dublinirish
Everestt Gholstonson
- Messages
- 27,329
- Reaction score
- 13,092
none of them are gonna squealSounds like the NCAA is interviewing players and promising immunity
none of them are gonna squealSounds like the NCAA is interviewing players and promising immunity
ah they are all drones man and they love Harbaugh, they'll say nothingYou are overlooking that they Michigan players not Notre Dame guys. You have to remember many probably don't have spines
Immunity carries the threat of punishment. What's the punishment, bowl ban? Do they let players transfer without having to sit, even if they've already transferred in the past? Or do they let players that comply participate in a bowl? I'm trying to guess how the players are up for punishment and what they're getting out of.Sounds like the NCAA is interviewing players and promising immunity
none of them are gonna squeal
Genuine question because I don't know the answer, would they be able to suspend players if they were aware of the scheme? That could impact players who are borderline draftableImmunity carries the threat of punishment. What's the punishment, bowl ban? Do they let players transfer without having to sit, even if they've already transferred in the past? Or do they let players that comply participate in a bowl? I'm trying to guess how the players are up for punishment and what they're getting out of.
I have no idea if the NCAA could suspend a kid for just being aware of the scheme.Genuine question because I don't know the answer, would they be able to suspend players if they were aware of the scheme? That could impact players who are borderline draftable
Right, I'm just thinking out loud because I don't know either. Is there something in the bylaws that a player has to report something if they see illegal activity? Is that how they'll get them? Maybe a sportsmanship clause or something. If the immunity is true, you gotta figure whatever they're holding over there heads has to be bowl or general participation related, because I don't think they can do anything with their scholarships.Genuine question because I don't know the answer, would they be able to suspend players if they were aware of the scheme? That could impact players who are borderline draftable
I have no idea if the NCAA could suspend a kid for just being aware of the scheme.
I think there is no way that the NCAA would suspend a player just because they were aware of the scheme. Realistically, I think they would've had to actively been involved in the scheme to face any punishment.
Makes sense. My hunch would be that they would try to protect the players as much as possible from the crimes of their coaches but @ulukinatme has me wondering what they this immunity if fromI have no idea if the NCAA could suspend a kid for just being aware of the scheme.
I think there is no way that the NCAA would suspend a player just because they were aware of the scheme. Realistically, I think they would've had to actively been involved in the scheme to face any punishment.
"The University’s November 8 response does not deny that the impermissible scheme occurred. Instead, it offers only procedural and technical arguments designed to delay accountability. The University also argues that because it believes that others are engaged in decoding signs, there must be nothing wrong with the University’s activities. In addition to impermissible activities of others being currently unsupported by facts, the University’s culpability is not dependent on the actions of other institutions."
IV. The University’s Claim That It Had Reviewed Almost No Evidence
The Conference is highly concerned about the University’s statements in its November 8 response that it “has not yet had an opportunity to review almost any of the evidence” and that “[f]rom what we can tell, your [notice] largely relies on rumor.” Univ. Resp. at 1, 7. We know from the evidence provided to the Conference by the NCAA on November 9 that the University had been provided the Master Spreadsheet, numerous other corroborating documents, photographs, and videos, and significant interview recordings, all of which confirm the existence of the impermissible scheme. This includes, as early as October 31 and November 1, at least three University officials attending NCAA interviews during which details of the impermissible scheme were revealed. That knowledge preceded the above-referenced November 2 call with the NCAA, in which the University participated, during which the NCAA stated it knew and could prove the existence of the impermissible scheme.
We assume the University’s first comment did not mean that it and its counsel had not taken the time to review the documents and other information upon receiving them. The University appears to suggest that imposition of discipline is inappropriate because the University claimed it had seen almost no evidence. But given the extensive evidence the University was in fact provided by the NCAA, it cannot possibly be true that the University had not seen “almost any of the evidence.” The evidence the University had should have allowed it to determine for itself the clear basis for concluding that the impermissible scheme occurred. And the combination of (i) the extensive evidence the University had, and (ii) the Conference’s reference in its November 4 notice to specific categories of evidence that it had reviewed surely allowed the University to know that the Conference was not “largely rel[ying] on “rumor.”
Interesting. Offering immunity would mean they are chasing something big. As others have said, if you are offering immunity you would have to wager what they are threatening (if they find all the info needed) must be pretty severe to the athletes themselves.Sounds like the NCAA is interviewing players and promising immunity
Doesn’t failure to cooperate mean the NCAA can speed up their timeline?
Something I saw on 11Warriors yesterday: the NCAA has announced that they want to finish their investigation and submit their Notice of Allegations this fall (which isn't helpful to keep Michigan out of the Postseason) and a strict reading of this fall means before 12/21, and what happens on 12/20? Early Signing DayEvery commit in their 2024 class should be very cautious of signing their LOI during the early signing period in December.
Apologies if already posted, but I really don't think I can hate that university more. Their PRESIDENT tweeted this after the PSU game. They are beyond shameless, morally corrupt and completely delusional.
Deep down, your players must know you care about them. This is the most important thing
He literally quoted Bo a couple weeks ago in support of the team when the reports first started coming out, including the below, which is cringing hilarious when you realize what Bo allowed to happen to his players
HE IS BACK!!! I just thought you were going to lurk behind your computer screen all day like a middle school teenager.Jim Shady is an elite nickname given the location/situation
There's got to be one or two riding the bench that think they should be getting some playing time.On the current roster maybe, but there's plenty of jaded guys from the last couple years that transferred out