My guess on OM sanctions

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MedDawg

Yeah. As I remembered it, SMU was penalized a season and a portion of another season, and SMU voluntarily gave up the rest of that second season.

---

No. It wasn't until a few months after the penalties were handed out and transfers were happening that the school didn't see a way they could field a viable team, so they cancelled the away games that were scheduled for 1988. But to self impose, they had to present this PRIOR to sancations being handed out, not after. That was the price they had to deal with for their corruption and sanctions

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Really Clark?

SMU didn't self impose the death penalty. Not sure where anyone got that.

Whether or not SMU self imposed or not it is a possibility that a program can choose to self impose in lieu of other penalties. A better argument would be the time for self imposing penalties has already passed. I could accept that.

The matrix is a guideline. It was never intended and the NCAA specifically stated when they introduced the matrix that COI can still deviate, if justified.

If it's not justified when there is academic fraud, illegal payments, and illegal contact when will it be justified?

They do not have to follow it to the letter or apply it to the letter for each infraction.

Then why present a matrix to the public? As stated earlier if the COI deviates too far from the matrix then the sports media will have a field day exposing the NCAA. It will prove that their 2013 reorganization was a sham. It will be business as usual for rogue programs and boosters.

The smaller cases will fall within the matrix guidelines the vast majority of the time because you are dealing with a number of infractions that are manageable.

People have already been complaining about the unfairness of the NCAA towards small programs. The myth that the NCAA will never give a DP again has been debunked numerously by showing the small schools and non-revenue programs that received the DP AFTER SMU.

It's going to be impossible for major case to be followed by the letter with each infraction and added together.

It's OM's compliance office's fault that this is a major case not the NCAA's. Saying that the penalties are too steep for you to pay the price is a pretty pathetic excuse.

That was never the intention or ever presented that they would do so.
Is this your opinion or do you have actual knowledge of this? Once again why create a matrix that will not be used. They put mitigated, standard and aggravated in the matrix to account for variables. Going totally off Script should not be another option or the whole thing falls apart again.

And the schools would not want the matrix implemented in that way.

There have been several articles posted on ED that state that behind the scenes there are other institutions that want to see UNC and OM hammered. I don't think they will mind the matrix being used as they voted on.

Remember the matrix and how it is to be used was discussed with the member institutions, presidents, AD's and coaches long before it was unveiled to the public.

Are you saying that they presented one thing to the public while secretly having a different agreement by the scenes? That is deserving of a tin foil hat.

---

NM

Reason, I'm not just given an opinion. It is what they stated and have stated what the matrix is for and how it will be used. The first reason it was considered was strickly to stop the "risk/reward" that members were considering with premeditated violations. They wanted something in writing and a guideline to show violators, if you do this violation, you can expect this type of punishment. But they have never stated that the matrix must be stacked per every single violation by the letter. That was never on the board. That is what makes major cases complicated at punishment phase and what makes this a benchmark for schools. The rest of the members are looking at the "risk/reward" of this case to determine their line of violations they are willing to cross.

Your last section, what!?!? I was saying that the members had input into the matrix before it was finished. Don't know where you are getting the conspiracy theory. In fact the NCAA stated in the release that at one point they were not getting as much feed back as they had hoped to let the members know basically, if you don't respond now to help develop this, don't complain later when you get hit with the sanctions guidelines.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Really Clark?

And for the record, I believe this is a benchmark case for the NCAA and unprecedented. I can see school penalties in the form of 6-8 years probation, 2-3 year postseason ban, 50% scholarship reduction over 4 years, and large financial penalty. In the original NOA from last year with their laughable self imposed penalties they did self impose a financial penalty of 1% of the program's budget which is the same as a Level 1 standard. They knew that there was more there and wanted to self impose a large financial penalty (like many of their people believe you just throw money at a problem to make it go away). For reference they tried to self impose the same penalty that ULL received except ULL was only penalized $5,000. They tried to throw $159,325 at the NCAA. That's a large self imposed financial penalty. I believe they get significant penalties but the process that many are trying to apply the penalty matrix is not how violations to infractions to penalties work. The COI do have leadway to deviate from the matrix but thy have to be able to prove and satisfy the remaining NCAA and the appellant committee to do so. That is one of the major reasons for the matrix. You have guidelines to show schools and coaches exactly what to expect if caught because many were looking at old cases and deciding "it's worth it" to cheat in certain instances.

