Skunkbear Signal Stealing Scandal

ShadesO'Green

Member
Messages
19
Reaction score
45
And as I post that, partridges Twitter is back but Common theme of further involvement seems likely for non coordinator position
 

ulukinatme

Carr for QB 2026!
Messages
31,521
Reaction score
17,402
How many boxes of crayons did it take to write 600 pages about Michigan football?

Ha-is this a Stalions Marine joke? Lmao.

Obligatory reference
APsPiU1.jpeg
 

ShadesO'Green

Member
Messages
19
Reaction score
45
It’s not the end, this was an intial big ten investigation. As more comes out, more could be dished out by big ten. Ncaa hasn’t even begun any punishment if they see fit
 

sfk324

Well-known member
Messages
1,712
Reaction score
2,276

I really think the conference basically told them if UM ended up winning in court, they would reevaluate the punishment. A favorable decision would have (in all likelihood ) merely nullified the suspension, not precluded the conference from assessing a sanction in line with the contract. So the conference would have been within its rights to punish the institution more generally, rather than just the coach as representative for the institution. It doesn't take a genius (which is fortunate for UM and their fans) to understand that the conference would have been within its rights under the wording of the bylaws to disqualify the institution as a whole from post-season play (not just the football team, mind you), withhold UM's share of conference revenue, revoke prior year titles, etc. The Jimbo suspension is absolutely a slap on the wrist, and Michigan would have been absolutely stupid to pursue this any further.
 

Irish#1

Livin' Your Dream!
Staff member
Messages
44,608
Reaction score
20,086
One of two things happened IMO.

1. Michigan's lawyers realized their shot to get a stay was slim or,
2. B1G said they will not pursue any further action if Michigan quits whining and accepts the suspension knowing the NCAA has yet to fire up their bulldozer.
 

Katzenboyer

Well-known member
Messages
1,925
Reaction score
3,186
My read (as an attorney who doesn't practice in this particular field) is a combination of the following:
  • The B10 believes punishment is warranted, but that they were worried that they may have overstepped their bounds re: the timing of the suspension (which could have seen Harbaugh returning to the field on Saturday while the process plays out);
  • The B10 knows that any significant punishment will be the result of the NCAA investigation, and not the conference's; and
  • Michigan was worried about making statements under oath that could be contradicted if more bad stuff comes out in the following weeks/months.
Just my two cents.
 

Blazers46

Adjectives: wise/brilliant/handsome.
Messages
8,107
Reaction score
5,459
Did the Big10 have to give evidence during this trial? If so I’m assuming UM didn’t want anything to come out… if not, disregard my baseless assumption.
 

sfk324

Well-known member
Messages
1,712
Reaction score
2,276
Did the Big10 have to give evidence during this trial? If so I’m assuming UM didn’t want anything to come out… if not, disregard my baseless assumption.
It wasn't a trial on the merits at this point, just a preliminary hearing where the main issue was whether or not to grant a temporary restraining order allowing Harbaugh to coach. As such, it was largely to be based on filings and oral arguments and there was a very low chance that any testimony would have been taken.
 

ab2cmiller

Troublemaker in training
Messages
11,454
Reaction score
8,533
My read (as an attorney who doesn't practice in this particular field) is a combination of the following:
  • The B10 believes punishment is warranted, but that they were worried that they may have overstepped their bounds re: the timing of the suspension (which could have seen Harbaugh returning to the field on Saturday while the process plays out);
  • The B10 knows that any significant punishment will be the result of the NCAA investigation, and not the conference's; and
  • Michigan was worried about making statements under oath that could be contradicted if more bad stuff comes out in the following weeks/months.
Just my two cents.
I agree. If the above is true, it would seem that the conference is done issuing punishment this year. NCAA can't issue punishment yet this year as they are required to give a number of days for Michigan to respond. End result is that Michigan has a realistic chance of stealing someone else's spot in the CFP, which will be a travesty.
 

Katzenboyer

Well-known member
Messages
1,925
Reaction score
3,186
Did the Big10 have to give evidence during this trial? If so I’m assuming UM didn’t want anything to come out… if not, disregard my baseless assumption.

They would have needed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of their claims. So, yes.
 

sfk324

Well-known member
Messages
1,712
Reaction score
2,276
They would have needed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of their claims. So, yes.
But the merit of their claim was only whether the suspension was allowed under the terms of the conference bylaws, not whether Michigan cheated and/or Harbaugh knew about it.
 

Katzenboyer

Well-known member
Messages
1,925
Reaction score
3,186
It wasn't a trial on the merits at this point, just a preliminary hearing where the main issue was whether or not to grant a temporary restraining order allowing Harbaugh to coach. As such, it was largely to be based on filings and oral arguments and there was a very low chance that any testimony would have been taken.

This is incorrect. Harbaugh was expected to testify under oath (or at least he said he would).

The Big 10 would have needed to show what they had re: the sign stealing - documents, testimony, etc. Michigan would have needed to show why that wasn't enough -- i.e., rebutted the B10's evidence with their own, which would most likely entirely relate to witness testimony.

This was going to be a full-blown evidentiary hearing.
 

Katzenboyer

Well-known member
Messages
1,925
Reaction score
3,186
But the merit of their claim was only whether the suspension was allowed under the terms of the conference bylaws, not whether Michigan cheated and/or Harbaugh knew about it.

You're not wrong, and that would have been Michigan's argument. But both the answers to your questions require evidence.

Did Michigan cheat? B10 would have needed to show all the evidence they had.

Did Harbaugh know about it? Michigan would have needed to rebut that. How else could they do that without Harbaugh's own testimony, or testimony of someone on the staff?

Michigan needs proof to support their request for a TRO. That requires evidence.
 
Last edited:

ulukinatme

Carr for QB 2026!
Messages
31,521
Reaction score
17,402
"We're cooperating fully with the investigation"
Harbaugh: Nope
Stallions before he left: Nope
Both were reported as not fully cooperating.
 

NDpendent

Well-known member
Messages
2,011
Reaction score
6,337
Smart move for both parties. Then we will party after the NCAA investigation.

Just word from the wise, everyone should stock up on popcorn now because there will be a shortage soon. I just bought three shopping carts worth myself. 🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿
 

thekid33

President of the Kevin McDougal Fan Club
Messages
2,467
Reaction score
4,172
The NCAA is still coming for him. I read this as the Big 10 taking the W on 3 games and then they are content to let the NCAA bring the real hammer. It's not like the Big 10 really conceded anything with this settlement.
 

stlnd01

Was away. Now returned.
Messages
13,386
Reaction score
10,247
This isn't the end of it. The NCAA will hammer them. But unless the NCAA hammers them faster than they have ever hammered before, this is probably the end of it for this season.
Which means if Michigan wins out they go to the CFP with a legit title shot. Which is probably all they care about at this point.
 
Top