Donna Dangles: We Skate

[AugieDoggy]

Oh yeah, and **** Virginia while we're at it

 

[DCH]

John Infante's bylaw blog said it best: the cleanest option for the NCAA is to put out a conservative NoA, follow procedure up to the CoI, and let Miami off with time-served.

The best thing for us would be if the NoA is so neutered that they can't charge any more than Failure to Monitor. That way, we'd be able to operate this entire summer knowing there likely won't be additional penalties.

http://www.athleticscholarships.net/bylaw-blog.htm

Not to interrupt Donna Shalala thread 17,458, but that is a very poorly written article. Half of his "arguments" are completely illogical. Not surprising this hack used to work for the NCAA.

 

[bomb]

It will have been one of the most masterful displays ever seen.

She's a genius. She's playing chess and you're playing checkers.

we need to go out and get a bronze statue of Donna and put it in front of Hecht.

All you're doing is being a sycophant. There's really nothing to say to someone who thinks a terse press release years after an investigation is done is somehow evidence of the hand of God.

Why are you insulting me? There was nothing sycophantic about anything I said.

Uh, otay.

Also, interesting for you to now claim the following as a defense of DS: "the incoming recruiting class thought the bowl bans were behind them. Look at the 2012 class AG was still able to bring in with this cloud over us." Somehow I expect when it comes to defending AG, you're going to admit that this investigation's length has harmed our recruiting, and yet here you are minimizing that in defense of DS. But you're not being a sycophant. Got it.

And you call other people butthurt? You're amazing.

Think back to when we gave up the first bowl game. It was done so we could tell the recruits were putting it behind us. It helped us land a phenomenal class.

Then, once those recruits were in and signed, that fall we announced that we were giving up another one. Which helped us with this years crop.

We played it perfectly to do our best to minimize the affect on recruiting.

Now, Donna has been biding her time, playing well in the sandbox... no, actually cooperating... the NCAA said publicly as much... the NCAA documents showed that we knew what was going on. We expressed our objection for the record. The record. Get it? Then we sat back again and let them hang themselves. Now, we are pouncing.

You can call me names if you want, but it doesn't change the fact that the administration, led by Shalala, has don't a masterful job here. We're suddenly in a great position, with even a chance for time served and definitely a basis for a law suit. Shalala was able to come out and say... that's enough. We've paid our dues. and we haven't even lost a single 'ship.

If you're looking for someone with an agenda, look in the mirror. I'm just enjoying our day in the light.

 

[bomb]

What would you suggest she should've done? Specifically.

You realize there was nothing she could've done to expedite things, correct? You realize that if she resisted, given who we are (the most hated university within the NCAA), the investigation may have dragged on even longer, right? You realize that by failing to cooperate she would've handed the COI a silver bullet to put into our collective head, right?

I know you think you're smart, and I'm sure you are, but I'm also sure that the people advising the President, as well as the President herself, are also quite competent and capable -- they certainly are more experienced in these matters and understand the dynamics (and people) of the NCAA better than you.

I'm also certain that our President knows more facts about the case than you, me, or anyone else pontificating on these boards. I'm guessing -- just a hunch -- that she is more politically astute and connected than you as well.

And in the end, whether you want to admit it or not, the fact is we sit here today in a position to get out of this mess relatively unscathed -- a prospect that NO ONE who understood how the NCAA works thought possible a year ago. Shockingly, moreover, the public and the media are behind us. Who would've thunk it in the aftermath of the Yahoo article when every talking head was calling for the death penalty?

So whatever winding road we took to get to this point means nothing; all that matters is that we are in a great position to emerge from this mess as a going concern. And the person driving the whole thing is the President. She let them dig their own grave as they praised her cooperation with each pitch of the shovel. And after praising her contributions and cooperation, Emmert is now absolutely stuck, standing in his grave, as he futilely tries to climb out and salvage his career. He can't unring the bell.

If I presented that as a likely scenario in September 2011, you would've said I'm dreaming. No chance. Well it's happened. So that, in a nutshell, is why I think she played this perfectly.

You know what they say about what happens when you assume, right?

Welcome to there. You're trying to talk yourself into something I'm not even sure you believe. Be my guest. But save me the condescending crap about what I know or don't know.

