Article: NCAA Charges Miami With Lack of Institutional Control

Dan E. Dangerously
Dan E. Dangerously
4 min read

Comments (1051)

just because we share a common enemy does not make her a friend.

"the enemy of my enemy is my friend"

I would love her next statement to be "My client openly admits that everything he has told the NCAA and Yahoo was a lie. He wished to go on the record and say 'It's a Canes Thing. You wouldn' understand'"

The problem is she's not infuriated with the NCAA because that's the wishes of her client Shapiro. She's infuriated because the NCAA didn't pay her full bill.
 
Guys the less that the guys at other places get, the better it is for us. Because it happened at UM. I know we want some of these guys to feel the pain, but keep the big picture in mind.
 
Like that stuff on Morton. He was the dirtiest coach besides Hurtt IIRC. That doesnt look too damaging
 
And yet i got attacked all day for saying maybe the cooperation strategy we pursued wasnt an unmitigated success. I'd guess Donna Shalala herself regrets it, yet her sycophants here see her every action as beyond flawless.

But what good would an adversarial approach done right off the bat? And what harm has been done by cooperating up until this point?

I'm not sure how the outcome would have been any different if UM and Shalala had come out swinging like they have now. I'm not saying the course of cooperation is an "umitigated success", but I don't see how other courses of action would have been better to this point. They were cooperative up until the point they learned about the NCAA's malfeasance. Seems like a prudent approach to a situation to me.

Me too. Because of how she played it, we now get to wear the white hat. We may be the first school to have a president who engineered a situation where screaming foul against the NCAA isn't being perceived as sour grapes.

Guess what? We broke rules. Lots of them. Badly. And we're the good guys!! Brilliant mastery of a complicated situation by Shalala. It's great to be!!

and this guy gets it as well. you are dead on balls accurate about being able to wear the white hat. if we go guns out playing our cards from the get go we lose the pr war, which whether people want to acknowledge it or not, is crucial bc at this point the NCAA is under fire for their ethics and actions and winning the pr war is key in getting the media on our side to scrutinize and microscope the NCAA for what they are, unethical and improper. Ethnic is a good guy and solid poster but you are just being contrary at this point. Even you are admitting that she may have played this perfectly so by hedging your bet one way and going another is being just argumentative. It's beyond ridiculous to claim that any administrator is without flaw but there is absolutely nothing wrong with believing that we are in the best hands possible by having a President that has solid political power and intellect to handle the NCAA. I will make no apologies for believing that Donna Shalala and Mike Glazier have the best feel for this and will handle this as well as any people in the country.


"Dead on balls accurate"?

260.jpg

it's an industry term
 
Advertisement
I think it's very telling how in her closing statements, Donna said the following:

We deeply regret any violations, but we have suffered enough.

Interesting choice of word, suffering. We've certainly already paid, 2.5 years worth of it. I hope she's already called some people to ask favors, it's that time.
 
Be assured, Donna's statement wasn't written in 15 minutes last night. They had the topline points ready to go.
 
The NOA is a complaint. Then there's a discovery process presumably. Then a response. Then a hearing.
 
Advertisement
hopefully Donna gets Horseface Robinson fired from Yahoo and gets him his true occupation:

getting it from race horse studs and birthing thoroughbreds
 
http://www.athleticscholarships.net/2013/02/20/ncaa-lost-miami-investigation.htm

NCAA Lost a Lifeline With Miami Debacle

The misconduct in the Miami investigation certain is a black mark on the history of the NCAA and throws the organization into disarray in the present. The NCAA has made a lot of decisions and rules that people disagree with over the years, but rare are the cases where the conduct of the national office itself is universally condemned by both the public and the membership. At the same time major regulatory overhauls are underway, the NCAA must now also repair the enforcement staff, rather than just the penalty structure and Committee on Infractions.

But the biggest blow to the NCAA was not to its reputation or to its present standing. Rather, one possible long-term future of the NCAA was lost with the mishandling of the Miami case and the quick move to deliver the Notice of Allegations before the ink was dry on the NCAA’s external review. Like it or not, uncertainty about the NCAA’s future means rocky times ahead for college athletics at all levels.

