forums

Article: NCAA Charges Miami With Lack of Institutional Control

View as article
Ethnicsands said:
Biscuits said:
Ethnicsands said:
All the discussion about deals and signals and settlement has been wildly uninformed.

There is no one even to talk deal with up to now. The NCAA is not set up well to cut deals. The enforcement arm collects evidence and bring charges. The COI assess them and imposes penalties. You would have to talk deal with the COI, but you can't even consider doing that until there is a NOA.

So go back and ask what DS is angry about. The NOA brings serious charges against the U. That's one thing. The investigation revealed a true witch-hunt against the U. That's another. But what did she expect? Perhaps she thought Emmert would soften the NOA given the problems with the investigation. Maybe.

Maybe she's just trying to send a message to the COI? But that can be done more diplomatically.

I think the only way to interpret her comments are a signal of defiance in the face of a set of events that she is concerned could play out very badly for us.
Click to expand...

That's certainly one way to interpret it. It's not the only way, by any stretch.

It's not politically or legally expedient for the NCAA to just let Miami off with time served at this point. That's been a well-documented opinion by several takes I've read on the situation, and I agree with it. Since the process pretty much has to be followed, this NOA has to be issued, and it has to have teeth, given the extent of the investigation and the media attention on the case. Harsh language in the NOA does not directly signal that Miami would get hammered moving forward by the COI. Specifically, I'd be interested to read the NOAs for Boise, UCF, and Ohio State. Their penalties were all relatively light.

My opinion is that Donna's issuing this statement is a public shot across the bow of the NCAA. But it does not mean that she hasn't been given back-channel assurnaces that Miami will getting time-served, at the end of the formal process. As I mentioned earlier, a statement like this in the press by Miami gives the COI and *** Boy Emmert (I'd apply to have his name legally changed, if I could) the cover they need to throw Enforcement under the bus. Everyone knows that Enforcement was way off the reservation in this investigation, and who knows how many others? The head of the deparment has been fired, along with others. There's no one left on the Enforcement side to **** when they get bus-tossed and Miami gets times served.

There's blood on both sides. We've been muck-raked for over two years; NCAA has been severly undermined.

There's no reason for either side to pursue this further.
Click to expand...

Back-channel assurances by whom? The COI decides penalties, and unless you live in Robert Ludlumville, it's hard to see how they or any amongst them could give us assurances on penalties before they've seen the NOA. It's also hard to see how anyone could speak for that group. And if you think the COI has somehow met and given us assurances before the NOA was issued, well, let's just say that sounds fanciful.

And on the odd chance that somehow you're right, if DS has been given some 'assurances,' then why would she be publicly humiliating the NCAA? When someone cuts a deal with you, the quid pro quo generally includes shutting your trap and letting things play out.

Her going hard after them is pretty clear evidence in my view that there is nothing promised, no wink-winks. She's positioning things for maximum leverage. As she should.
Click to expand...

This. DS went harder than an Armenian on the NCAA. You don't do that to your adversary when you've got a deal worked out.

I was one who thought there would be a settlement worked out and that the COI would be a mere formality, but DS spitting bile with her public statements tells me otherwise.
 
Advertisement
If NCAA lets us skate we drop the entire thing and move on.

If not, we drop bombs over Baghdad... on.... wait for it....


392.gif
 
Personally, I think saga needs to end. We need to put this behind us. Let's finish up our business with NCAA and move on. Last thing we need is to keep this story alive once this mess w/ NCAA is over. JMO.
 
The Franchise said:
One thing I've gleaned from this is that we finally have a local reporter that is pro-UM and on our side instead of constantly trying to f#ck us--Tim Reynolds. Tim Reynolds is a champion. This dude should do a major expose' on this debacle, bury the NCAA and win a Pulitzer Prize in the process.
Click to expand...

Gotta disagree with you here. I dont think Tim Reynolds has any intention to be "Pro-UM", i just think he's the only local reporter that is coherant enough to see this for exactly what it is, a crock of ****. He doesnt really have a history of picking sides, he just seems to be a very good writer that can justify his worht through thorough investigative journalism and by putting out a quality product, not by creating attention through publishing unfounded garbage(like the Herald and Yahoo).
 
Advertisement
Terrible idea. A defense to defamation is truth. All the people that werent able to testify previously would now be forced to. Furthermore, none of the bull**** about strippers and abortions made it into the NOA anyways. **** yahoo but its not worth suing them.
 
Ethnicsands said:
Back-channel assurances by whom? The COI decides penalties, and unless you live in Robert Ludlumville, it's hard to see how they or any amongst them could give us assurances on penalties before they've seen the NOA. It's also hard to see how anyone could speak for that group. And if you think the COI has somehow met and given us assurances before the NOA was issued, well, let's just say that sounds fanciful.

