Dennis Dodd: NCAA accusses UM of deflecting allegations...

[The Franchise]

Why do they care? That's the whe point. They have become emotionally invested in hurting Miami. Their job was to investigate and write a report what they found. Instead they go to lengths to continue to slander the University. All to help the SEC.

They care because they're protecting their jobs. Money is one of the biggest motivators in the history of the world.

They got in too deep with this, and now, instead of having the ability to say, "we've done a thorough investigation in conjunction with the ultra-cooperative University of Miami and found no sufficiently corroborated allegations that would justify any further punishment" they have to resort to heel digging to justify the 3 years and countless dollars they wasted chasing the flimsy allegations of a convicted liar with a stated vendetta.

As soon as I saw all that verbiage about getting "creative" in order to find new ways to make cases against member institutions I knew there was going to be problems. Getting "creative" is a euphemism for being a scumbag piece of **** when it comes to investigative organizations. They don't need to get "creative"; they need to see exactly what is there and be forthright about it. Save the creativity for the artists of the world. That's not the ncaa's job.

Correct.

The sad part is if the NCAA wanted to protect themselves for the long-run, they would be best with

1. Firing the incompetent,

2. Admitting to terrible errors,

3. Fixing the investigative process with rules and standards (making sure everyone sees how they will conduct investigations in the future), and

4. Throwing out this case.

At some point you bring a cause of action or not. At some point you realize the investment (man-power, hours of investigation, resources etc.) doesn't provide a good gain. If the NCAA was smart they should have went to Shalala and offered a settlement a long time ago but they are too far to go back now. Shalala is also done with this mess.

You can always tell when dumb people inhabit and run an organization because they never fully admit wrongdoing and try to correct the issues. Instead, they heel dig and try to protect their gigs by going on the offensive.

In some situations, it is best to say, "We f#cked this up, and here's how we're going to fix it." The ncaa has lost track of who it is supposed to serve and what its purpose is supposed to be. They've become a rogue organization with no checks and balances that thinks it can do as it pleases. The "creative" rhetoric that I saw bandied about in those emails between those pigs made me sick to my stomach. I know what "creative" means when it comes to this sort of ****, and it's never a good thing.

Problem is that they had their feeble minds up as soon as Robinscum wrote his fable and wanted to make something stick instead of seeing if there was anything there and then going from there. They've got the ENTIRE process wrong, and it needs a complete overhaul. On top of that, they need to adopt a real standard and burden of proof instead of this floating nebulous nonsense we've seen over the years. The double-self-corroboration debacle SHOULD be the end of the way they do everything there. That **** should have frightened every member institution to the point of demanding immediate change.

 

[Udaman]

This has long since ceased to be about rational behavior on the part of the NCAA. We may very well have to pursue legal recourse against them. There's no question in my mind that we have suffered damages. However, the question I would ask the lawyers on the site is how can UM get around the NCAA's "non-state actor" defense which they trot out every time they get sued, and which the Supreme Court sanctioned in the Tarkanian case?

 

[The Franchise]

This has long since ceased to be about rational behavior on the part of the NCAA. We may very well have to pursue legal recourse against them. There's no question in my mind that we have suffered damages. However, the question I would ask the lawyers on the site is how can UM get around the NCAA's "non-state actor" defense which they trot out every time they get sued, and which the Supreme Court sanctioned in the Tarkanian case?

Just do what O'Bannon and McNair did.

 

[bozcane]

Can we hire a guy like this..seriously. Aside from Emmert, who else is on the list?

Dude's too flaky and doesn't ride in cabs well. Need something cleaner. Time for a fly-by:

 

[MIA42178]

This has long since ceased to be about rational behavior on the part of the NCAA. We may very well have to pursue legal recourse against them. There's no question in my mind that we have suffered damages. However, the question I would ask the lawyers on the site is how can UM get around the NCAA's "non-state actor" defense which they trot out every time they get sued, and which the Supreme Court sanctioned in the Tarkanian case?

IMHLO, that defense isn't going to fly on an intentional fraud cause of action.

