaches and ath. department employees now.....
I hear what you're saying and agree ... I didn't even see the DP option listed on the matrix
The question is, if the matrix indicates a larger scholarship reduction than is possible, then does that mean they have little choice than the death penalty?Quote:
Originally Posted by FISHDAWG
UNM will take any penalty that is not the DP, because the DP would possibly get them kicked out of the SEC.
Will the SEC tolerate OM playing at SWAC level for ten years?Quote:
Originally Posted by 1bigdawg
I will be fascinating to see how the COI tallies up the sanctions.
In the past, they just kind of handed down an agreed upon amount that "seemed reasonable" per the violations.
However new matrix should make the deciding upon sanctions more like checking out at the super market.
$2.50 for eggs
$1.50 for break
$2.50 for bread
It should be a much more intemized, objective process. With 21 level 1 violations, that's a disaster for OM.
I don't believe they get kicked out of the SEC for anything less than the DP. The DP gives the SEC an excuse; "We have to have another team to play so we are dropping UNM and adding NC State, Oklahoma, etc."Quote:
Originally Posted by Reason2succeed
If they are just playing horrible because of lost schollys, then they stay. On top of everything else, the conference won't want to set a precedent of kicking someone out over probation.
Vandy has been playing at that level foreverQuote:
Originally Posted by Reason2succeed