My guess on OM sanctions

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reason2succeed

I hear you. But if they get what you described what I will say is that OM was smart to continue cheating since there is obviously a max penalty that the NCAA is willing to drop.

I would then expect many programs to make sure that if they are cheating to make sure that they make it worth it. Why only rob one bank when you can rob ten banks and you still won't get life in prison?

---

No way. A 2 year bowl ban, which allows players to transfer, plus a 30 or more scholarship loss is program crippling in the SEC. Absolutely crippling. They will become everyone's homecoming opponent for the next 10 years or more. USC still hasn't recovered and they are light years above ole miss. I expect a 3 year bowl ban and close to 40 scholly's lost. They may never be competitive again. Plus, what did all that cheating get them? They still haven't played in the SEC CH and they finished ahead of us 1 time!!! ONE!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reason2succeed

I hear you. But if they get what you described what I will say is that OM was smart to continue cheating since there is obviously a max penalty that the NCAA is willing to drop.

I would then expect many programs to make sure that if they are cheating to make sure that they make it worth it. Why only rob one bank when you can rob ten banks and you still won't get life in prison?

---

I think you are really underselling those penalties. But even if you think that that is light and it is worth it to continue cheating, you understand that they would be under repeat offender and the death penalty would definitely be on the table if caught again with any major infractions. I mean they are so good at cheating and keeping it hid and not pissing off other schools that this NOA is only one of the largest in history. And now they have to keep their nose clean for several years or they will extend their probation and multiple major infractions again during their probation period would be the first major case since SMU that will give the NCAA a legitimate chance to go nuclear

"Take the win." Well said Sandwolf.
Anything over 30 over 4 and a 2 year bowl ban is A HUGE BLOWOUT WIN. In the hyper-competitive SEC, it will take a mid-tier school like Ole Miss at least a decade to begin to recover. I made my prediction of 32 over 4, 2 year bowl ban (may up that to 3 but will stick for now.) and I'll take that all day.
"Take the win."

#

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spbdawg

I think we all need clarification of what has happened so far:

The 2016 noa had 14 Level I Allegations supported by nearly 50 unique Level I Violations. For instance The ACT fraud was one Level I Allegation which was broken three times....so that's technically three Level I Violations not one....so they each will/could be applied against the penalty matrix.

The 2017 noa has an additional 7 Level I Allegations with an unknown number of unique Level I Violations.

The penalty matrix is applied against violations not allegations.

Ole Miss is already under the repeat offender window and any additional Violations post Oct 2016 could trigger the death penalty.

If any of the above is substantially wrong please feel free to tell me which and how.

---

Yeah that's not correct. An individual violation only helps determine what Level an infraction will be alleged. Under the infraction you have some violations that in themselves would only be a Level III or less. You can have enough minor violations under one like infraction that it can rise to a Level 1 infraction. You take As a whole similar violations under that infraction or the violations concerning one person, that is what determines what Level the entire infraction is alleged to be. And no where in the bylaws, matrix, or case history does it state that each infraction must be added for a grand total of penalties. The individual violations are not even a part of the matrix. The violation or violations only help determine the Level of the infraction. You also don't apply an infraction dealing with an individual to the school either. The ULL case with Saunders had 4 infractions in the case but ULL only had to deal with 1, the other 3 were against Saunders so the matrix was applied but only the sections that dealt with that infraction. There is no lumping, stacking or adding of all penalties under every subsection of the matrix for each infraction. Much less for every individual violation.

#

33-40 scholarships
3 year bowl ban
Freeze gets a 5+ year show cause.
Bjork and Vitter forced to resign.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spbdawg

Ok. So if 25 instances of ACT fraud were documented under one allegation it would be treated like a single episode against umiss for the purposes of penalties. This doesn't make sense. Multiple infractions should carry multiple penalties.