 

[McGahee2TheHouse]

This has long since ceased to be about rational behavior on the part of the NCAA. We may very well have to pursue legal recourse against them. There's no question in my mind that we have suffered damages. However, the question I would ask the lawyers on the site is how can UM get around the NCAA's "non-state actor" defense which they trot out every time they get sued, and which the Supreme Court sanctioned in the Tarkanian case?

IMHLO, that defense isn't going to fly on an intentional fraud cause of action.

What are the elements for that COA?

 

[MIA42178]

This has long since ceased to be about rational behavior on the part of the NCAA. We may very well have to pursue legal recourse against them. There's no question in my mind that we have suffered damages. However, the question I would ask the lawyers on the site is how can UM get around the NCAA's "non-state actor" defense which they trot out every time they get sued, and which the Supreme Court sanctioned in the Tarkanian case?

IMHLO, that defense isn't going to fly on an intentional fraud cause of action.

What are the elements for that COA?

Common Law Fraud (narrowed down the the 5 elements they learn you in law school):
1. Misrepresentation (or ommission) of a material fact
2. made by a person with scienter (knowledge) of its falsity
3. made with the intent to deceive the victim
4. The victim justifiably relied on the falsity
5. Damages

 

[Canesfan1899]

I feel at this point there is no way this doesn't go to court and end very ugly for the NCAA. They have been given so many chances to say enough is enough and close the case and they just keep backing themselves further into a corner.

 

[4Canes]

The most surprising of all is the rhetoric that's coming from the NCAA, it seems as though they're trying to persuade the masses. Only problem is when your leader is not a popular person, people have a hard time getting past it.

 

[McGahee2TheHouse]

This has long since ceased to be about rational behavior on the part of the NCAA. We may very well have to pursue legal recourse against them. There's no question in my mind that we have suffered damages. However, the question I would ask the lawyers on the site is how can UM get around the NCAA's "non-state actor" defense which they trot out every time they get sued, and which the Supreme Court sanctioned in the Tarkanian case?

IMHLO, that defense isn't going to fly on an intentional fraud cause of action.

What are the elements for that COA?

Common Law Fraud (narrowed down the the 5 elements they learn you in law school):
1. Misrepresentation (or ommission) of a material fact
2. made by a person with scienter (knowledge) of its falsity
3. made with the intent to deceive the victim
4. The victim justifiably relied on the falsity
5. Damages

I know you said their usual defense won't fly...how hard is this to prove ultimately? Just from my lowly 1L perspective, it seems like the facts in the Miami case would make for a slam dunk when applying them to the CL standard

 

[MIA42178]

This has long since ceased to be about rational behavior on the part of the NCAA. We may very well have to pursue legal recourse against them. There's no question in my mind that we have suffered damages. However, the question I would ask the lawyers on the site is how can UM get around the NCAA's "non-state actor" defense which they trot out every time they get sued, and which the Supreme Court sanctioned in the Tarkanian case?

IMHLO, that defense isn't going to fly on an intentional fraud cause of action.

What are the elements for that COA?

Common Law Fraud (narrowed down the the 5 elements they learn you in law school):
1. Misrepresentation (or ommission) of a material fact
2. made by a person with scienter (knowledge) of its falsity
3. made with the intent to deceive the victim
4. The victim justifiably relied on the falsity
5. Damages

I know you said their usual defense won't fly...how hard is this to prove ultimately? Just from my lowly 1L perspective, it seems like the facts in the Miami case would make for a slam dunk when applying them to the CL standard

IMHO, damages / detrimental reliance will be the hardest to prove. Sounds like there are plenty of instances of the NCAA deceiving Miami, not following its rules (while we were led to believe the rules were being followed), ommitting facts, and so on to get the rest to a trier of fact.

 

[Larry]

LOL @ deflecting allegations.

Dude, Miami already penalized themselves, too much so, knowing what we know now...in a timely fashion...for said allegations.

If by deflecting they mean "trying to move on"...then yes, we are deflecting...leave us alone and go take care of yourself.

Perhaps the NCAA should focus more on their own internal structure instead of trying to penalize a University further after they clearly went above and beyond for any wrong doing by anyone in the program, of which, the NCAA can't even prove with anything that would hold up in court.