And on the odd chance that somehow you're right, if DS has been given some 'assurances,' then why would she be publicly humiliating the NCAA? When someone cuts a deal with you, the quid pro quo generally includes shutting your trap and letting things play out.

Her going hard after them is pretty clear evidence in my view that there is nothing promised, no wink-winks. She's positioning things for maximum leverage. As she should.
Click to expand...

What precedence are you using for this assumption? We're in fairly uncharted territory here. As has been noted widely, this isn't a court of law. This isn't a plea-deal. This isn't a subcomittee hearing...yet.

Again, I'm of the opinion that the NCAA, in part, may need these threats from Miami in order to give it the political cover to let UM off with time served. Even though time served is pretty ******* hefty, already.

By no means am I saying your version is invalid. I buy it. But not at the exclusion of all other possibilities.
 
Biscuits said:
Ethnicsands said:
All the discussion about deals and signals and settlement has been wildly uninformed.

There is no one even to talk deal with up to now. The NCAA is not set up well to cut deals. The enforcement arm collects evidence and bring charges. The COI assess them and imposes penalties. You would have to talk deal with the COI, but you can't even consider doing that until there is a NOA.

So go back and ask what DS is angry about. The NOA brings serious charges against the U. That's one thing. The investigation revealed a true witch-hunt against the U. That's another. But what did she expect? Perhaps she thought Emmert would soften the NOA given the problems with the investigation. Maybe.

Maybe she's just trying to send a message to the COI? But that can be done more diplomatically.

I think the only way to interpret her comments are a signal of defiance in the face of a set of events that she is concerned could play out very badly for us.
Click to expand...

That's certainly one way to interpret it. It's not the only way, by any stretch.

It's not politically or legally expedient for the NCAA to just let Miami off with time served at this point. That's been a well-documented opinion by several takes I've read on the situation, and I agree with it. Since the process pretty much has to be followed, this NOA has to be issued, and it has to have teeth, given the extent of the investigation and the media attention on the case. Harsh language in the NOA does not directly signal that Miami would get hammered moving forward by the COI. Specifically, I'd be interested to read the NOAs for Boise, UCF, and Ohio State. Their penalties were all relatively light.

My opinion is that Donna's issuing this statement is a public shot across the bow of the NCAA. But it does not mean that she hasn't been given back-channel assurnaces that Miami will getting time-served, at the end of the formal process. As I mentioned earlier, a statement like this in the press by Miami gives the COI and *** Boy Emmert (I'd apply to have his name legally changed, if I could) the cover they need to throw Enforcement under the bus. Everyone knows that Enforcement was way off the reservation in this investigation, and who knows how many others? The head of the deparment has been fired, along with others. There's no one left on the Enforcement side to **** when they get bus-tossed and Miami gets times served.

There's blood on both sides. We've been muck-raked for over two years; NCAA has been severly undermined.

There's no reason for either side to pursue this further.
Click to expand...


This is where I'm at as well. The end-game is has likely been agreed upon and were all bearing witness to a well choreographed last act.
 
Advertisement
PUNCICANE said:
The Franchise said:
One thing I've gleaned from this is that we finally have a local reporter that is pro-UM and on our side instead of constantly trying to f#ck us--Tim Reynolds. Tim Reynolds is a champion. This dude should do a major expose' on this debacle, bury the NCAA and win a Pulitzer Prize in the process.
Click to expand...

Gotta disagree with you here. I dont think Tim Reynolds has any intention to be "Pro-UM", i just think he's the only local reporter that is coherant enough to see this for exactly what it is, a crock of ****. He doesnt really have a history of picking sides, he just seems to be a very good writer that can justify his worht through thorough investigative journalism and by putting out a quality product, not by creating attention through publishing unfounded garbage(like the Herald and Yahoo).
Click to expand...

I've read most of what he's written lately, and he's going out of his way to stand up for UM and to clown viciously the NCAA. Therefore, I'm confident in my position that he's pro-UM. I appreciate his work, and he could parlay this into a monster story on the corruption of the NCAA, get himself on 60 Minutes and win a Pulitzer. There's a GIANT story there for someone to get super famous off.
 
Biscuits said:
Ethnicsands said:
Back-channel assurances by whom? The COI decides penalties, and unless you live in Robert Ludlumville, it's hard to see how they or any amongst them could give us assurances on penalties before they've seen the NOA. It's also hard to see how anyone could speak for that group. And if you think the COI has somehow met and given us assurances before the NOA was issued, well, let's just say that sounds fanciful.

And on the odd chance that somehow you're right, if DS has been given some 'assurances,' then why would she be publicly humiliating the NCAA? When someone cuts a deal with you, the quid pro quo generally includes shutting your trap and letting things play out.

Her going hard after them is pretty clear evidence in my view that there is nothing promised, no wink-winks. She's positioning things for maximum leverage. As she should.
Click to expand...

