NCAA investigation, go ahead, ask me...

[CanesAreAble]

Will the NOA that was allegedly released today tell us if we're getting hit with "lack of institutional control", "failure to monitor", etc..., or will it simply contain a list of infractions that we have the chance to dispute?

If the latter, when can we get an idea of what we're dealing with?

 

[LoungeLord]

Do infractions that don't improve winning, like taking players already at school to a strip club, carry less penalty than one's that get a better player to come to a school?

 

[UMcanesfan420]

Does it help that even Shapiro admits that Shannon, the HC, told everyone to stay away from him? Obviously, his assistants didn't listen, but obviously Shannon tried.

 

[DapperSlapper]

Dapper, this is one I have been wanting someone to answer. What is the deal with the threats to the former players about banning? Does it hold weight and can they force UM to do it? Does it give leverage to the University in appeals or legal action?

I posted about this when that letter was made public. I viewed it as an idle threat for the following reasons:

The letter was from Enforcement - it is their job to be as over the top and forceful as possible. That being said, the evidence is judged by the COI. The COi does not hesitate to disagree with Enforcement - it happens frequently.

In this instance, I am very confident that the COI would disagree with Enforcement's view that silence = admission because of Bylaw 32.8.7.4, which states,

"In presenting information and evidence for consideration by the Committee on Infractions during an infractions hearing, the enforcement staff shall present only information that can be attributed to individuals who are willing to be identified. Information obtained from individuals not wishing to be identified shall not be relied on by the Committee on Infractions in making findings of violations. Such confidential sources shall not be identified to either the Committee on Infractions or the institution."

Note the "willing to be identified" language. Papacane was kind enough to steal that post from me last time...

 

[stormsurge]

Is there just one fixed group of people that make up the COI or does it change from case to case? In other words, will the same people who reviewed USCw and USCe be reviewing our case?

 

[DapperSlapper]

Will the NOA that was allegedly released today tell us if we're getting hit with "lack of institutional control", "failure to monitor", etc..., or will it simply contain a list of infractions that we have the chance to dispute?

If the latter, when can we get an idea of what we're dealing with?

An NOA states the factual allegations against an institution - what allegedly happened - and states which rules those allegations violated and why. The NOA will state whether the allegations amount to Failure to Monitor or Loss of Institutional Control.

 

[CanesAreAble]

Will the NOA that was allegedly released today tell us if we're getting hit with "lack of institutional control", "failure to monitor", etc..., or will it simply contain a list of infractions that we have the chance to dispute?

If the latter, when can we get an idea of what we're dealing with?

An NOA states the factual allegations against an institution - what allegedly happened - and states which rules those allegations violated and why. The NOA will state whether the allegations amount to Failure to Monitor or Loss of Institutional Control.

So if it's "failure to monitor", do you think the school simply forgoes the appeals process (assuming FTM means we over-sanctioned ourselves)? Also, do you think the school will release this information soon?

 

[DapperSlapper]

Is there just one fixed group of people that make up the COI or does it change from case to case? In other words, will the same people who reviewed USCw and USCe be reviewing our case?

That shouldn't be a complicated question, but it is...

The COI is made up of 10 members - 7 have to have been on staff in some capacity at member institutions or at the NCAA. At least 3, but no less than 2, have to have no prior link to member institutions, a conference, or the NCAA, There are other restrictive rules...but you get the idea. COI members serve 3 year terms, and each can serve 3 terms - excepting service as coordinator of appeals, which is separate.

Most here know that Paul Dee was the chair of the COI, but many probably don't know that UM has another prominent member of the COI. M. Minnette Massey, a long time professor at the law school was on the COI that gave SMU the death penalty.

 

[DapperSlapper]

Do infractions that don't improve winning, like taking players already at school to a strip club, carry less penalty than one's that get a better player to come to a school?