I am certain the NCAA has passed the threshold for harassment and defamation in this case a long time ago. I'd prefer Miami just tell these ***** to lawyer up and tell them they hope they have deep pockets.

 

[JHallCanes]

At this point, what the **** else could they even say?

That's some limp wristed ****assness akin to your girlfriend bringing up the stripper you finger banged 5 years ago at a drunken bachelor party.

Who finger bangs a stripper?

That's the point I was getting at. The accusations are non-sensical at this point.

 

[Pixelated bukake]

Just a note. I have several friends in Florida who are attorneys and Miami alums who have offered their services pro bono to prosecute a civil case against the NCAA including one who is a coverage attorney, i.e. he sees coverage and civil litigation issues the way Rain Man sees toothpicks. In each case, UM said 'thanks but no thanks.' Miami clearly wants to avoid litigation, mostly because of the time and the unnecessary expenses. That is not to say that this option is off the table, hence the 'reservation of rights' language in their recent letter to Infractions, but it is not the preferred course.

 

[frostycane]

Even if we end up suing wont we still have to begin serving any penalties they hand down? I mean, if they come out in june, or whenever the mtg is, and say you have 1 more bowl ban and 20 ships over 3 yrs then dont we have to begin those penalties even if we are suing against them? Or do we get to hold off until the lawsuit is settled. Because we all know that if this thing goes to court it will take FOREVER to get this thing hashed out. By then we will have finished our penalties and then there is nothing left to gain for us as a University. I mean I would love to get a court ordered victory over those losers but I dont want anymore bowl bans and I dont wanna lose any schollys over this either.

 

[jakeman1]

Three bowl bans, the ACCCG, and 20 more ships, for what they're accused of doing? I don't see it. This was a rogue booster Shannon actively tried to get kids to avoid. The only thing close to the LOIC charge was two people not even in the athletic department might have had contact with him, long before he even had any ties to the agency. No head coach or AD has been implicated as having any knowledge. Shannon actively tried to keep him away from the program. They didn't even interview Dee, which still amazes me. He should have been one of the first interviews.

 

[RiDLer80]

I don't know why I keep reading **** on the NCAA. Everything they do and so is so utterly ridiculous and nonsensical it just ****es me off more and more.

 

[bomb]

Just a note. I have several friends in Florida who are attorneys and Miami alums who have offered their services pro bono to prosecute a civil case against the NCAA including one who is a coverage attorney, i.e. he sees coverage and civil litigation issues the way Rain Man sees toothpicks. In each case, UM said 'thanks but no thanks.' Miami clearly wants to avoid litigation, mostly because of the time and the unnecessary expenses. That is not to say that this option is off the table, hence the 'reservation of rights' language in their recent letter to Infractions, but it is not the preferred course.

Or Miami wants to use their own hand-picked outside counsel instead of just the first guys who volunteer? It's nice that these guys have offered their services pro-bono, but lets not pretend that there aren't incredible ancillary benefits to being a part of such a high profile affair. I'm not sure the University's "thanks but no thanks" to your friends is really an indication of where their heads are at. But I agree that their first choice is most likely to make this go away as quickly as possible and avoid lengthy litigation.

 

[Udaman]

IMHLO, that defense isn't going to fly on an intentional fraud cause of action.

What are the elements for that COA?

Common Law Fraud (narrowed down the the 5 elements they learn you in law school):
1. Misrepresentation (or ommission) of a material fact
2. made by a person with scienter (knowledge) of its falsity
3. made with the intent to deceive the victim
4. The victim justifiably relied on the falsity
5. Damages

I know you said their usual defense won't fly...how hard is this to prove ultimately? Just from my lowly 1L perspective, it seems like the facts in the Miami case would make for a slam dunk when applying them to the CL standard

IMHO, damages / detrimental reliance will be the hardest to prove. Sounds like there are plenty of instances of the NCAA deceiving Miami, not following its rules (while we were led to believe the rules were being followed), ommitting facts, and so on to get the rest to a trier of fact.

