Just to put things in perspective. The NCAA investigation...

[rok]

12 schollies over 4 years.

That's 12% of our adjusted gross. That's not peanuts.

 

[Gatorhater]

Thanks Randy

One of the few things we can't blame on Randy. This one is on Donna and Paul Dee.

 

[Ernie McCracken]

Let's see what they do to Johnny Football! No way that SOB didn't get compensated for signing over 4000 items.

White kid, drives a mercedes, Texas A&M, SEC..... Nothing to see here.

 

[passitback]

12 schollies over 4 years.

That's 12% of our adjusted gross. That's not peanuts.

I believe Al has the numbers pretty much figured out. Haven't we been playing with less than 85 for a while now. I don't think 12 over 4 is too bad... Take it and run.

 

[Biscuits]

12 schollies over 4 years.

That's 12% of our adjusted gross. That's not peanuts.

Fuggin this. Double digits, and we riot.

 

[Ernie McCracken]

12 schollies over 4 years.

That's 12% of our adjusted gross. That's not peanuts.

This. It's the 4 years that really hurts us. That's an awful long time to deal with scholly limits. IF, say, that rumor were true then

This year, we can have 85 athletes
In 2014 we could have 82 athletes
In 2015 we could have 79 athletes
In 2016 we could have 76 athletes
In 2017 we could have 73 athletes!!

Usually with these scholarship reductions, they don't allow you to make up for attrition either, so chances are we would be in the 60's.

So we're trying to build for the future, but with only 73 athletes on scholarship in 2017 we literally would have no depth at all. Then, in 2018, we would have to sign a MONSTER class, bringing in 35+ kids.

2018 would be a repeat of last year.

It basically screws our program for a long time moving forward.

 

[Consigliere]

12 schollies over 4 years.

That's 12% of our adjusted gross. That's not peanuts.

I believe Al has the numbers pretty much figured out. Haven't we been playing with less than 85 for a while now. I don't think 12 over 4 is too bad... Take it and run.

We did not play at 85 last year (closer to 79) FYI. In reality down 3 or 4 ships a year is nothing. Remember a team normally redshirts a bunch of kids, these kids don't see the field (much). Instead of redshirting a few players, you just don't have them on a roster. In a given year how many scholarship players see a snap, 77? If it is 12 in a year, it might hurt much much more.

I would be pretty ****ed if we got those punishments because the NCAA shot themselves in the foot 1000 times during the investigation AND given what happened to OSU and Oregon (HC directly involved)....I would be a little confused.

 

[Ernie McCracken]

It also means the "black cloud" of the NCAA would have been over us from 2010 to 2018.... that's EIGHT YEARS of the NCAA ******** us and making it harder to win.

 

[BigCaneAl]

12 schollies over 4 years.

That's 12% of our adjusted gross. That's not peanuts.

This. It's the 4 years that really hurts us. That's an awful long time to deal with scholly limits. IF, say, that rumor were true then

This year, we can have 85 athletes
In 2014 we could have 82 athletes
In 2015 we could have 79 athletes
In 2016 we could have 76 athletes
In 2017 we could have 73 athletes!!

Usually with these scholarship reductions, they don't allow you to make up for attrition either, so chances are we would be in the 60's.

So we're trying to build for the future, but with only 73 athletes on scholarship in 2017 we literally would have no depth at all. Then, in 2018, we would have to sign a MONSTER class, bringing in 35+ kids.

2018 would be a repeat of last year.

It basically screws our program for a long time moving forward.

Pretty sure this is completely wrong

 

[usfcane]

Let's see what they do to Johnny Football! No way that SOB didn't get compensated for signing over 4000 items.

White kid, drives a mercedes, Texas A&M, SEC..... Nothing to see here.

FYI , the family is loaded

 

[rok]

I would be pretty ****ed if we got those punishments because the NCAA shot themselves in the foot 1000 times during the investigation AND given what happened to OSU and Oregon (HC directly involved)....I would be a little confused.

They'll do as they please since they don't answer to anybody. Prepare for the worst and hope for the best.

 

[Ernie McCracken]

12 schollies over 4 years.

That's 12% of our adjusted gross. That's not peanuts.