It is no longer a question of if but when there is a major transformation of the top level of college athletics in favor of the largest schools. That transformation could take one of three forms:

Changing Division I radically, beyond the current push for deregulation;
Creation of a new division within the NCAA; or
A group of schools leaving the NCAA and launching a new intercollegiate athletics association.
The first two are not devestating events for the NCAA, so long as the rest of the NCAA (Divisions II and III along with the have-nots of Division I) do not concede too much to the big boys. The third would be, especially if it was not a football organization, but instead an all-sports organization that included the most valuable men’s basketball programs.

But a new organization will need a regulatory arm. The idea that a bunch of schools that cannot operate in packs of 8–14 without decent sized rulebooks are going to operate a national organization of 50–150 schools based on a pamphlet of regulations and no enforcement arm is laughable. Not to mention that the presidents and conference commissioners which control college athletics have expressed no support for radical deregulation or abandoning amateurism and academic standards. Heck, they have not even agreed to let some technical recruiting rules fall by the wayside.

A successor to the NCAA will have a rulebook of at least 100 pages and will need someone to enforce those rules. To boost public trust, the schools making up this new association may appoint an independent third party to do investigations, interpret rules, make eligibility determinations, and levy punishments. Just like many have demanded the NCAA do for years.

Prior to the Miami investigation, the NCAA was one of the most logical candiates. If the NCAA was not operating the tournaments, it reduces the conflict of interest inherent when the same organization has to punish the schools most important to its biggest source of revenue. And as much as the NCAA is ridiculed for how it handles its regulatory functions, no other organization has any experience in this area. Arms-length dealing with a set of schools could lead to an agreement that improves on the current enforcement system without throwing away the institutional knowledge and experience the NCAA has gained.

That would give the NCAA a fighting chance at surviving to keep the remains of Division I and Divisions II and III alive. Revenue from this agreement along with other sources like the Eligibility Center (which the new organization might still use), TV contracts (albeit smaller), ticket sales, etc. may still fund some version of the 89 tournaments the NCAA runs. There would be cut backs, but a slide all the way to the levels of the NAIA could be avoided.

Not anymore though. With the mistakes in the Miami investigation, it is hard to see the largest schools throwing away one of the chief benefits of being in the NCAA (the national office as whipping boy) but still trust the NCAA to handle the enforcement of their rules. If there is a split, there is now no chance that the NCAA would be an option as a third-party enforcement arm. The new organization will either hire someone else or will gut the NCAA of its best people and practices to seed its own internal regulatory wing.

That means the loss of a significant potential revenue source for the NCAA following a split and a period of growing pains for a new organization. A new national office that does not appear to be an improvement over the NCAA at the same time revenue stops growing while expenses keep going up may bring about one of the doomsday scenarios facing college sports over the next 15–25 years.

Posted on February 20, 2013 by John Infante
This entry was posted in Bylaw Blog, Bylaws, NCAA Investigations. Bookmark the permalink.
 
Advertisement
So all this talk of how the school CHEATED and how the athletes CHEATED the first NOI that the public sees basically shows that Shapiro had ZERO contact with recruits and that he was hanging out with their coaches?? And that the coach that allowed this we got rid of? I hope all the NOI they sent out are this frivolous, the NCAA is looking worse by the minute. Also its always baffled me where they get their dollar figures from, that sure as **** doesnt look like 6K worth of benefits to me. They always try to put amounts on **** that they cant determine.
 
What discovery process?

You have 90 days to respond. I would imagine any school that has been charged would like to see the evidence. Why wouldn't they provide it up front?
 
This is the NCAA that we are talking about. Logic is a luxury!
What discovery process?

You have 90 days to respond. I would imagine any school that has been charged would like to see the evidence. Why wouldn't they provide it up front?
 
Advertisement
AP report: Hurtt, Hill and Fernandez got the Rule 10.1 citings because NCAA believes they "misled" probe.
11:59am - 20 Feb 13

This is hilarious
 
Tim Reynolds

Stuff I'm hearing from NOA is comical: Someone asked Shapiro for money to buy his girlfriend a present, then kept the cash. (They broke up.)
11:34am - 20 Feb 13
 
Back
Top