I like this approach, but while I think there is a strong case that the NCAA perpetrated a fraud against the Federal Bankruptcy Court what I find less clear is whether there was actual "reliance" by the University on the NCAA's mis-representations. On the contrary, I think we are taking every opportunity to refute their misrepresentations. Instead, I think the fundamental issue raised by this and other recent cases is the NCAA's blatant failure to provide any kind of fair, due-process to the schools or for that matter the coaches they are targeting and therefore causing (in some cases severe) economic damage to them.

I sincerely hope that Shalala is prepared to go to the mattresses with the legal fight, because beyond the near-term PR problems we are causing for them, the NCAA has the luxury of time on their side; we do not. They can simply wait us out while our recruiting and program whither on the vine.

In an ideal world, I would like to see us dig in and challenge the NCAA on state actor grounds. Prior to the Tarkanian decision, there was precedent for it in federal cases, with the principal argument being that the NCAA was a state actor, because the membership was composed primarily of public educational institutions that had delegated part of their disciplinary power to a private organization. Bizarrely, the Rehnquist Court in its 1988 Tarkanian decision reversed this, which has emboldened the NCAA's enforcement staff to act even more egregiously against its membership--often against the weaker, private schools. But more recent cases like Brentwood Academy vs. Tennessee Schools Athletics ***'n. have shown the Supremes willing to entertain the idea that because of their coercive power and intertwined interests with the State, collegiate athletic associations should be regarded as state actors. And if we are able to successfully plead this even in a lower court, the NCAA would **** a brick and hopefully try to settle. I think these are the lengths UM needs to be prepared to go to if we truly want to "skate".

 

[Hurricanes]

What are the elements for that COA?

Common Law Fraud (narrowed down the the 5 elements they learn you in law school):
1. Misrepresentation (or ommission) of a material fact
2. made by a person with scienter (knowledge) of its falsity
3. made with the intent to deceive the victim
4. The victim justifiably relied on the falsity
5. Damages

I know you said their usual defense won't fly...how hard is this to prove ultimately? Just from my lowly 1L perspective, it seems like the facts in the Miami case would make for a slam dunk when applying them to the CL standard

IMHO, damages / detrimental reliance will be the hardest to prove. Sounds like there are plenty of instances of the NCAA deceiving Miami, not following its rules (while we were led to believe the rules were being followed), ommitting facts, and so on to get the rest to a trier of fact.

I like this approach, but while I think there is a strong case that the NCAA perpetrated a fraud against the Federal Bankruptcy Court what I find less clear is whether there was actual "reliance" by the University on the NCAA's mis-representations. On the contrary, I think we are taking every opportunity to refute their misrepresentations. Instead, I think the fundamental issue raised by this and other recent cases is the NCAA's blatant failure to provide any kind of fair, due-process to the schools or for that matter the coaches they are targeting and therefore causing (in some cases severe) economic damage to them.

I sincerely hope that Shalala is prepared to go to the mattresses with the legal fight, because beyond the near-term PR problems we are causing for them, the NCAA has the luxury of time on their side; we do not. They can simply wait us out while our recruiting and program whither on the vine.

In an ideal world, I would like to see us dig in and challenge the NCAA on state actor grounds. Prior to the Tarkanian decision, there was precedent for it in federal cases, with the principal argument being that the NCAA was a state actor, because the membership was composed primarily of public educational institutions that had delegated part of their disciplinary power to a private organization. Bizarrely, the Rehnquist Court in its 1988 Tarkanian decision reversed this, which has emboldened the NCAA's enforcement staff to act even more egregiously against its membership--often against the weaker, private schools. But more recent cases like Brentwood Academy vs. Tennessee Schools Athletics ***'n. have shown the Supremes willing to entertain the idea that because of their coercive power and intertwined interests with the State, collegiate athletic associations should be regarded as state actors. And if we are able to successfully plead this even in a lower court, the NCAA would **** a brick and hopefully try to settle. I think these are the lengths UM needs to be prepared to go to if we truly want to "skate".

SKATE SKATE SKATE.....WHAT ARE U TALKING ABOUT WE DID 2 BOWLS,THEY HAVE NOTHING BIG ON US AND U TALKING ABOUT>>>SKATE