The Michigan/Sign Stealing & COVID Punishment Thread

[BigC421/]

19 minutes ago, AkronsWitness said:

Here is a list of all of the evidence the NCAA actually has, can prove and they instructed the B1G to act on (sorry for the crazy font)

MICHIGAN’S “MASTER SPREADSHEET” DETAILS SIGN-STEALING ACTIVITIES

The NCAA obtained what it described as a “master spreadsheet” from Michigan that “included a very large amount of detailed information regarding the impermissible scheme.” Per the notice of disciplinary action, the spreadsheet included the following items:

• a large and detailed chart listing the names of various individuals assigned to attend past and future football games involving the University’s scheduled football opponents 
• similar in-person attendance assignments for past and future games involving highlyranked, non-conference football opponents (presumably potential University football opponents in post-season games)
• notations showing whether in-person attendance at non-conference games would be necessary depending on different win/loss scenarios
• the 2023 game schedules of the university’s scheduled football opponents
• color-coding to reflect past games actually attended by assigned individuals and future games for which individual assignments were still needed 
• the names of individuals assigned to certain cities and locations 
• monetary amounts associated with certain assigned games

• The NCAA informed the Big Ten on Nov. 2 that it “knew and could prove” that Stalions partook in the following actions:

• the staff member participated in and coordinated a vast off-campus, in-person advance scouting scheme involving a network of individuals
• he purchased and forwarded tickets for games involving future university football opponents, and the tickets were for seats strategically located for stealing the future opponents’ signs
• he and others acting at his direction video recorded signs used by future university opponents while attending the opponents’ games in person
• information, including videos of future opponents’ signs, was delivered back to the staff member by those who had attended the games and taken the videos at his direction
• during the time in question, including through the university’s seventh game of the 2023 season, the staff member was present on the university’s sidelines, dressed similarly to university coaches, in close proximity to university coaches, and he communicated directly with such coaches.

• Given that, Petitti felt comfortable taking action against Michigan now, even though the NCAA has not yet concluded its investigation.

Won’t lie and say that’s nothing if they actually have all that can prove it.  It sound like the ncaa is insulting intentionally or not the lone wolf theory which was Michigans defense in the first place.  They didn’t make a public comment saying no evidence in Harbaugh without a purpose.  The legal arguments by Michigan are still relevant and if a court takes the case will almost assuredly agree. The big10 s own rule book says it can not suspend a coach during an ncaa investigation 

 NCAA has bigger issues on its hands right now for those not paying attention they are the verge of being sued into complete bankruptcy in a separate claim involving former athletes and nil lost compensation. 
 

Im not sure what would give me more joy winning a natty or leaving the big10

 

notice how I read and gave thought to the information you posted rather than just dismissing it because I don’t like it or was 11warriors

Edited November 11, 2023 by BigC421/

[MWil23]

They aren’t leaving the conference and walking away from millions in TV revenue and if they do then nobody else will take a team who cheats their against own conference opponents. Enjoy draconian penalties Michigan.

[Ragnarok]

12 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

They aren’t leaving the conference and walking away from millions in TV revenue and if they do then nobody else will take a team who cheats their against own conference opponents. Enjoy draconian penalties Michigan.

ACC might end up desperate enough to take them

[BigC421/]

18 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

They aren’t leaving the conference and walking away from millions in TV revenue and if they do then nobody else will take a team who cheats their against own conference opponents. Enjoy draconian penalties Michigan.

Lol your argument is very contradicting. They won’t walk away from millions but other conferences won’t want to take a school that would exponentially add millions to there next deal.  Michigan is half the reason for that tv revenue deal and it will follow them wherever they go. A bidding war is more likely than rejecting. Despite grand standing all these conferences no non of this crap matters. No competitive advantage was gained.  Everyone steals signs, no one cares a lone wolf did it in an unconventionally way it’s all hyperbole.  Paying recruits pre nil was cheating against your own conference. I’ll take a great player over some signs they get decoded anyway. There is clearly an agenda going on. The rush to judgement and try to punish before they win a title is unprecedented. USC and Auburn both under investigation and the ncaa had proof during seasons they won titles no one demanded to stop due process and throw out the rule book just to stop them.
 