---

The number and/or severity of each violation is what determines the Level of the infraction and the sub-Level (aggravated, standard, mitigated). People also seem to forget that a Level 2 aggravated infraction is the same as a Level 1 standard with the penalty matrix. But yes the number of violations definitely play a part in determining the level of the infraction and the severity of that level. Each violation when looked at separately can vary greatly in severity from minor to major. But the matrix was never intended or presented in a way to make people believe that it would be applied for each and every violation. No infractions case has ever been handled that way. At some point you have to stop the penalty application for the infractions or it gets extremely silly. Under your scenario if you applied 25 different Level 1 aggravated infractions because there are 25 violations, then you could put them on probation for 250 years and take away 1,062.5 scholarships. That's a ridiculous penalty proposition.

#

which leads to the argument that if a thief continues to burglarize other peoples' homes while he's waiting on court but he's out on bail, at some point his bail has to be revoked to protect the public. Just because his hearing may be a year or so down the road doesn't mean society has to continue to put up with his thieving ways and act as if his latest law-breaking attempts are excusable.

Because these guys won't stop cheating (even while the investigation is ongoing), the ncaa knows what they gotta do as unpopular as it may be (and I'm talking about the DP).

#

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spbdawg

Agreed. And that's why everyone agrees the number of violations in this case has stressed the new matrix.

---

I agree partially but not under your original premise. It was never written with the intent that each separate violation has to be a separate infraction for the penalties. Violations only determine the level of the infraction by the individual or school or both. I agree it's going to strain the matrix to a degree but penalties to a school do not and usually are not applied in conjunction with individual infraction. Only part of the matrix will or could apply per infraction. However the number and/or severity of the infractions dealing with indivuals of the school do directly coorelate to LOIC and Fraud. The number or severity of the infraction that individuals are responsible for Level 1 infractions dealing with impermissible benefits and competitive advantages is what gets a school to LOIC. That is what they don't want.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spbdawg

Agreed. And that's why everyone agrees the number of violations in this case has stressed the new matrix.

---

has stressed the new matrix to the point the ncaa NEVER thought could be accomplished. This case will definitely be precedent-setting for the next 25 years imo, and TCUN will not get off light.

Again, I'll say we're closer to the DP than not despite what some of my fellow Bulldogs want to deny.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WSOPdawg

has stressed the new matrix to the point the ncaa NEVER thought could be accomplished. This case will definitely be precedent-setting for the next 25 years imo, and TCUN will not get off light.

Again, I'll say we're closer to the DP than not despite what some of my fellow Bulldogs want to deny.

---

They will NOT go against their on legislation concerning the death penalty:

"Following the announcement of a major case, a major violation occurs and
The second violation occurred within five years of the starting date of the penalty assessed in the first case. The second major case does not have to be in the same sport as the previous case to affect the second sport.
Penalties for repeat violators of legislation, subject to exemptions authorized by the committee on the basis of specifically stated reasons, may include any of the following:

The prohibition of some or all outside competition in the sport involved in the latest major violation for one or two sport seasons and the prohibition of all coaching staff members in that sport from involvement (directly or indirectly) in any coaching activities at the institution during that period
The elimination of all initial grants-in-aid and recruiting activities in the sport involved in the latest major violation in question for a two-year period.
The requirement that all institutional staff member serving on the NCAA Board of Directors; Leadership, Legislative, Presidents or Management Councils; Executive Committee or other Association governance bodies resign their positions. All institutional representatives shall be ineligible to serve on any NCAA committee for a period of four years and
The requirement that the institution relinquish its Association voting privileges for a four-year period."

To do so against the legislation of the NCAA is opening them up for issues that could be litigated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WSOPdawg

which leads to the argument that if a thief continues to burglarize other peoples' homes while he's waiting on court but he's out on bail, at some point his bail has to be revoked to protect the public. Just because his hearing may be a year or so down the road doesn't mean society has to continue to put up with his thieving ways and act as if his latest law-breaking attempts are excusable.

Because these guys won't stop cheating (even while the investigation is ongoing), the ncaa knows what they gotta do as unpopular as it may be (and I'm talking about the DP).

