Per David Johnson of Rebel 247

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg

Not sure why anyone would believe this and the entire "smoking gun" thing is completely open to interpretation. Also consider the he's getting info from optimistic/biased sources.

---

8 lev-1 violations sure smells like smoke from where I'm sitting

ETA - reading comprehension fail - it's the second letter .... hey, maybe there's another 8 to go with the first letter

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to TrapGame again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeastMan

To be totally fair and balanced, he also said there will be no smoking gun in 2nd letter.

---

Here's the entire quote:

"7:45 a.m.
***Just an update on what we're hearing from off-the-record sources regarding the ongoing NCAA investigation: We understand that an amendment to the first Notice of Allegations is expected. If not an amendment, then a second NOA in and of itself is expected. We use the word "expected," as no one knows if it is imminent, but there seems to be a collective feeling that it is coming. There is nothing earth-shattering in that, but we are now hearing that finality of the investigation could carry on well into next summer and possibly even into the fall of 2017. There does not appear to be a pathway to a speedy resolution, as most have hoped for. On a side note, we are unaware of any new smoking guns that have arisen in all of this, so it's difficult to put a finger on cause and effect if this ultimately proves to be the case."

So, he really didn't say there wasn't a smoking gun. "we are unaware of any new smoking guns..." is infinitely different than "There are no smoking guns" ..."we are unaware..." was definitely added for a reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tripp McNeely

Here's the entire quote:

"7:45 a.m.
***Just an update on what we're hearing from off-the-record sources regarding the ongoing NCAA investigation: We understand that an amendment to the first Notice of Allegations is expected. If not an amendment, then a second NOA in and of itself is expected. We use the word "expected," as no one knows if it is imminent, but there seems to be a collective feeling that it is coming. There is nothing earth-shattering in that, but we are now hearing that finality of the investigation could carry on well into next summer and possibly even into the fall of 2017. There does not appear to be a pathway to a speedy resolution, as most have hoped for. On a side note, we are unaware of any new smoking guns that have arisen in all of this, so it's difficult to put a finger on cause and effect if this ultimately proves to be the case."

So, he really didn't say there wasn't a smoking gun. "we are unaware of any new smoking guns..." is infinitely different that "There are no smoking guns" ..."we are unaware..." was definitely added for a reason.

---

Bingo. was just about to post the same thing.

The old smoking guns will be there haha

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tripp McNeely

Here's the entire quote:

"7:45 a.m.
***Just an update on what we're hearing from off-the-record sources regarding the ongoing NCAA investigation: We understand that an amendment to the first Notice of Allegations is expected. If not an amendment, then a second NOA in and of itself is expected. We use the word "expected," as no one knows if it is imminent, but there seems to be a collective feeling that it is coming. There is nothing earth-shattering in that, but we are now hearing that finality of the investigation could carry on well into next summer and possibly even into the fall of 2017. There does not appear to be a pathway to a speedy resolution, as most have hoped for. On a side note, we are unaware of any new smoking guns that have arisen in all of this, so it's difficult to put a finger on cause and effect if this ultimately proves to be the case."

So, he really didn't say there wasn't a smoking gun. "we are unaware of any new smoking guns..." is infinitely different that "There are no smoking guns" ..."we are unaware..." was definitely added for a reason.

---

It's coming

🔨 🔨 🔨 🔨

Wow...do yall remember that rumor i posted about an announcement that would be coming mid week? Sorry had to Pat myself on the back. At any rate, 17 Ole Miss.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ari Gold

9 over 3.

---

Looks like they were right all along...9 year investigation and 3 year death penalty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrapGame

No smoking gun? How bout a smoking mask.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Zh_enJ3T4AQ/hqdefault.jpg

---

That photo would make Hitler roll over in his grave to hide his hard on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeastMan

To be totally fair and balanced, he also said there will be no smoking gun in 2nd letter.

---

Why the second letter. Any second letter is a smoking gun.

#

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tripp McNeely

Here's the entire quote:

"7:45 a.m.
***Just an update on what we're hearing from off-the-record sources regarding the ongoing NCAA investigation: We understand that an amendment to the first Notice of Allegations is expected. If not an amendment, then a second NOA in and of itself is expected. We use the word "expected," as no one knows if it is imminent, but there seems to be a collective feeling that it is coming. There is nothing earth-shattering in that, but we are now hearing that finality of the investigation could carry on well into next summer and possibly even into the fall of 2017. There does not appear to be a pathway to a speedy resolution, as most have hoped for. On a side note, we are unaware of any new smoking guns that have arisen in all of this, so it's difficult to put a finger on cause and effect if this ultimately proves to be the case."

So, he really didn't say there wasn't a smoking gun. "we are unaware of any new smoking guns..." is infinitely different than "There are no smoking guns" ..."we are unaware..." was definitely added for a reason.

---

"the investigation could carry on well into next summer and possibly even into the fall of 2017." If the investigations ends in fall of 2017 and the NCAA issues another of amended NOI. Mississippi will have 90 days to respond, then a hearing with the COI which meets only quarterly has to be scheduled, this hearing could take place in the summer of 2018. That would put it past the 2018 signing day and halfway through the 2019 recruiting period.

If there's any level 1s in new letter, I'd release it and fire freeze. Blame everything on him, beg for forgiveness, and hope the NCAA buys it. Pretty sure freeze's trouble would justify no buy out. There's no good class to worry about keeping together also

NAFOOM has been very quiet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msbulldog

"the investigation could carry on well into next summer and possibly even into the fall of 2017." If the investigations ends in fall of 2017 and the NCAA issues another of amended NOI. Mississippi will have 90 days to respond, then a hearing with the COI which meets only quarterly has to be scheduled, this hearing could take place in the summer of 2018. That would put it past the 2018 signing day and halfway through the 2019 recruiting period.

---

So basically they're looking at this recruiting cycle, 2018 AND possibly 2019 being tainted by the investigation before penalties are even handed down. I'm all for that as long as it continues to simmer like it has!

This probably means Freeze is coaching OM in 2017.

Unless the sanctions come down in August or something and he gets a show cause right before the season starts.

Ole Miss has a delimma here. Do you fire Freeze after signing day and give the new coach a full Spring, offseason, and recruiting calendar, or do you risk it and keep him with the possibility/probability that he gets a show cause in right before or during the season?

Would a 2nd letter mean Repeat Offender status which compounds the penalties? I thought that is why they were trying to get it just added to the first one.

If this is true and OM gets Letter II then Freeze should be fired. No excuses. Fire the bastard and throw your daughters at the NCAA for mercy.

#

I don't see how it could be considered repeat offender when they aren't currently on probation.