Just win a natty this year, frankly the next time anyone cares about vacated championships will be the first time.  Most people couldn’t even tell you what championships have been vacated. You can never take away the memories. People remember what they saw and experienced.  It probably wouldn’t even get vacated given the punishments been handed out is the brilliance of it all to lol.  They could vacate half the wins from earlier this season but it wouldn’t change that they won the CFP ( obviously there’s a lot of football to play, just making a point)  

Edited November 11, 2023 by BigC421/

[BigC421/]

Very interesting point made on yes mgoblog 

The Big10 (and potentially the ncaa ) have just opened themselves up to a potentially massive class action law suit from any and all football players. According to there own written statement the act of sign stealing or knowing an opponents play is a risk to player safety, health and well being.  Both the big10 and ncaa openly admit they allow sign stealing and it is not against the rules. Most member coaches have admitted on record they do it, and the conference (and ncaa) allow it.  Connecting dots the conferences is knowingly engaging in and allowing a practice it considers a risk to player health.  Many attempts threw the years have been made from multi parties to have all conference members ( and ncaa teams in separate attempts ) equipped with helmet communication technology. Every time the big10 and ncaa have rejected these requests. Putting player safety and health at risk despite being presented with options to stop the practice they consider a direct risk to player health.  

Edited November 11, 2023 by BigC421/

[mse326]

39 minutes ago, BigC421/ said:

The legal arguments by Michigan are still relevant and if a court takes the case will almost assuredly agree. The big10 s own rule book says it can not suspend a coach during an ncaa investigation

You keep saying this.

1. You are not a lawyer so don't pretend you know what is or isn't likely to be done by a court

2. All you've done is parrotted what the University/Harbaugh's lawyers and a UM fans legal analysis. Lawyers literally make their living arguing their point is correct. They are good at it. But that doesn't make it so. Post the actual rule, not just their interpretation, and show where it says they cannot suspend a coach during an NCAA investigation. From the letter by the lawyers I haven't seen a rule that says that

[BigC421/]

2 minutes ago, mse326 said:

You keep saying this.

1. You are not a lawyer so don't pretend you know what is or isn't likely to be done by a court

2. All you've done is parrotted what the University/Harbaugh's lawyers and a UM fans legal analysis. Lawyers literally make their living arguing their point is correct. They are good at it. But that doesn't make it so. Post the actual rule, not just their interpretation, and show where it says they cannot suspend a coach during an NCAA investigation. From the letter by the lawyers I haven't seen a rule that says that

I posted the actual rule days ago.  The lawyer literally quoted the exact rule from the rule book explaining this matter.  

[BigC421/]

9 minutes ago, mse326 said:

You keep saying this.

1. You are not a lawyer so don't pretend you know what is or isn't likely to be done by a court

2. All you've done is parrotted what the University/Harbaugh's lawyers and a UM fans legal analysis. Lawyers literally make their living arguing their point is correct. They are good at it. But that doesn't make it so. Post the actual rule, not just their interpretation, and show where it says they cannot suspend a coach during an NCAA investigation. From the letter by the lawyers I haven't seen a rule that says that

32.2.2(C) NCAA Initiated Cases. The Compliance and Reinstatement Subcommittee shall review violations by member universities as determined by the NCAA and may impose penalties in addition to those imposed by the NCAA for any violations.

1. Where the NCAA initiates a preliminary or official inquiry with a member university the Conference will cooperate with university and NCAA representatives in the processing of that case through the normal NCAA investigation, hearing and appeal processes.

2. While the case will be processed through normal NCAA channels, the Conference Compliance and Reinstatement Subcommittee shall review the case and may impose additional penalties, if warranted, subsequent to the NCAA action.