---

It has been proven and reported to the NCAA... In November 2016 and continuing OM coaches and boosters failed to STOP recruiting violations.... JUST STOP...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Really Clark?

The number and/or severity of each violation is what determines the Level of the infraction and the sub-Level (aggravated, standard, mitigated). People also seem to forget that a Level 2 aggravated infraction is the same as a Level 1 standard with the penalty matrix. But yes the number of violations definitely play a part in determining the level of the infraction and the severity of that level. Each violation when looked at separately can vary greatly in severity from minor to major. But the matrix was never intended or presented in a way to make people believe that it would be applied for each and every violation. No infractions case has ever been handled that way. At some point you have to stop the penalty application for the infractions or it gets extremely silly. Under your scenario if you applied 25 different Level 1 aggravated infractions because there are 25 violations, then you could put them on probation for 250 years and take away 1,062.5 scholarships. That's a ridiculous penalty proposition.

---

While there may not be a specific clause that mandates each violation be penalized per the matrix, I don't think there is a clause that prevents it either.

I don't think anyone is forgetting about what can happen with the L2's (S,M or A), it's just that there are so many L1's that the L2's look like icing-on-the-cake only...not necessary to get UNM the kind of crippling penalties we expect.

No infractions case has ever been handled that way, but we are now operating under a different system, with a school that has cheated on a level perhaps unseen since SMU. This matrix only came into play in 2013.

You talk of 25 L1 aggravated resulting in an absurdly high number of penalties, but you seem to not consider just how bad 25 L1 aggravated violations would be. Well before the NCAA got there, the school would have it's program DP'd, and not just for a couple of years.

IMO, the matrix allows for the COI to use each violation, and the DP is still allowed to handle those cases where the violations are so severe, so numerous, or a combination of both that the matrix penalties exceed the damage caused by the DP.

#

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spbdawg

They've been under the repeat offender clause since the fall.

---

So, ANY violations After October 2016 would constitute OM becoming labeled as a "repeat offender".

And many recruits, in the signing class of 2017, could have basically caused OM to qualify for the "repeat offender status"....

Jeez, will they ever stop?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blacklistedbully

While there may not be a specific clause that mandates each violation be penalized per the matrix, I don't think there is a clause that prevents it either.

I don't think anyone is forgetting about what can happen with the L2's (S,M or A), it's just that there are so many L1's that the L2's look like icing-on-the-cake only...not necessary to get UNM the kind of crippling penalties we expect.

No infractions case has ever been handled that way, but we are now operating under a different system, with a school that has cheated on a level perhaps unseen since SMU. This matrix only came into play in 2013.

You talk of 25 L1 aggravated resulting in an absurdly high number of penalties, but you seem to not consider just how bad 25 L1 aggravated violations would be. Well before the NCAA got there, the school would have it's program DP'd, and not just for a couple of years.

IMO, the matrix allows for the COI to use each violation, and the DP is still allowed to handle those cases where the violations are so severe, so numerous, or a combination of both that the matrix penalties exceed the damage caused by the DP.

---

The matrix is just a guideline like a sentencing guideline. But you have to separate the infractions between individuals and institutional and the part of the matrix that applies. The fraud and LOIC (due to the number and severity of infractions by individuals) are the major infractions that are tied to the school and will carry the bulk of their penalties under the probation, competition ban, scholarship reduction, and financial penalties. Recruiting restrictions, etc. is more fluid but still tied to what the staff did. But the infraction concerning Farrar for example, that Level 1 infraction in itself doesn't use the penalties that apply to the program as a whole. The indivual penalties under the matrix will only apply to the Farrar infraction. However; him, Harris, Kiffin, and head coach responsibility taken together is what is getting them LOIC. They will not take each of those separately to apply program sanctions but the whole is applied to levy Level 1 LOIC against the school. There is a separation of what part of the matrix can be used for what infraction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spbdawg

They've been under the repeat offender clause since the fall.

---

That's right. But we have no indication that the revised NOA includes any infractions occurring after that time. Until that happens, death penalty can not be consider by their own legislation