Infractions relative to current student athletes are treated differently from recruiting violation, but I wouldn't say violations are less severe for one than the other. I've noticed in most people's predictions of sanctions that they leave out recruiting restrictions. For recruiting restriction, the NCAA can restrict the number of coaches allowed to recruit, the amount of time coaches can spend on recruiting, the number of official visits a school can host, etc. Compare those to bowl bans and scholarship losses. Which is worse?

 

[stormsurge]

Is there just one fixed group of people that make up the COI or does it change from case to case? In other words, will the same people who reviewed USCw and USCe be reviewing our case?

That shouldn't be a complicated question, but it is...

The COI is made up of 10 members - 7 have to have been on staff in some capacity at member institutions or at the NCAA. At least 3, but no less than 2, have to have no prior link to member institutions, a conference, or the NCAA, There are other restrictive rules...but you get the idea. COI members serve 3 year terms, and each can serve 3 terms - excepting service as coordinator of appeals, which is separate.

Most here know that Paul Dee was the chair of the COI, but many probably don't know that UM has another prominent member of the COI. M. Minnette Massey, a long time professor at the law school was on the COI that gave SMU the death penalty.

If it may not be the same exact people then how consistent is the COI in its rulings versus previous COI decisions? (in other words, do their decisions vary wildly?)

 

[TooColdToHold]

What's the difference between failure to monitor and lack of institutional control?

 

[ShoelessSteve]

Why is the NCAA willing to take different stances with different programs. On one hand, you had blatant academic fraud at UNC and they said that it's the university's issue, not the NCAA. Then you have Penn State getting slammed for criminal activity. Then you have the Tennessee case where they decided to not hammer the school, but instead go after Bruce Pearl with show cause. We can post about this all night, but why is there inconstancy with the NCAA and punishment? Is the NCAA showing favoritism to schools best known for their basketball, or do they feel the need to bully schools like Penn State, Miami, and USC, who are best known for their football tradition?

Good post. To continue on this line of reasoning, can Miami point to these inconsistencies in its defense/rebuttal? Rather than just argue the merits of Miami's case alone, can Miami point to [the opposite of] precedent with all the different rulings? If so, what would the NCAA argue? That each case is looked at on its own without regard to other cases?

 

[DapperSlapper]

Why is the NCAA willing to take different stances with different programs. On one hand, you had blatant academic fraud at UNC and they said that it's the university's issue, not the NCAA. Then you have Penn State getting slammed for criminal activity. Then you have the Tennessee case where they decided to not hammer the school, but instead go after Bruce Pearl with show cause. We can post about this all night, but why is there inconstancy with the NCAA and punishment? Is the NCAA showing favoritism to schools best known for their basketball, or do they feel the need to bully schools like Penn State, Miami, and USC, who are best known for their football tradition?

To reiterate re: UNC - easy classes with a curriculum that a corpse could satisfy = not an NCAA issue, assuming the student athlete did whatever was necessary to pass/remain eligible. The NCAA does not regulate curricula. Its position is that a school runs the risk of losing accreditation if the classes are too easy. That's not an NCAA issue.

Normal class, and exceptions are made for a student athlete = NCAA problem. You can think of the ways in which this type of cheating happens, but the bottom line is that the student athlete did not satisfy what the school say the requirements are for the class.

Re: Pearl - he hosted a bbq, if I remember correctly. It was not a big deal by any means. He then lied about said bbq to the NCAA. That's a big deal. Without evidence that he was told to lie, it rests solely on him.

 

[DapperSlapper]

Does it help that even Shapiro admits that Shannon, the HC, told everyone to stay away from him? Obviously, his assistants didn't listen, but obviously Shannon tried.

Yes, it helps. To what extent, I couldn't tell you, but it's a valid, and good, argument that UM has.