And your comment that we might get out of this 'unscathed' is so ignorant it's incredible. If this is unscathed, I can't wait to see what harmed looks like. We've suffered a ton already.

The death penalty? Because YAHOO! said so? Great logic.

You sound drunk. Go on thinking Donna did great here. I'll bet you a lot that Donna don't think she did great here.

Thanks for the concrete suggestions on what she should've done. I figured you'd skip past that and launch into some ad hominem attack to avoid the issue.

And if you're going to quote what I said, at least get it right. I said relatively unscathed, as in much better off than anyone imagined, except maybe you. That's beyond dispute for reasonable men. We're looking at worst case scenario loss of 15 scholarships. We were talking in USC terms a year ago.

Of course, my reference to the death penalty was in relation to public perception, not to what I or anyone else with a level head thought we were facing. But, again, continue with your mischaracterizations.

For such a professed contrarian who ostensibly supports open dialogue, you sure turn into a little testy b*tch when challenged.

Ah, Mr. whiny punk calls me names but says I'm the 'ad hominem' one. I'd tell you what I think of you but this isn't the WEZ.

Your post was arrogant and condescending and vapid, and I responded. You re-upped, because that is what stupid people do when challenged. Have at it.

'Relatively unscathed'? Really? Because people who know nothing were worrying about worse a year ago? Great thinking!

We've self-imposed two bowl bans and a third Conference Championship game ban. No one has ever done that. We've suffered a cloud over recruiting for years now. We've self-imposed various other limits. And that's 'relatively unscathed'? Maybe in your world. In the real world we've already paid a higher price than these allegations warranted, and we aren't done paying the piper yet.

And this investigation has dragged on forever, and while I can't prove it, I do think that it is in part because of the compliant poster the U took in the face of the investigation. Donna made quite clear that posture when the investigation was announced. And yet you ask 'what could she have done differently?' If she's done nothing differently from what anyone else could have done, I guess I'd ask you why you compliment her?

The real world? Here's reality: whatever you think the allegations warranted in your world, the NCAA was intent on burying us. And up until recently, so was the media and the public at large. Nothing could be more clear after reading the Report. The tactics employed and the scope of the investigation belie your suggestion that we could be in a better position now if under someone else's leadership. Instead of calling people stupid, drunk, etc, piece together a coherent argument based on facts as to what Donna could have, within reason, done differently to put us in a better position. Would love to hear it...

You ask me why I compliment her and I've already answered that. Today, right now, we sit in a position of leverage that I never thought possible. The President of the NCAA is on life support. The only reason he's not engaging in serious efforts to get this summarily disposed is because he doesn't think he can get the necessary committee approval. The case going to COI is tainted. The malfeasance of the investigators, the star witness, and the star witness' lawyer is firmly established in the record. Mitigating facts that would have never came to light are now in the record that will be reviewed by the COI, including the fact that the NCAA subsidized its star witness' prison account and phone.

If, for example, Miami would've taken a different approach, intervened, and successfully protected against Perez's line of questioning, then the NCAA would not have hung itself. And the appearance of Miami trying to object and intervene would have looked bad to the COI.

Instead, as I've stated time and again, we look golden (no pun intended). The COI will see that at every turn and juncture we cooperated. As Donna pointed out, we followed through on our commitment. We never interfered with the investigation. We were transparent throughout. And that history, especially when juxtaposed against the NCAA's behavior during the investigation, will be significant at the hearing. Donna took all their bullets out of their gun. The NCAA cannot say, "yes, we screwed up, but listen UM was uncooperative and obstructive. What our people did was inexcusable, but UM didn't help things by being uncooperative."

Moreover, Donna had to be careful about prematurely launching a PR campaign against the NCAA. She picked her spot perfectly. She gave the NCAA more than ample time to conduct its investigation and never openly criticized the institution. When the story about Perez broke, she issued a tempered statement of concern but again refrained from openly criticizing the NCAA and allowed it to perform an investigation, knowing of course that nothing good would come of that for the NCAA. And once the Report hit and the anti-NCAA sentiment was at an all-time high, she launched her first salvo.

