#
Printable View
#
What's that smell
Doesn't matter. The NCAA will do with Ole Miss what they choose.
It really doesn't matter.
This isn't 1+1+1 = 3. This is 1+1+X = Whatever the 17 we want
Where did Connor take the ACT?
Why did Saban back off when it looked like Connor wouldn't make the grades?
Then... Surprise he makes it.
#
I think it's when they get caught that determines if it's the new matrix not when the rules that are broken takes place.
• Conduct breaches that occurred before Oct. 30, 2012, and are processed before Aug. 1, 2013, will be subject to the current process and penalties.
• Conduct breaches that occurred before Oct. 30, 2012, but are processed after Aug. 1, 2013, would be subject to the new process but would incur the more lenient of the two penalty structures (current and revised).
• Conduct breaches that occurred during a span that includes both before and after Oct. 30, 2012, and are processed after Aug. 1, 2013, will be subject to new process and the revised penalties as long as most of the violations occurred after Oct. 30, 2012.
• Conduct breaches that occur after Oct. 30, 2012 and are processed after Aug. 1, 2013, will be subject to both the new process and the revised penalty structure.
#
#
Regardless of how the NCAA looks at it, this is going to be TSUN when they finally go before the COI.
https://d2arxad8u2l0g7.cloudfront.ne...a/19556414.gif
Conduct breach means infraction. Each infraction is taken independently and you have 13 infractions or conduct breaches named in the NOA. Your orginal question was about the ACT fraud happening prior to the new structure. All infractions at this point are processed under the new structure (Level 1, 2, etc). It's why you see the infractions in the UNC case listed as Level 1 eventhough many of the infractions go back nearly a decade before the new system. Now the actual penalty portion will be under the new matrix UNLESS the older penalty process would have been lesser. This would only be for the ACT fraud stuff. Everything else will be under the new process and penalty matrix.Quote:
Originally Posted by spbdawg
This is the key point in bold. ACT fraud is about as significant as you can get from an NCAA infraction standpoint.Quote:
Originally Posted by Really Clark?
This is correct... Precedent, evidence, and proof are secondary to perceived guilt/lying and/or arrogance in the eyes of the NCAA...Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
That being said, after the Cam Fiasco, the bungled Miami investigation, the backtracking on the PSU sanctions, etc there is no telling which way this thing will go...
When is their 90 days up?
#
I think this may be what could kick it up a notch with OM. If they determine that this is all part of the same pattern of systemic cheating, they could enforce the new standard for the old offenses.Quote:
Originally Posted by Really Clark?
It's been up. But they requested an extension and draft night has thrown an enormous monkey wrench in this process. To be honest, I don't think the NCAA ever dreamed of a process to handle a scenario like UNM. I think they wanted to finalize this NOA and keep investigating them as a repeat offender. But the length and number of violations is already getting into one of the most egregious in recent history. But Tunsil is the gift that keeps on giving.Quote:
Originally Posted by RBritt
It's been mentioned before by multiple people so this isn't breaking news but the latest is they don't go before the COI until sometime in 2017. If they're going to do something with all this talent they have "acquired", this is the year to do it. They have this season on the house. The bookie is coming for his payment before the next season.Quote:
Originally Posted by Really Clark?
How long did the delay give them? I keep hearing '17, but shouldn't the delay run out before then?
They have 2 classes on their roster that would be good "Mullen classes", 1 class ranked 43rd with no one of significance left, 1 class that was ranked 6th with nearly no one left, and an elite class of true freshmen. They aren't talented enough to make any type of real noise. They just aren't. If they didn't have Kelly at quarterback they would struggle to get bowl eligible with that schedule. As it stands, they will win 7 or 8 games, just like they are predicted to.Quote:
Originally Posted by starkvegasdawg34
And that still pisses me off to no endQuote:
Originally Posted by starkvegasdawg34
Conner... "Coach I dont want to go to Ole Miss, but I have too" ....Quote:
Originally Posted by Leroy Jenkins
Take that how ever you want too.
I really think the NCAA is in some uncharted territory and there several questions we just don't know the answer to. If it was just UNM and NCAA needing to flesh out what Tunsil said, then maybe the fall COI hearing would have been plenty of time. But with Rumors of sources opening up to the NCAA, it may have caused them needing more time as well. In the end with such a long investigation with the most Level 1's of any school in recent history, I really think the NCAA knows this case will set a huge precedent.Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
#
#
Somewhat of a thread hijack but if ole miss FANS were given the choice between the below scenarios which do you think they would choose:
Scenario 1: 33 scholarships over 3 years, 2 year bowl ban, show cause for 2 assistants, and 1 year suspension for freeze. 5 years probation.
Or
Scenario 2: 16 scholarships over 4 years. 3 years probation. No bowl ban. Show cause for 1 assistant. No suspension for freeze BUT the grove is shut down and fenced off for 5 years.
Honest question which would ole miss fans choose?
Ole Miss people are just stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by THE Bruce Dickinson
The NCAA knows that everybody cheats a little. A player goes back to his hometown and some local booster buys him supper. It happens everywhere. I think the NCAA kinds turns a blind eye to it. I think the things the NCAA punishes harshly are the things that don't happen everywhere. Not all assistant coaches are paying utility bills. Very few teams are probably rigging ACT scores. And I would bet that Freeze might be the only coach who took a booster on a recruiting visit. That is blatant and ballsy.
Those were mistakes.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebodyshotmypaw
The thing I'm wondering is whether the NCAA will stick them with a lack of institutional control. This investigation has spanned over 3 presidents. Khyatt, Jones and currently, Vitter. There have been 2 athletic directors in Boone and Bjork. Also, 3 football coaches in Orgeron, Nutt and Freeze. I think it important to remember that Freeze worked with David Saunders under Orgeron. Freeze was cited for improper recruiting on some players from Memphis while working as a recruiting asst under Oregeron. If this isn't LOIC I don't know what is.
Saunders was also recruiting coordinator under Cutcliffe. Saunders, who currently has a huge show cause (8 years?), was hired by OM three different times.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bodaski
Trick question... both are the same...Quote:
Originally Posted by THE Bruce Dickinson