 

[PeteCanes]

[video=youtube;cyhXtVUROkI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyhXtVUROkI[/video]

 

[DapperSlapper]

Why is the NCAA willing to take different stances with different programs. On one hand, you had blatant academic fraud at UNC and they said that it's the university's issue, not the NCAA. Then you have Penn State getting slammed for criminal activity. Then you have the Tennessee case where they decided to not hammer the school, but instead go after Bruce Pearl with show cause. We can post about this all night, but why is there inconstancy with the NCAA and punishment? Is the NCAA showing favoritism to schools best known for their basketball, or do they feel the need to bully schools like Penn State, Miami, and USC, who are best known for their football tradition?

I forgot to address Penn State in my last post...

Emmert had to get authority for what happened with PSU from a joint motion by the NCAA Executive Committee and the Division I Board of Directors. You can see how that was done by looking at this:

http://ncaa.s3.amazonaws.com/files/2...C MOTION.pdf

That is not happening again any time soon. Certainly not in UM's case. PSU's case was entirely out of NCAA infractions procedures. UM's case is entirely within those procedures.

 

[DapperSlapper]

Is there just one fixed group of people that make up the COI or does it change from case to case? In other words, will the same people who reviewed USCw and USCe be reviewing our case?

That shouldn't be a complicated question, but it is...

The COI is made up of 10 members - 7 have to have been on staff in some capacity at member institutions or at the NCAA. At least 3, but no less than 2, have to have no prior link to member institutions, a conference, or the NCAA, There are other restrictive rules...but you get the idea. COI members serve 3 year terms, and each can serve 3 terms - excepting service as coordinator of appeals, which is separate.

Most here know that Paul Dee was the chair of the COI, but many probably don't know that UM has another prominent member of the COI. M. Minnette Massey, a long time professor at the law school was on the COI that gave SMU the death penalty.

If it may not be the same exact people then how consistent is the COI in its rulings versus previous COI decisions? (in other words, do their decisions vary wildly?)

We could debate that all night... What I will say is that the COI's decision in a particular case is much harder to guess than a judge in a court case. There is typically precedent in cases in both instances, but the COI does not have any real need to restrain itself to what a COI did in the past. A judge has that pressure.

 

[chiane]

Is there actually any law or punishment guidelines for the NCAA, or can they make up any **** they want? The entire process seems about as legit as a fraternity hazing, as does self imposed sanctions. Where else in life do you see that?

 

[DapperSlapper]

I will add one more thing - don't pay attention to what the sports writers say regarding the timeline for a decision in this case unless they are quoting someone who know what he is talking about (like Infante, or myself...). I know certain sportswriters have said a decision could come out in May or June...don't bet on it. Those writers fail to consider certain things that must happen before the hearing. As I posted in another thread:

UM (and any individuals who get NOAs) gets 90 days to respond to the NOA and dispute allegations or conclusions that allegations amount to violations. After the response(s) to NOA, the parties have 30 days to have prehearing conferences - Enforcement consults with each party one by one (unless the parties agree to consult all together) to determine what the issues will be at the hearing.

After that, Enforcement prepares a case summary and sends it to the COI and the other parties. This has to be done 14 days before the hearing.

After that, there is a hearing during a regularly scheduled meeting of the COI (they meet every other month).

After the hearing, the COI works on its decision. A quick decision would be about 6 weeks. UNC's decision took about 4 1/2 months.

This case could be a little further delayed as well. The COI may also decide it needs an interpretation on an issue (such as application of the rule allowing more than 4 years of conduct to be considered). It can make a request to the academic and membership affairs staff. The interpretation is based on whatever set of of facts the COI provides - so they weigh evidence first, then submit the request for an interpretation (after the hearing). The institution and Enforcement are advised if that happens. The institution can appeal the interpretation.

We may have a decision sometime around the start of the season, give or take.

 

[weownfsu]

Is there actually any law or punishment guidelines for the NCAA, or can they make up any **** they want? The entire process seems about as legit as a fraternity hazing, as does self imposed sanctions. Where else in life do you see that?

what