Now Emmert sits in an impossible situation. He's got millions of dollars into this investigation. He's got years into this investigation. His enforcement staff is going to produce NOA built on a house of cards. The harsh self-imposed penalties were necessary to mitigate the uncertainty for our recruits and coaches, and the COI will now probably view them as sufficient. The public is demanding that the NCAA reform its practices because of this investigation. No one is calling for UM's head. To the contrary, the consensus is UM should walk at this point.

Hopefully that was clear enough for you.

Lock it up.

:stormwarning:

 

[Ethnicsands]

It will have been one of the most masterful displays ever seen.

She's a genius. She's playing chess and you're playing checkers.

we need to go out and get a bronze statue of Donna and put it in front of Hecht.

All you're doing is being a sycophant. There's really nothing to say to someone who thinks a terse press release years after an investigation is done is somehow evidence of the hand of God.

Why are you insulting me? There was nothing sycophantic about anything I said.

Uh, otay.

Also, interesting for you to now claim the following as a defense of DS: "the incoming recruiting class thought the bowl bans were behind them. Look at the 2012 class AG was still able to bring in with this cloud over us." Somehow I expect when it comes to defending AG, you're going to admit that this investigation's length has harmed our recruiting, and yet here you are minimizing that in defense of DS. But you're not being a sycophant. Got it.

And you call other people butthurt? You're amazing.

Think back to when we gave up the first bowl game. It was done so we could tell the recruits were putting it behind us. It helped us land a phenomenal class.

Then, once those recruits were in and signed, that fall we announced that we were giving up another one. Which helped us with this years crop.

We played it perfectly to do our best to minimize the affect on recruiting.

Now, Donna has been biding her time, playing well in the sandbox... no, actually cooperating... the NCAA said publicly as much... the NCAA documents showed that we knew what was going on. We expressed our objection for the record. The record. Get it? Then we sat back again and let them hang themselves. Now, we are pouncing.

You can call me names if you want, but it doesn't change the fact that the administration, led by Shalala, has don't a masterful job here. We're suddenly in a great position, with even a chance for time served and definitely a basis for a law suit. Shalala was able to come out and say... that's enough. We've paid our dues. and we haven't even lost a single 'ship.

If you're looking for someone with an agenda, look in the mirror. I'm just enjoying our day in the light.

Ah, the woe is bomb, you're calling me names! routine.

You sound ... like bomb. You jump into the thread with 'donna's playing chess, you're playing checkers' blather, which is nothing more than a version of name calling tethered to your sycophantic exaltation of DS. Now you're telling me I have an 'agenda', which is more personal attack idiocy (as I do not have an agenda here, unlike you.) Then when I describe what you're doing (which is clear in the bolded text above), you get on your 'name calling' high horse. How very typically bomb of you.

We can disagree about this 'masterful' job.

 

[trUstno1]

What would you suggest she should've done? Specifically.

You realize there was nothing she could've done to expedite things, correct? You realize that if she resisted, given who we are (the most hated university within the NCAA), the investigation may have dragged on even longer, right? You realize that by failing to cooperate she would've handed the COI a silver bullet to put into our collective head, right?

I know you think you're smart, and I'm sure you are, but I'm also sure that the people advising the President, as well as the President herself, are also quite competent and capable -- they certainly are more experienced in these matters and understand the dynamics (and people) of the NCAA better than you.

I'm also certain that our President knows more facts about the case than you, me, or anyone else pontificating on these boards. I'm guessing -- just a hunch -- that she is more politically astute and connected than you as well.

And in the end, whether you want to admit it or not, the fact is we sit here today in a position to get out of this mess relatively unscathed -- a prospect that NO ONE who understood how the NCAA works thought possible a year ago. Shockingly, moreover, the public and the media are behind us. Who would've thunk it in the aftermath of the Yahoo article when every talking head was calling for the death penalty?

So whatever winding road we took to get to this point means nothing; all that matters is that we are in a great position to emerge from this mess as a going concern. And the person driving the whole thing is the President. She let them dig their own grave as they praised her cooperation with each pitch of the shovel. And after praising her contributions and cooperation, Emmert is now absolutely stuck, standing in his grave, as he futilely tries to climb out and salvage his career. He can't unring the bell.

If I presented that as a likely scenario in September 2011, you would've said I'm dreaming. No chance. Well it's happened. So that, in a nutshell, is why I think she played this perfectly.

You know what they say about what happens when you assume, right?

Welcome to there. You're trying to talk yourself into something I'm not even sure you believe. Be my guest. But save me the condescending crap about what I know or don't know.

And your comment that we might get out of this 'unscathed' is so ignorant it's incredible. If this is unscathed, I can't wait to see what harmed looks like. We've suffered a ton already.

The death penalty? Because YAHOO! said so? Great logic.

You sound drunk. Go on thinking Donna did great here. I'll bet you a lot that Donna don't think she did great here.

Thanks for the concrete suggestions on what she should've done. I figured you'd skip past that and launch into some ad hominem attack to avoid the issue.

And if you're going to quote what I said, at least get it right. I said relatively unscathed, as in much better off than anyone imagined, except maybe you. That's beyond dispute for reasonable men. We're looking at worst case scenario loss of 15 scholarships. We were talking in USC terms a year ago.

Of course, my reference to the death penalty was in relation to public perception, not to what I or anyone else with a level head thought we were facing. But, again, continue with your mischaracterizations.

For such a professed contrarian who ostensibly supports open dialogue, you sure turn into a little testy b*tch when challenged.

Ah, Mr. whiny punk calls me names but says I'm the 'ad hominem' one. I'd tell you what I think of you but this isn't the WEZ.

Your post was arrogant and condescending and vapid, and I responded. You re-upped, because that is what stupid people do when challenged. Have at it.

'Relatively unscathed'? Really? Because people who know nothing were worrying about worse a year ago? Great thinking!

We've self-imposed two bowl bans and a third Conference Championship game ban. No one has ever done that. We've suffered a cloud over recruiting for years now. We've self-imposed various other limits. And that's 'relatively unscathed'? Maybe in your world. In the real world we've already paid a higher price than these allegations warranted, and we aren't done paying the piper yet.

And this investigation has dragged on forever, and while I can't prove it, I do think that it is in part because of the compliant poster the U took in the face of the investigation. Donna made quite clear that posture when the investigation was announced. And yet you ask 'what could she have done differently?' If she's done nothing differently from what anyone else could have done, I guess I'd ask you why you compliment her?

The real world? Here's reality: whatever you think the allegations warranted in your world, the NCAA was intent on burying us. And up until recently, so was the media and the public at large. Nothing could be more clear after reading the Report. The tactics employed and the scope of the investigation belie your suggestion that we could be in a better position now if under someone else's leadership. Instead of calling people stupid, drunk, etc, piece together a coherent argument based on facts as to what Donna could have, within reason, done differently to put us in a better position. Would love to hear it...

You ask me why I compliment her and I've already answered that. Today, right now, we sit in a position of leverage that I never thought possible. The President of the NCAA is on life support. The only reason he's not engaging in serious efforts to get this summarily disposed is because he doesn't think he can get the necessary committee approval. The case going to COI is tainted. The malfeasance of the investigators, the star witness, and the star witness' lawyer is firmly established in the record. Mitigating facts that would have never came to light are now in the record that will be reviewed by the COI, including the fact that the NCAA subsidized its star witness' prison account and phone.

If, for example, Miami would've taken a different approach, intervened, and successfully protected against Perez's line of questioning, then the NCAA would not have hung itself. And the appearance of Miami trying to object and intervene would have looked bad to the COI.

Instead, as I've stated time and again, we look golden (no pun intended). The COI will see that at every turn and juncture we cooperated. As Donna pointed out, we followed through on our commitment. We never interfered with the investigation. We were transparent throughout. And that history, especially when juxtaposed against the NCAA's behavior during the investigation, will be significant at the hearing. Donna took all their bullets out of their gun. The NCAA cannot say, "yes, we screwed up, but listen UM was uncooperative and obstructive. What our people did was inexcusable, but UM didn't help things by being uncooperative."

Moreover, Donna had to be careful about prematurely launching a PR campaign against the NCAA. She picked her spot perfectly. She gave the NCAA more than ample time to conduct its investigation and never openly criticized the institution. When the story about Perez broke, she issued a tempered statement of concern but again refrained from openly criticizing the NCAA and allowed it to perform an investigation, knowing of course that nothing good would come of that for the NCAA. And once the Report hit and the anti-NCAA sentiment was at an all-time high, she launched her first salvo.