---

the NCAA also set a bit of a precedent with Penn State, where they handed down incredible penalties, and then reduced them over time. I'd hate for that to happen, but perhaps that could happen here too....hand out biblical punishments to send a message, and then lessen them over time....almost like credit for good behavior. Of course, that would have to mean that Ole Miss finally decided to get their house in order, which isn't a given.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bubb Rubb

the NCAA also set a bit of a precedent with Penn State, where they handed down incredible penalties, and then reduced them over time. I'd hate for that to happen, but perhaps that could happen here too....hand out biblical punishments to send a message, and then lessen them over time....almost like credit for good behavior. Of course, that would have to mean that Ole Miss finally decided to get their house in order, which isn't a given.

---

The Penn St deal was difficult. Mostly the issue was revolved around a scandal that had criminal implications and there was just not a lot of legislation for them to use other than the lying and cover up. That kind of put that case in its own category. The matrix can't really fit that case because of the type of infractions it actually involved and you had a massive scandal. The scandal is what actually had the COI thinking if they should or could use the death penalty with that case. It was a major external factor that made it difficult to decide on punishment and the reduction of penalties was a fluid situation. Without the external factor of a scandal, I don't think UNM will get a reduction in penalties at a later date, unless the appeals committee reduces a portion during the process. But that was a difficult and poignant case.

40 scholarships
2 year bowl ban
10 year show cause for freezus
10 year probation
vacate all wins under freezus

anything less will be a shame

I think the penalties will shake out something like this:

4 years probation
30 - 35 scholarships docked
2 year show cause for Freeze
Multiple show cause rulings for assistants (10 years for Farrar)
2 year bowl ban
Additional financial penalties
Recruiting visit and recruit contact limitations

This seems underwhelming, but it would cripple Ole Miss. They would lose their coach, have their hands tied in recruiting, see their young talent transfer out, and have to field a team of walk-ons and players they are battling sun belt teams for. It would take them 10 years to overcome it. Oh, and there's the repeat offender watch, too, so any misstep during that time would make it worse.

NCAA will accept the penalties Ole Miss has offered.






































Thread was about dead. Figured I would kick it up a notch

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Really Clark?

Guys. Nowhere in the bylaws or matrix does it state they have to stack the penalties with each violation. In fact it does say they can choose which part of the penalties they may or may not use for punishment. And I can't think of a time they have ever just across board added penalties on top of each other when dealing with multiple infractions. Honestly, the base penalty matrix for the starting point of what they are looking at is Level 1 aggravated and the COI will add or subtract accordingly each subsection. That will probably be the minimum. But nowhere are they required to added each penalty together by the matrix standard for each and every penalty. The Fraud and LOIC (especially since that is usually an aggravated offense) will be the starting point of the penalties more than likely then adjust upward from there. The coaches penalty matrix is considered separately from the school as well.

---

Well Hells Bells! No wonder they didn't do a damn thing to stop the cheating train. Why would they even make an effort to clean up their operation if there's a ceiling on the penalties the NCAA can hand down?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LockeDawg

Well Hells Bells! No wonder they didn't do a damn thing to stop the cheating train. Why would they even make an effort to clean up their operation if there's a ceiling on the penalties the NCAA can hand down?

---

There's a ceiling on any penalty that's handed down. The question is whether the penalties effectively stop the behavior. Clark's explanation leaves plenty of runway for the NCAA to turn Ole Miss into a quiet neighborhood for a decade or so.