What precedence are you using for this assumption? We're in fairly uncharted territory here. As has been noted widely, this isn't a court of law. This isn't a plea-deal. This isn't a subcomittee hearing...yet.

Again, I'm of the opinion that the NCAA, in part, may need these threats from Miami in order to give it the political cover to let UM off with time served. Even though time served is pretty ****ing hefty, already.

By no means am I saying your version is invalid. I buy it. But not at the exclusion of all other possibilities.
Click to expand...

I could definitely accept that she's trying to play her strong hand and force the NCAA to play ball and settle the case. But she didn't go off on the NCAA with a settlement already secretly in place.
 
Biscuits said:
Ethnicsands said:
Back-channel assurances by whom? The COI decides penalties, and unless you live in Robert Ludlumville, it's hard to see how they or any amongst them could give us assurances on penalties before they've seen the NOA. It's also hard to see how anyone could speak for that group. And if you think the COI has somehow met and given us assurances before the NOA was issued, well, let's just say that sounds fanciful.

And on the odd chance that somehow you're right, if DS has been given some 'assurances,' then why would she be publicly humiliating the NCAA? When someone cuts a deal with you, the quid pro quo generally includes shutting your trap and letting things play out.

Her going hard after them is pretty clear evidence in my view that there is nothing promised, no wink-winks. She's positioning things for maximum leverage. As she should.
Click to expand...

What precedence are you using for this assumption? We're in fairly uncharted territory here. As has been noted widely, this isn't a court of law. This isn't a plea-deal. This isn't a subcomittee hearing...yet.

Again, I'm of the opinion that the NCAA, in part, may need these threats from Miami in order to give it the political cover to let UM off with time served. Even though time served is pretty ******* hefty, already.

By no means am I saying your version is invalid. I buy it. But not at the exclusion of all other possibilities.
Click to expand...

Which assumption are you asking about?

There is really no way for there to have been assurances cut yet. Structurally, it doesn't work. The COI would have had to meet and agree on something in advance of even seeing the NOA, let alone having a hearing. Or the President of the NCAA would have had to cut a deal around the COI like the PSU situation, which hasn't happened here.

As for my comment about shutting your trap, that's just common knowledge across deals wherever they are cut. Whether it's a court of law, business settlement or otherwise. When someone cuts a deal with you, you generally don't turn around and start publicly excoriating that person or entity. That's a sign of the lack of a deal, not of having a deal.

It may well play out that we get time served, but it won't be because there's a 'deal' in place already.
 
Advertisement
The Franchise said:
PUNCICANE said:
The Franchise said:
One thing I've gleaned from this is that we finally have a local reporter that is pro-UM and on our side instead of constantly trying to f#ck us--Tim Reynolds. Tim Reynolds is a champion. This dude should do a major expose' on this debacle, bury the NCAA and win a Pulitzer Prize in the process.
Click to expand...

Gotta disagree with you here. I dont think Tim Reynolds has any intention to be "Pro-UM", i just think he's the only local reporter that is coherant enough to see this for exactly what it is, a crock of ****. He doesnt really have a history of picking sides, he just seems to be a very good writer that can justify his worht through thorough investigative journalism and by putting out a quality product, not by creating attention through publishing unfounded garbage(like the Herald and Yahoo).
Click to expand...

I've read most of what he's written lately, and he's going out of his way to stand up for UM and to clown viciously the NCAA. Therefore, I'm confident in my position that he's pro-UM. I appreciate his work, and he could parlay this into a monster story on the corruption of the NCAA, get himself on 60 Minutes and win a Pulitzer. There's a GIANT story there for someone to get super famous off.
Click to expand...

the dude is LEGIT, thats for certain
 
DCH said:
Terrible idea. A defense to defamation is truth. All the people that werent able to testify previously would now be forced to. Furthermore, none of the bull**** about strippers and abortions made it into the NOA anyways. **** yahoo but its not worth suing them.
Click to expand...

Yep. And Yahoo has an unlimited budget for legal fees I imagine. Not the one to go after
 
Advertisement
I don't think there's a deal in place. What deal could there be? What part would Miami play in a deal? What could Miami give the NCAA aside froim an assurance not to sue, and I think it's pretty clear already under what terms Miami will or won't pursue legal action.

I think Emmert, or someone at his bidding, has told Miami that we're getting time served. I think Emmert can give the COI marching orders. I think the members of the COI are not interested in seeing this case get any ugiler than it already is, even without any additional pressure from *** Boy. Them telling Miami 'You're getting time served,' isn't a deal. It's an indication.
 
Pretty much the most embarrassing situation I can remember the NCAA handling, and that's saying something.

I'm waiting for their next star witness to be Dan Brown and his new tell-all book about Miami's benefits being hidden somewhere in The Louvre.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top