Now Emmert sits in an impossible situation. He's got millions of dollars into this investigation. He's got years into this investigation. His enforcement staff is going to produce NOA built on a house of cards. The harsh self-imposed penalties were necessary to mitigate the uncertainty for our recruits and coaches, and the COI will now probably view them as sufficient. The public is demanding that the NCAA reform its practices because of this investigation. No one is calling for UM's head. To the contrary, the consensus is UM should walk at this point.

Hopefully that was clear enough for you.

 

[bomb]

It will have been one of the most masterful displays ever seen.

She's a genius. She's playing chess and you're playing checkers.

we need to go out and get a bronze statue of Donna and put it in front of Hecht.

All you're doing is being a sycophant. There's really nothing to say to someone who thinks a terse press release years after an investigation is done is somehow evidence of the hand of God.

Why are you insulting me? There was nothing sycophantic about anything I said.

Uh, otay.

Also, interesting for you to now claim the following as a defense of DS: "the incoming recruiting class thought the bowl bans were behind them. Look at the 2012 class AG was still able to bring in with this cloud over us." Somehow I expect when it comes to defending AG, you're going to admit that this investigation's length has harmed our recruiting, and yet here you are minimizing that in defense of DS. But you're not being a sycophant. Got it.

And you call other people butthurt? You're amazing.

Think back to when we gave up the first bowl game. It was done so we could tell the recruits were putting it behind us. It helped us land a phenomenal class.

Then, once those recruits were in and signed, that fall we announced that we were giving up another one. Which helped us with this years crop.

We played it perfectly to do our best to minimize the affect on recruiting.

Now, Donna has been biding her time, playing well in the sandbox... no, actually cooperating... the NCAA said publicly as much... the NCAA documents showed that we knew what was going on. We expressed our objection for the record. The record. Get it? Then we sat back again and let them hang themselves. Now, we are pouncing.

You can call me names if you want, but it doesn't change the fact that the administration, led by Shalala, has don't a masterful job here. We're suddenly in a great position, with even a chance for time served and definitely a basis for a law suit. Shalala was able to come out and say... that's enough. We've paid our dues. and we haven't even lost a single 'ship.

If you're looking for someone with an agenda, look in the mirror. I'm just enjoying our day in the light.

Ah, the woe is bomb, you're calling me names! routine.

You sound ... like bomb. You jump into the thread with 'donna's playing chess, you're playing checkers' blather, which is nothing more than a version of name calling tethered to your sycophantic exaltation of DS. Now you're telling me I have an 'agenda', which is more personal attack idiocy (as I do not have an agenda here, unlike you.) Then when I describe what you're doing (which is clear in the bolded text above), you get on your 'name calling' high horse. How very typically bomb of you.

We can disagree about this 'masterful' job.

Jesus Christ, who stole your lunch money? Sack up. You're wrong. You're entitled to believe you're right, since we all know that you can never, ever, ever be wrong. But you're wrong. Others have laid it out for you. We get that you won't accept it. Its not possible.

Anyway, for all your kvetching, it doesn't affect the status of the U right now. We're in a lot better place than we ever expected to be. And I thank the President for masterfully guiding us to this point. All your personal insults and attacks on Shalala aren't going to change reality. Have a nice day.

 

[SFbayCane]

dycane is looking like George Kennedy to Ethnic's Paul Newman from the fight scene in Cool Hand Luke.


Stay down, Luke!






/props to the seven posters on this board who will get that reference....four of which can no longer read font this small.

 

[bomb]

dycane is looking like George Kennedy to Ethnic's Paul Newman from the fight scene in Cool Hand Luke.


Stay down, Luke!







/props to the seven posters on this board who will get that reference....four of which can no longer read font this small.

LOL great reference!

The car wash scene in that is an all time fave.

 

[Ethnicsands]

It will have been one of the most masterful displays ever seen.

She's a genius. She's playing chess and you're playing checkers.

we need to go out and get a bronze statue of Donna and put it in front of Hecht.

Why are you insulting me? There was nothing sycophantic about anything I said.

Uh, otay.