Dear Coach,

I do NOT believe for any reason that the NCAA will except the penalties offered by OM.... haha.... GTHOM

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bubb Rubb

There's a ceiling on any penalty that's handed down. The question is whether the penalties effectively stop the behavior. Clark's explanation leaves plenty of runway for the NCAA to turn Ole Miss into a quiet neighborhood for a decade or so.

---

JMHO, but I don't think the behavior ceases until all of the rouge Boosters names are made public. Every person involved in the violations needs to feel the public humiliation strongly for the Network to pull in the reigns on this run away train. Run their names and businesses through the mud for a few months and those clowns will think twice before they seek out another high school coach or recruit.

Imagine yourself sitting on the pew in church on Sunday after a humiliating OleMiss loss and folks are pointing/whispering about your involvement paying players and effectively causing the team to suffer week in and week out. How happy will the wife be when she's attending the weekly prayer circle meeting or the local garden party & the vicious gossiping women are discussing hubby being named in the NOA. Imagine the vitriol you'd get from the members of the country club when the wife & kids are hanging out at the pool/tennis courts.

They deserve to be shamed for their actions, and if they aren't then what will ever stop them?

Neal McCready wrote yesterday that he thinks most Ole Miss fans will begrudgingly accept:

1 year bowl ban
15-20 scholarships
Suspension for Hugh Freeze

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LockeDawg

Well Hells Bells! No wonder they didn't do a damn thing to stop the cheating train. Why would they even make an effort to clean up their operation if there's a ceiling on the penalties the NCAA can hand down?

---

Exactly!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DancingRabbit

Neal McCready wrote yesterday that he thinks most Ole Miss fans will begrudgingly accept:

1 year bowl ban
15-20 scholarships
Suspension for Hugh Freeze

---

This is why from all accounts they haven't stopped their behavior. Why would you if this is the only penalty you get? They got a sugar bowl and they lose one year of bowl eligibility that can be covered by a trip to Hawaii.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reason2succeed

Exactly!!!



This is why from all accounts they haven't stopped their behavior. Why would you if this is the only penalty you get? They got a sugar bowl and they lose one year of bowl eligibility that can be covered by a trip to Hawaii.

---

If there is no solid, concrete reason to curtail the cheating due to minimal consequences, then what is the incentive to put a stop to them? This shit was systematic and it was orchestrated from the very core of the Athletic Department. When the Asst AD facilitates Booster/Recruit involvement, when he does all of the necessary leg work to introduce Boosters to specific recruits and aids in administering impermissible benefits then there is no control or oversight involved.

When the staffer continues to operate while the NCAA is in the building actively investigating, then someone within the institution directed him to do so knowing there'd be no repercussions down the road. OleMiss/Barney and the staff never even checked up during the investigation, they continued on business a usual. Then after the first NOA was received and the NCAA gave them a heads up on Barney's sideshow enterprise they chose to keep him on staff, WTF?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DancingRabbit

Neal McCready wrote yesterday that he thinks most Ole Miss fans will begrudgingly accept:

1 year bowl ban
15-20 scholarships
Suspension for Hugh Freeze

---

Maybe before NOA numero dos but now they better get a jar of lube and use it liberally.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrapGame

Maybe before NOA numero dos but now they better get a jar of lube and use it liberally.

---

Precisely what I was thinking. That would've been a little disappointing for just the first NOA. After the second one? It's gonna be a lot worse than that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrapGame

Maybe before NOA numero dos but now they better get a jar of lube and use it liberally.

---

Agreed, OM could have taken serious action after the 1st NOA and cut Freeze/Farrar/and every other staffer in the allegations. They could have shown contrition, put forth every effort to right the ship and prove to the NCAA that they would put the funds and attention necessary to harbor an environment of compliance.

Instead, they basically walked around with middle fingers in the air, laughing in the face of the NCAA and Barney kept the train a chuggin along.

Nuke the fing shitbirds

This thread update:

6,933 views
138 post

439 Online NOW.... keep it up ladies and gentlemen....
Some people are fishing in our pond today....:cool: