Article: NCAA Charges Miami With Lack of Institutional Control

[NoahZach]

This is the sort of thing I was concerned about when I questioned the BOT statement yesterday. They pretty much forced the NCAA to issue a vote of confidence, because the alternative was not viable. The problem is, people get dug in on their views once they go public. Not sure the public battle is one UM should want. Our goal is to put this behind us, not reform the NCAA.

The "vote of confidence" seems pretty weak and meaningless to me. I suspect that it is going to look desperate and isn't going to have the intended impact in the public. Just more to ridicule in the NCAA's handling of its business.

That said, I agree to UM shouldn't--and probably doesn't--want a public battle. Unfortunately, I think UM feels it needs to plow the ground and try to push a settlement or set public opinion so that it is easier for the COI to rule in UM's favor.

In the latter circumstance, the question is whether the COI will come down hard anyway to try to demonstrate that it does what it does, regardless of public opinion, or whether it will sense that deciding in accord with public opinion will demonstrate that, ultimately, the process works. The latter move may help the NCAA move on from this debacle and pursue needed reforms under less pressure.

 

[Ethnicsands]

This is the sort of thing I was concerned about when I questioned the BOT statement yesterday. They pretty much forced the NCAA to issue a vote of confidence, because the alternative was not viable. The problem is, people get dug in on their views once they go public. Not sure the public battle is one UM should want. Our goal is to put this behind us, not reform the NCAA.

The "vote of confidence" seems pretty weak and meaningless to me. I suspect that it is going to look desperate and isn't going to have the intended impact in the public. Just more to ridicule in the NCAA's handling of its business.

That said, I agree to UM shouldn't--and probably doesn't--want a public battle. Unfortunately, I think UM feels it needs to plow the ground and try to push a settlement or set public opinion so that it is easier for the COI to rule in UM's favor.

In the latter circumstance, the question is whether the COI will come down hard anyway to try to demonstrate that it does what it does, regardless of public opinion, or whether it will sense that deciding in accord with public opinion will demonstrate that, ultimately, the process works. The latter move may help the NCAA move on from this debacle and pursue needed reforms under less pressure.

The other folks on the executive committee certainly don't think they are chopped liver compared to DS. Egos can get involved.

Train wrecks happen sometimes. The lack of anyone in charge and disalignment of interests, both of which characterize this situation, are common contributing factors to things falling apart.

 

[Ethnicsands]

This is the sort of thing I was concerned about when I questioned the BOT statement yesterday. They pretty much forced the NCAA to issue a vote of confidence, because the alternative was not viable. The problem is, people get dug in on their views once they go public. Not sure the public battle is one UM should want. Our goal is to put this behind us, not reform the NCAA.

There's reason the public vote of confidence has earned the moniker 'dreaded'.

IDGAF if Emmert stays or goes, but there's an awful lot of chatter out there.

Dude needs to go. Luca Brasi style.

 

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

the only person killing it more then Bilas is this guy.....

Tim Reynolds ‏@ByTimReynolds
The NCAA still supports the NCAA, in other words? I'm releasing a statement later today reaffirming my commitment to myself.



HAAA

Reynolds/Bilas '16

[video=youtube;2lzZ5xzVWS0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lzZ5xzVWS0[/video]

 

[The Franchise]

That sounded like a guy screaming for a life preserver. Pathetic. Measure that against Don Donna's fire and brimstone statement. Don Donna sounded like Ric Flair in his prime on the stick, and that dull **** from the NCAA sounded like Van Hammer.

 

[NVA CANE]

Lulz at any non SEC school defending emmert. Dude is all about the SEC. Was he around during the cam newton issue? This **** about bama and PEDs. Pictures of guys holding wads of cash from ole miss (clemson too). If anything all non SEC presidents on the ncaa board need to go after his *** and the SEC and even the playing field.

 

[Problem2]

" The NCAA said it would consider the motions by three former assistants to dismiss charges against them, but none know if they have a legitimate chance of success. At least one of the three has been considering a lawsuit."

http://miamiherald.typepad.com/sports-buzz/#storylink=cpy

 

[NoahZach]

This is the sort of thing I was concerned about when I questioned the BOT statement yesterday. They pretty much forced the NCAA to issue a vote of confidence, because the alternative was not viable. The problem is, people get dug in on their views once they go public. Not sure the public battle is one UM should want. Our goal is to put this behind us, not reform the NCAA.

The "vote of confidence" seems pretty weak and meaningless to me. I suspect that it is going to look desperate and isn't going to have the intended impact in the public. Just more to ridicule in the NCAA's handling of its business.

That said, I agree to UM shouldn't--and probably doesn't--want a public battle. Unfortunately, I think UM feels it needs to plow the ground and try to push a settlement or set public opinion so that it is easier for the COI to rule in UM's favor.

In the latter circumstance, the question is whether the COI will come down hard anyway to try to demonstrate that it does what it does, regardless of public opinion, or whether it will sense that deciding in accord with public opinion will demonstrate that, ultimately, the process works. The latter move may help the NCAA move on from this debacle and pursue needed reforms under less pressure.

The other folks on the executive committee certainly don't think they are chopped liver compared to DS. Egos can get involved.

Train wrecks happen sometimes. The lack of anyone in charge and disalignment of interests, both of which characterize this situation, are common contributing factors to things falling apart.

Yeah, but the BOT did not ask for NCAA reform and did not ask for Emmert's head. All it did was express regret, note the existence of troubling aspects of the NCAA's investigation and join Shalala's request that no further sanctions be imposed. I don't see how that forced the vote of confidence, which I think sprang from the calls for Emmert's head in the media. It seems to me that the Executive Committee wanted to squash that talk and the vote of confidence was the result.

Involvement of egos at the Executive Committee level certainly is a worry, to the extent that the Executive Committee plays any role in the infractions side of the case. It looks like the ship sailed on the question of a private settlement of this mess, which is where the Executive Committee apparently had more direct involvement.

At this stage, it seems to me that the question is what happens with the COI. I think that is UM's target audience right now on the PR side--and appears to have been the target of the BOT's statement.

 

[Ethnicsands]

This is the sort of thing I was concerned about when I questioned the BOT statement yesterday. They pretty much forced the NCAA to issue a vote of confidence, because the alternative was not viable. The problem is, people get dug in on their views once they go public. Not sure the public battle is one UM should want. Our goal is to put this behind us, not reform the NCAA.

The "vote of confidence" seems pretty weak and meaningless to me. I suspect that it is going to look desperate and isn't going to have the intended impact in the public. Just more to ridicule in the NCAA's handling of its business.

That said, I agree to UM shouldn't--and probably doesn't--want a public battle. Unfortunately, I think UM feels it needs to plow the ground and try to push a settlement or set public opinion so that it is easier for the COI to rule in UM's favor.

In the latter circumstance, the question is whether the COI will come down hard anyway to try to demonstrate that it does what it does, regardless of public opinion, or whether it will sense that deciding in accord with public opinion will demonstrate that, ultimately, the process works. The latter move may help the NCAA move on from this debacle and pursue needed reforms under less pressure.

The other folks on the executive committee certainly don't think they are chopped liver compared to DS. Egos can get involved.

Train wrecks happen sometimes. The lack of anyone in charge and disalignment of interests, both of which characterize this situation, are common contributing factors to things falling apart.

Yeah, but the BOT did not ask for NCAA reform and did not ask for Emmert's head. All it did was express regret, note the existence of troubling aspects of the NCAA's investigation and join Shalala's request that no further sanctions be imposed. I don't see how that forced the vote of confidence, which I think sprang from the calls for Emmert's head in the media. It seems to me that the Executive Committee wanted to squash that talk and the vote of confidence was the result.

Involvement of egos at the Executive Committee level certainly is a worry, to the extent that the Executive Committee plays any role in the infractions side of the case. It looks like the ship sailed on the question of a private settlement of this mess, which is where the Executive Committee apparently had more direct involvement.

At this stage, it seems to me that the question is what happens with the COI. I think that is UM's target audience right now on the PR side--and appears to have been the target of the BOT's statement.

Gotta disagree with your take. The BOT's statement included them saying they 'respectfully, but firmly' agree with DS that no further sanctions are warranted. That 'but firmly' is nothing if not a cannon shot so close to the bow that it dislodged some barnacles. It can only mean 'or else.' and that, in my view, is what drove the NCAA's response. They really had no choice.

 

[The Franchise]

Not buying that the ncaa feels it needs to dig its heels in as a result of anything UM's said. The smart play is to realize that they caused all this uproar with their blatant corruption. They'd be well-served to lick their wounds and to quietly process what Don Donna mandated. There's no need for them to heel dig when they're clearly in the wrong. All they'll buy themselves is a meritorious lawsuit and possible Congressional interruptis.

I think Noah Zach is on the right path with the support for Emmertt being a result of the media's tirades against him specifically. The media's entire slant has been anti-Emmertt. UM has said nothing about Emmertt. UM probably doesn't even care about Emmertt; we just care about the result here.

 

[Ethnicsands]

Not buying that the ncaa feels it needs to dig its heels in as a result of anything UM's said. The smart play is to realize that they caused all this uproar with their blatant corruption. They'd be well-served to lick their wounds and to quietly process what Don Donna mandated. There's no need for them to heel dig when they're clearly in the wrong. All they'll buy themselves is a meritorious lawsuit and possible Congressional interruptis.