This. It's the 4 years that really hurts us. That's an awful long time to deal with scholly limits. IF, say, that rumor were true then

This year, we can have 85 athletes
In 2014 we could have 82 athletes
In 2015 we could have 79 athletes
In 2016 we could have 76 athletes
In 2017 we could have 73 athletes!!

Usually with these scholarship reductions, they don't allow you to make up for attrition either, so chances are we would be in the 60's.

So we're trying to build for the future, but with only 73 athletes on scholarship in 2017 we literally would have no depth at all. Then, in 2018, we would have to sign a MONSTER class, bringing in 35+ kids.

2018 would be a repeat of last year.

It basically screws our program for a long time moving forward.

Pretty sure this is completely wrong

I'm pretty sure it's right, ace.

 

[rok]

12 schollies over 4 years.

That's 12% of our adjusted gross. That's not peanuts.

I believe Al has the numbers pretty much figured out. Haven't we been playing with less than 85 for a while now. I don't think 12 over 4 is too bad... Take it and run.

You're spending a lot of money on this counter-surveillance

 

[usfcane]

Wouldn't it be 3 scholies a year for four years?

 

[Consigliere]

I would be pretty ****ed if we got those punishments because the NCAA shot themselves in the foot 1000 times during the investigation AND given what happened to OSU and Oregon (HC directly involved)....I would be a little confused.

They'll do as they please since they don't answer to anybody. Prepare for the worst and hope for the best.

Then we will appeal or, if need be, bring a cause of action.

Perhaps if the NCAA didn't tank the investigation. Perhaps if we didn't already sit two bans (something no other team has done). Perhaps if this wasn't the longest investigation in the history of the NCAA. Perhaps if the smoking gun wasn't a criminal, defrauder, con-artist with an open vendetta to destroy UM....then maybe I would agree with 12 ships.

 

[Supcanes]

12 schollies over 4 years.

That's 12% of our adjusted gross. That's not peanuts.

I don't give a f v ck! It makes me sleep good at night. That's what counts

 

[CandyCane]

Stop speculating.

 

[nystateofmind]

12 schollies over 4 years.

That's 12% of our adjusted gross. That's not peanuts.

This. It's the 4 years that really hurts us. That's an awful long time to deal with scholly limits. IF, say, that rumor were true then

This year, we can have 85 athletes
In 2014 we could have 82 athletes
In 2015 we could have 79 athletes
In 2016 we could have 76 athletes
In 2017 we could have 73 athletes!!

Usually with these scholarship reductions, they don't allow you to make up for attrition either, so chances are we would be in the 60's.

So we're trying to build for the future, but with only 73 athletes on scholarship in 2017 we literally would have no depth at all. Then, in 2018, we would have to sign a MONSTER class, bringing in 35+ kids.

2018 would be a repeat of last year.

It basically screws our program for a long time moving forward.

Pretty sure this is completely wrong

It is, you'd lose 4 a year, so:

82
82
82
82

I have no idea where he got those numbers from.

 

[BigCaneAl]

12 schollies over 4 years.

That's 12% of our adjusted gross. That's not peanuts.

This. It's the 4 years that really hurts us. That's an awful long time to deal with scholly limits. IF, say, that rumor were true then

This year, we can have 85 athletes
In 2014 we could have 82 athletes
In 2015 we could have 79 athletes
In 2016 we could have 76 athletes
In 2017 we could have 73 athletes!!

Usually with these scholarship reductions, they don't allow you to make up for attrition either, so chances are we would be in the 60's.

So we're trying to build for the future, but with only 73 athletes on scholarship in 2017 we literally would have no depth at all. Then, in 2018, we would have to sign a MONSTER class, bringing in 35+ kids.

2018 would be a repeat of last year.

It basically screws our program for a long time moving forward.

Pretty sure this is completely wrong

I'm pretty sure it's right, ace.

No, there are many factors. The limits would be 3 less scholarships available per year from 25. So they'd have 22 scholarships per year to offer. Then they'd probably be limited to a total of 82 scholarship players per year for the 4 years. If we bring in the max per year for 4 years then we'd have 88. So at no point would we be forced to 73 by the sanctions.

 

[BigCaneAl]

Stop speculating.

Ok, lock it...you heard the man. Let's stop all the speculation on a message board.