samichesrdelicious
Recruit
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2012
- Messages
- 83
wrong.
Actually, he is saying more than that.
What he said was UM could have played it another way. He said the alternative was for UM to continue playing nice, keep taking a beating and HOPE that backroom politicking might carry the day. Well, fortunately, UM recognizes that HOPE is not a strategy. HOPE was the only other option Cote, really, said was available. I disagree with and still, nobody can present an argument other than HOPE that the NCAA, even before Donna gutted them, was in any mood to show mercy.
The President of the NCAA was answering death penalty questions a week after the YAHOO story broke! They convicted us in the media before they even approached Shapiro. Since then, they have lied, cheated and broken their own rules to have UM's scalp, and Cote thinks that the NCAA might bend to backroom politicking and let us off with a wrist slap?
That is monumentally naive, IMO. The NCAA Enforcement Division has buggered UM for the better part of three years. The buggering won't stop unless UM stops it. Yes, Cote said we kicked a bully in the balls and they will have the last word, but he also said we had a viable alternative. I disagree. The only alternative to kicking the NCAA's **** will be USC type penalties.
This is a "bet the company" case. UM either schools Enforcement before the COI or UM is going get hammered. There never was an alternative and the NCAA made that clear the day they got in bed with Shapiro.
I don't disagree with much of what you're saying, but it doesn't mean that Cote's opinion is wrong. As he is saying, backing the NCAA animal into a corner does have risks. it very well maybe a sophie's choice situation. whatever we do they will try to **** us. I just don't see the logic of calling cote scum for this article.
Why does PSU keep coming up as an instance where the NCAA was unfair?