I think Noah Zach is on the right path with the support for Emmertt being a result of the media's tirades against him specifically. The media's entire slant has been anti-Emmertt. UM has said nothing about Emmertt. UM probably doesn't even care about Emmertt; we just care about the result here.

I'm not claiming their strategy is a good one, just observing that the UM statements do not exist in a vacuum, and do generate reactions. I think it is more likely the ncaa is responding to UM here than to the media. There's no reason to respond to the media if you're the NCAA. You can't control it, it will continue, you may stoke it further, you can't keep responding to it, etc. UM's statements are highly unusual in like circumstances. I'd say the NCAA's is, also, but i'm not sure there hve been like circumstances for them.

 

[NoahZach]

Not buying that the ncaa feels it needs to dig its heels in as a result of anything UM's said. The smart play is to realize that they caused all this uproar with their blatant corruption. They'd be well-served to lick their wounds and to quietly process what Don Donna mandated. There's no need for them to heel dig when they're clearly in the wrong. All they'll buy themselves is a meritorious lawsuit and possible Congressional interruptis.

I think Noah Zach is on the right path with the support for Emmertt being a result of the media's tirades against him specifically. The media's entire slant has been anti-Emmertt. UM has said nothing about Emmertt. UM probably doesn't even care about Emmertt; we just care about the result here.

I'm not claiming their strategy is a good one, just observing that the UM statements do not exist in a vacuum, and do generate reactions. I think it is more likely the ncaa is responding to UM here than to the media. There's no reason to respond to the media if you're the NCAA. You can't control it, it will continue, you may stoke it further, you can't keep responding to it, etc. UM's statements are highly unusual in like circumstances. I'd say the NCAA's is, also, but i'm not sure there hve been like circumstances for them.

But, you can try to end the dialog regarding the firing of Emmert by saying very directly that you're not firing him. That's what the Executive Committee was doing, I think.

 

[Southcane]

I don't understand all the over analysis here. To me, it is very simple. ESPN talking heads, CBS sports writers, even the New York Times and the Washington Post ALL have sharply criticized Emmert leadership and many asked for his resignation. The executive committee felt it was compelled to publicly support him. He may have even called the presidents on the committee and said: Do you want me to stay on the job? If yes you better show me some public support! Whatever happens after this is anyone guess.

 

[Problem2]

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/video/collegebasketball-on-cbs/0l8hftRV_OFc

**** Seth Davis and Doug Gottlieb

 

[Dan E. Dangerously]

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/video/collegebasketball-on-cbs/0l8hftRV_OFc

**** Seth Davis and Doug Gottlieb

Seth Davis doesn't know his *** from a hole in the ground. Guy has no clue Miami already served both bowl bans. Shouldn't shock anyone that they remembered to mind Emmert's shaft in that segment, they're about to air the NCAA's big multi-billion dollar meal ticket in a couple of months. Aids be upon them.

 

[nadiamufdi]

LMAO @ Gottlieb trying to talk down on anybody after he used stolen credit cards as a student.

 

[Mangum]

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/video/collegebasketball-on-cbs/0l8hftRV_OFc

**** Seth Davis and Doug Gottlieb

"Miami self imposed 2 bowl bans on its football program, one of which it has already served" - Seth Davis

 

[Ghandi]

Someone should post Gottliebs criminal exploits on twitter. Thee ******* clowns and their glass houses

 

[Problem2]

Hurtt's NOA was released, the most important part

"According to the notice, Hurtt engaged in improper recruiting of seven recruits form 2006-09 along with two other assistants and Shapiro. Names of the other assistants were redacted from the document released Monday.

The allegations mostly involve providing illegal transportation and lodging to the recruits. The total estimated value of the extra benefits was $3,315.

One incident involved a trip to Shapiro's home. Hurtt allegedly drove recruits and current players to the residence where the booster drove them around in his car. They later played played pool and Shapiro allegedly awarded cash prizes to the winning team."

You gotta be ****ting me

 

[DiegoCane]

Hurtt's NOA was released, the most important part

"According to the notice, Hurtt engaged in improper recruiting of seven recruits form 2006-09 along with two other assistants and Shapiro. Names of the other assistants were redacted from the document released Monday.

The allegations mostly involve providing illegal transportation and lodging to the recruits. The total estimated value of the extra benefits was $3,315.

One incident involved a trip to Shapiro's home. Hurtt allegedly drove recruits and current players to the residence where the booster drove them around in his car. They later played played pool and Shapiro allegedly awarded cash prizes to the winning team."

You gotta be ****ting me

So the guy we all thought they had the most on, is in for $3,315. The NCAA has absolutely **** on us and they are still going to try and go after us. I feel like I'm in the twilight zone.

And I hate Hurtt as much as the next guy but if this is all they have and they show cause him, wow.

And I'm sure the other 2 assistants are probably Stoutland and Pannuzio, they however had the SEC protection.