NCAA response "disingenuous," says compliance expert

[NoahZach]

here are the 3 different scenarios this can end up

Scenario 1
NCAA has few internal hearings, and orders a thorough investigation in to the full Miami investigation. After that the NCAA settles with Miami. Miami gets probations, and few other small things here and there

Scenario 2
goes to COI, during the hearing allot comes out. turns out Miami is really guilty of violations and the NCAA is guilt of botching this and being unethical. Miami gets the chose 1. bowl ban + probation OR 2. probation + scholarship reduction + fines + forfeit loads of wins.


Scenario 3
NCAA pushes this. the COI sides with Enforcement and the NCAA decides to "stick together". Miami gets 1 more year + TV bans etc. Miami appeals, gets denied and takes it to court. after about 5-7 years the NCAA loses and Miami "wins"

i don't think anyone looking at this whole thing objectively would maintain that because the ncaa can't prove benefits, they did not occur (not that you suggest this, just prefacing my possible outcome). miami would not have self imposed what they did if they could not substantiate enough to fit the penalty in their mind. this does not excuse miami, and it does not excuse the enforcement arm of the ncaa. that being considered,

possible scenario 4:
everyone makes some concessions in a deal. the coi concedes that the process was handled soo poorly that moving forward the only further action will be a duration of probation.
miami agrees not to sue the NCAA's balls to the wall in exchange for reimbursement of legal fees.

Anyone looking at this objectively absolutely would say that what the NCAA cannot prove did not occur and, in fact, much of that has not even been charged. The COI is supposed to decide based upon proof.

Remember that, when Miami self-imposed the second time, the whole Perez fiasco has not blown up and evidence and charges had not yet been excluded. One of the issues that conceivably could arise is whether the evidence sufficiently will justify the self-imposed punishment if the COI rejects many of the actual charges for insufficient evidence.

maybe you can show me what miami got from their interviews with the named offenders, because i havent seen it myself. anything they self imposed prior to receiving the NOA was based on what they felt they could substantiate, at least within reason, to them. there is a difference between what is right to punish, and what one believs happened, also. i don't think the ncaa has the right to punish for things that were admitted to with inadmissable evidence, but that doesn't change wether i think it happened or not, notice the difference between those two. the punishment self imposed, in all likelihood, fits the crime, but further punishment would not.

Based on your last comment, what we are saying may not be that different. I think UM self-imposed based upon what it believed the investigation had revealed and substantiated at the time and what it expected would help once the matter was before the COI. After that, however, evidence that might have been the basis for UM's evaluation was excluded.

So, the question is whether what remains as evidence does fit the self-imposed sanction, whether some further type of sanction is appropriate (vacated wins, scholarship reductions, some sanctions to basketball, etc.) or whether the self-imposed sanctions exceed what is left of the evidence now. There also is the question of what might happen to the individual coaches involved in the matter.

My original point is that the determination is based upon evidence that the COI deems sufficient, not a supposition of what probably happened, but has not been proven or even charged.

 

[JerseyCanes]

Proxy,
Slow down with some of those projections. Those last two you listed are way harsh. The NCAA really doesnt do the whole TV ban thing anymore.

they wont even try to give us another post season ban. GTFO

there are really 2 scenarios:

1. they give us no more punishment (or very light to save face)
2. they try to **** us (still wont be another bowl ban....just anything more than about 10 schollys) and we tell them to eat **** and take them to court

Yep. A couple scholly loses probation and thats about it. It will be light enough that UM will accept while simultaneously allowing the ****** NCAA to save some face.

I agree that this is what will happen...

JC

 

[Jonnyblaze]

Proxy,
Slow down with some of those projectionsalse last two you listed are way harsh. The NCAA really doesnt do the whole TV ban thing anymore.

they wont even try to give us another post season ban. GTFO

there are really 2 scenarios:

1. they give us no more punishment (or very light to save face)
2. they try to **** us (still wont be another bowl ban....just anything more than about 10 schollys) and we tell them to eat **** and take them to court

Yep. A couple scholly loses probation and thats about it. It will be light enough that UM will accept while simultaneously allowing the ****** NCAA to save some face.

I agree that this is what will happen...

JC

Yup. The case is going to the COI for sure. Some token scholarship losses that'll be negotiated behind closed doors, probation and the always laughable "vacating" wins will be the end result.

 

[DiegoCane]

Proxy,
Slow down with some of those projections. Those last two you listed are way harsh. The NCAA really doesnt do the whole TV ban thing anymore.

they wont even try to give us another post season ban. GTFO

there are really 2 scenarios:

1. they give us no more punishment (or very light to save face)
2. they try to **** us (still wont be another bowl ban....just anything more than about 10 schollys) and we tell them to eat **** and take them to court

This.

LOL at 3 bowl bans. Good luck with that.