[mse326]

 

Rule 32.2.1

Quote

A. Interim Action by the Commissioner. When the Commissioner has knowledge of a possible violation, the Commissioner may take any interim action the Commissioner deems necessary to prevent harm to the interests of the Conference or its member universities, their employees or students, officials or spectators of 59 Conference sporting events, to protect the integrity of the involved sport or to preserve the status quo pending final determination with respect to whether a violation has occurred and what suitable action, if any, should be taken. This interim action may include, but is not limited to: 1. Withholding a student-athlete from practice or competition in a sport; 2. Withholding a coach from conducting practice or coaching in a sport; 3. Prohibiting or limiting recruiting by an involved member university or any of its personnel; or 4. Canceling or postponing any regularly scheduled athletic contest where a member university is the home team.

Following is also the full 32.2.2 that the lawyer cited
 

Quote

32.2.2 Investigation A. Upon receipt of a report of an alleged violation, the Commissioner or a representative shall conduct an investigation to determine whether there is reason to believe a violation has occurred. In the event such a determination is made, the Commissioner shall request through the Faculty Representative that the involved member university provide the Commissioner with all information which the involved member university has which is or may be relevant to the investigation. B. Should the involved member university find at any time that it is more likely than not a violation has occurred, it shall so advise the Commissioner in writing and provide a statement regarding remedial action it has taken or proposes to take, if any. The involved member university shall cooperate fully with the Commissioner, shall provide all requested information, if available, and shall insure the availability of all persons under the control of the university for interview by the Commissioner or a representative. C. NCAA Initiated Cases. The Compliance and Reinstatement Subcommittee shall review violations by member universities as determined by the NCAA and may impose penalties in addition to those imposed by the NCAA for any violations. 1. Where the NCAA initiates a preliminary or official inquiry with a member university the Conference will cooperate with university and NCAA representatives in the processing of that case through the normal NCAA investigation, hearing and appeal processes. 2. While the case will be processed through normal NCAA channels, the Conference Compliance and Reinstatement Subcommittee shall review the case and may impose additional penalties, if warranted, subsequent to the NCAA action. D. Conference Initiated Cases. The Conference may initiate an informal, preliminary or official inquiry into a member university's practices regarding NCAA or Conference rules. 61 1. Informal Inquiry. An informal inquiry shall consist of a letter of inquiry regarding the possibility of secondary infractions of Conference or NCAA rules. 2. Preliminary Inquiry. A preliminary inquiry shall consist of written or in-person inquiries regarding the possibility of major infractions of NCAA or Conference rules. a. If the preliminary inquiry consists of an in-person inquiry by the Conference office staff, the university's President or Chancellor, Athletic Director, and Faculty Representatives shall be advised of the general matter under inquiry. 3. Official Inquiry. An official inquiry shall consist of a written document outlining major allegations of NCAA and/or Conference rules. 4. Major Violation. The Compliance and Reinstatement Subcommittee shall determine if a “reasonable basis” exists to believe that a major violation may have occurred prior to authorizing a preliminary or official inquiry or before asking the NCAA to review the matter. All written inquiries regarding major violations shall be copied to the university's President or Chancellor, Athletic Director and Faculty Representatives. a. Communicating with NCAA on Major Allegations. The Compliance and Reinstatement Subcommittee at any stage during a Conference inquiry regarding a major allegation of NCAA rules may determine that the NCAA enforcement staff rather than the Conference office staff would be a more appropriate or effective body to investigate and present the facts of a case. This determination may be based on shortage of Conference resources or the NCAA's ability to more effectively deal with the complexity of developing and presenting information relative to certain kinds of alleged practices.

No where does it say that the conference has to wait on the NCAA and no where does it say they can't run a parallel investiagtion of their own regardless of which started first. All it says is that the conference will cooperate with NCAA investigations and have the authority to increase the penalties if they so choose

[mse326]

5 minutes ago, BigC421/ said:

32.2.2(C) NCAA Initiated Cases. The Compliance and Reinstatement Subcommittee shall review violations by member universities as determined by the NCAA and may impose penalties in addition to those imposed by the NCAA for any violations.

1. Where the NCAA initiates a preliminary or official inquiry with a member university the Conference will cooperate with university and NCAA representatives in the processing of that case through the normal NCAA investigation, hearing and appeal processes.