Also, interesting for you to now claim the following as a defense of DS: "the incoming recruiting class thought the bowl bans were behind them. Look at the 2012 class AG was still able to bring in with this cloud over us." Somehow I expect when it comes to defending AG, you're going to admit that this investigation's length has harmed our recruiting, and yet here you are minimizing that in defense of DS. But you're not being a sycophant. Got it.

And you call other people butthurt? You're amazing.

Think back to when we gave up the first bowl game. It was done so we could tell the recruits were putting it behind us. It helped us land a phenomenal class.

Then, once those recruits were in and signed, that fall we announced that we were giving up another one. Which helped us with this years crop.

We played it perfectly to do our best to minimize the affect on recruiting.

Now, Donna has been biding her time, playing well in the sandbox... no, actually cooperating... the NCAA said publicly as much... the NCAA documents showed that we knew what was going on. We expressed our objection for the record. The record. Get it? Then we sat back again and let them hang themselves. Now, we are pouncing.

You can call me names if you want, but it doesn't change the fact that the administration, led by Shalala, has don't a masterful job here. We're suddenly in a great position, with even a chance for time served and definitely a basis for a law suit. Shalala was able to come out and say... that's enough. We've paid our dues. and we haven't even lost a single 'ship.

If you're looking for someone with an agenda, look in the mirror. I'm just enjoying our day in the light.

Ah, the woe is bomb, you're calling me names! routine.

You sound ... like bomb. You jump into the thread with 'donna's playing chess, you're playing checkers' blather, which is nothing more than a version of name calling tethered to your sycophantic exaltation of DS. Now you're telling me I have an 'agenda', which is more personal attack idiocy (as I do not have an agenda here, unlike you.) Then when I describe what you're doing (which is clear in the bolded text above), you get on your 'name calling' high horse. How very typically bomb of you.

We can disagree about this 'masterful' job.

Jesus Christ, who stole your lunch money? Sack up. You're wrong. You're entitled to believe you're right, since we all know that you can never, ever, ever be wrong. But you're wrong. Others have laid it out for you. We get that you won't accept it. Its not possible.

Anyway, for all your kvetching, it doesn't affect the status of the U right now. We're in a lot better place than we ever expected to be. And I thank the President for masterfully guiding us to this point. All your personal insults and attacks on Shalala aren't going to change reality. Have a nice day.

It's amazing how snotty you've remained all these years. I'm wrong? How ignorant of you to say so. Like you have any fugging clue what the facts are. You are entitled to your opinion, but when you pretend to know more than you do, you just reveal yourself to by ... bomb. Me, I've made clear that I have a view, explained it, but also haven't claimed knowledge of the unknowable or certainty. The reality is it is just not knowable whether DS played this well. Anyone who claims they know, as you are doing, is just marking themselves as an idiot.

 

[Ethnicsands]

dycane is looking like George Kennedy to Ethnic's Paul Newman from the fight scene in Cool Hand Luke.


Stay down, Luke!






/props to the seven posters on this board who will get that reference....four of which can no longer read font this small.

I don't agree, obviously. Folks are rushing to 'crown' DS for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with how this investigation has been handled. Y'all are entitled to exalt her as a Demigod if you want, but there is little she's actually done that merits approval even in dycane's version of events. Everyone is excited that the NCAA has stepped on its ****. Great. Not clear how that turn of events is a validation of DS's strategy.

 

[bomb]

Uh, otay.

Also, interesting for you to now claim the following as a defense of DS: "the incoming recruiting class thought the bowl bans were behind them. Look at the 2012 class AG was still able to bring in with this cloud over us." Somehow I expect when it comes to defending AG, you're going to admit that this investigation's length has harmed our recruiting, and yet here you are minimizing that in defense of DS. But you're not being a sycophant. Got it.

And you call other people butthurt? You're amazing.

Think back to when we gave up the first bowl game. It was done so we could tell the recruits were putting it behind us. It helped us land a phenomenal class.

Then, once those recruits were in and signed, that fall we announced that we were giving up another one. Which helped us with this years crop.

We played it perfectly to do our best to minimize the affect on recruiting.

Now, Donna has been biding her time, playing well in the sandbox... no, actually cooperating... the NCAA said publicly as much... the NCAA documents showed that we knew what was going on. We expressed our objection for the record. The record. Get it? Then we sat back again and let them hang themselves. Now, we are pouncing.