2. While the case will be processed through normal NCAA channels, the Conference Compliance and Reinstatement Subcommittee shall review the case and may impose additional penalties, if warranted, subsequent to the NCAA action.

I know I read it. It no where says they have to wait on the NCAA. It says they will cooperate with the NCAA and can increase the penalty. It says nothing about prohibiting their own investigation or assessing penalties.

[Bonanza23]

34 minutes ago, BigC421/ said:

Lol your argument is very contradicting. They won’t walk away from millions but other conferences won’t want to take a school that would exponentially add millions to there next deal.  Michigan is half the reason for that tv revenue deal and it will follow them wherever they go. A bidding war is more likely than rejecting. Despite grand standing all these conferences no non of this crap matters. No competitive advantage was gained.  Everyone steals signs, no one cares a lone wolf did it in an unconventionally way it’s all hyperbole.  Paying recruits pre nil was cheating against your own conference. I’ll take a great player over some signs they get decoded anyway. There is clearly an agenda going on. The rush to judgement and try to punish before they win a title is unprecedented. USC and Auburn both under investigation and the ncaa had proof during seasons they won titles no one demanded to stop due process and throw out the rule book just to stop them.
 

Just win a natty this year, frankly the next time anyone cares about vacated championships will be the first time.  Most people couldn’t even tell you what championships have been vacated. You can never take away the memories. People remember what they saw and experienced.  It probably wouldn’t even get vacated given the punishments been handed out is the brilliance of it all to lol.  They could vacate half the wins from earlier this season but it wouldn’t change that they won the CFP ( obviously there’s a lot of football to play, just making a point)  

hi conner 

2

Edited November 11, 2023 by Bonanza23
omittion

[Thomas5737]

UM are the Houston Astros of NCAAF.

I'm guessing away fan bases are about to give them the same treatment.

It didn't stop the Astros from continuing to win, but they are by far the most hated team in sports... as of now.

[BobbyPhil1781]

8 minutes ago, Thomas5737 said:

UM are the Houston Astros of NCAAF.

I'm guessing away fan bases are about to give them the same treatment.

It didn't stop the Astros from continuing to win, but they are by far the most hated team in sports... as of now.

Biggest difference here is the governing body can basically ruin the program where that can't happen in professional sports. If they have everything that is seems like they have, UM is in a ton of trouble. 

[BigC421/]

14 minutes ago, mse326 said:

 

Rule 32.2.1

Following is also the full 32.2.2 that the lawyer cited
 

No where does it say that the conference has to wait on the NCAA and no where does it say they can't run a parallel investiagtion of their own regardless of which started first. All it says is that the conference will cooperate with NCAA investigations and have the authority to increase the penalties if they so choose

Good find kudos on putting in the work and creating a very good counter I can appreciate and respect.  I’m as much if not more curious than stubborn.  I want to hear “good” arguments from opposing sides.

 

That said this makes for a bit of a quagmire. Both rules are clearly stated and neither rule directly references an ability to over ride the other. Who ever I do think it is some what inferred that the conference will not step in an before an ncaa investigation is complete but perhaps the legalese that’s above my head.  An assumption could be made that if the ncaa is investigating a member university it is highly likely one of the circumstances from your rule has occurred and is what is being investigated. Therefore the normal process including a hearing and appeals process should be followed.  
 

On top of that the big10 has not actually produced any evidence what so ever. Even if the evidence exits, they have not produced it. 

[BigC421/]

1 minute ago, BobbyPhil1781 said:

Biggest difference here is the governing body can basically ruin the program where that can't happen in professional sports. If they have everything that is seems like they have, UM is in a ton of trouble. 

Just like UNC and Kansas basketball ? Ton of trouble they got in. Kansas won a national title and Bill Self got a lifetime contract as the highest paid coach in the sport.  They did things way worse than this and the ncaa had way more evidence.  There was also no rush to judgement despite fbi wire tap evidence.  Big12 wasn’t stupid enough to step in and throw there weight. Investigation took years despite it being handed to them on a silver plater.