You can call me names if you want, but it doesn't change the fact that the administration, led by Shalala, has don't a masterful job here. We're suddenly in a great position, with even a chance for time served and definitely a basis for a law suit. Shalala was able to come out and say... that's enough. We've paid our dues. and we haven't even lost a single 'ship.

If you're looking for someone with an agenda, look in the mirror. I'm just enjoying our day in the light.

Ah, the woe is bomb, you're calling me names! routine.

You sound ... like bomb. You jump into the thread with 'donna's playing chess, you're playing checkers' blather, which is nothing more than a version of name calling tethered to your sycophantic exaltation of DS. Now you're telling me I have an 'agenda', which is more personal attack idiocy (as I do not have an agenda here, unlike you.) Then when I describe what you're doing (which is clear in the bolded text above), you get on your 'name calling' high horse. How very typically bomb of you.

We can disagree about this 'masterful' job.

Jesus Christ, who stole your lunch money? Sack up. You're wrong. You're entitled to believe you're right, since we all know that you can never, ever, ever be wrong. But you're wrong. Others have laid it out for you. We get that you won't accept it. Its not possible.

Anyway, for all your kvetching, it doesn't affect the status of the U right now. We're in a lot better place than we ever expected to be. And I thank the President for masterfully guiding us to this point. All your personal insults and attacks on Shalala aren't going to change reality. Have a nice day.

It's amazing how snotty you've remained all these years. I'm wrong? How ignorant of you to say so. Like you have any fugging clue what the facts are. You are entitled to your opinion, but when you pretend to know more than you do, you just reveal yourself to by ... bomb. Me, I've made clear that I have a view, explained it, but also haven't claimed knowledge of the unknowable or certainty. The reality is it is just not knowable whether DS played this well. Anyone who claims they know, as you are doing, is just marking themselves as an idiot.

Substantial post. thx 4 the analysis! You calling anyone snotty is pretty funny. Your ego has its own user name.

dycane killed you here. He nailed it. Why can't you just accept that maybe, like the rest of us human beings, you can be wrong sometimes too? Its ok, you know.

 

[cane305]

the ONLY way shalala could have managed this situation better was using her Washington connections to kill ****piro before the story broke.

 

[dycane]

I honestly want to tailgate with Bomb, 'Chise, and Ethnic before the Florida game. Name your finest liquor and it's on me. I'll also throw in some Kiwi models who know absolutely nothing about football.

 

[bomb]

I honestly want to tailgate with Bomb, 'Chise, and Ethnic before the Florida game. Name your finest liquor and it's on me. I'll also throw in some Kiwi models who know absolutely nothing about football.

It would be four Cane fans, all not talking ****. You get people off the internet, they suddenly become human again!

luv kiwi's btw

 

[NorthFlaCane]

you'll need a hefty supply of chambord

 

[Problem2]

On the morning after another dark day for the NCAA, and an upsetting one for UM, the UM administration is braced to receive more aggravation in the next day, two or three, when the notice of allegations is sent along to UM officials.

UM is fully aware there will be plenty in the NOA that will be upsetting. That’s because the NCAA is using evidence former UM recruits who went to school elsewhere and players who transferred from UM (several of both groups were granted immunity in exchange for throwing UM under the bus), several ex-Canes who talked (several voluntarily and several others because they were compelled by NCAA rules), and lots of documents and other information provided by convicted Ponzi schemer Nevin Shapiro, among other things. At least one former assistant coach has admitted wrongdoing.

The words "lack of institutional control" have been discussed in the UM/NCAA talks, but we do not have confirmation that they will actually appear in the notice of allegations. That remains to be seen, but UM is braced for that very real possibility.

UM will fight this hard. “It’s going the distance, and we’re going to defend ourselves aggressively,” one UM official said.

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

 

[Problem2]

lol if they still have the nerve to hit us with a LOIC

 

[zacklove]

this is just another example of why the whole process is totally wrong. Let's give immunity to those who did wrong so they will admit they did in order to punish people who didn't do anything at all. seems legit

 

[UCaneDoIt]

Tim Reynolds ‏@ByTimReynolds
AP Source: Miami has received notice of allegations from NCAA.