Article attached.
<LINK_TEXT text=“http://sports.usatoday.com/2016/08/03/w … season-ban”>http://sports.usatoday.com/2016/08/03/will-ole-miss-receive-a-postseason-ban</LINK_TEXT>
As the lawyer noted, the NCAA will take Ole Miss’s case more serious because of the, “number of violations, how egregious those violations are and the competitive advantage gained because of those violations are things the Committee on Infractions will review for its decision.”
I think the most important aspect that sets this apart from other NCAA infractions is the competitive advantage OM gained because of these blatant violations.
ADDITIONALLY
"Ole Miss could also see its football program’s case tried at the highest possible level, said John G. Long, a lawyer who operates his own firm that handles NCAA cases in Austin, Texas.
“You’re talking about boosters, you’re talking about coaches, you’re talking about academic violations, you’re talking about assistants that are lying to the NCAA enforcement,” said Long, who isn’t part of Ole Miss’ case. “We’re not talking about a case here where there are some administrative mistakes and some kids were ineligible because they were in the wrong majors.
“I find it hard to believe that they’re going to say that it’s a Level I with mitigation. A win for Ole Miss would be if it’s processed as just a standard Level I on the penalty side. I think it’s very realistic that the Committee on Infractions will … see it as an aggravated case.”
A Level I-Aggravated case carries a postseason ban of two to four years."
I’m afraid that if the truth was known about illegal acts by boosters, staff etc. The majority of schools would be on a post season ban. Not excusing Ole Miss, but I fear money has corrupted collegiate sports and what is against the rules is swept under many a rug.
Sad, but if you are correct, and we are running a clean program as CBB and JL contend, then I have to ask “why?” Don’t get me wrong, I want to run a clean program. Being successful when you are “doing it right” is a greater accomplishment than just being successful. However, if all of College Football is corrupt, are we not just “slamming our heads in a car door?”
Herein lies a massive problem. There is TOO MUCH $$$$$ in college football and TV has become so insanely powerful. A connective problem is that High Rating teams can get extra special treatment, so their draw for TV ratings keeps them from being penalized for cheating. Lower rating draw teams could get penalized more readily by NCAA.
Yep. What is the old quote (I don’t have it exactly right as to the teams, but the concept is the same “The NCAA got so mad at Kentucky basketball they put Murray State on probation.”
[quote=“HogTreat”]
Herein lies a massive problem. There is TOO MUCH $$$$$ in college football and TV has become so insanely powerful. A connective problem is that High Rating teams can get extra special treatment, so their draw for TV ratings keeps them from being penalized for cheating. Lower rating draw teams could get penalized more readily by NCAA.
[/quote]
A very popular notion, but incorrect. College teams have been cheating since tickets were 50 cents at the gate. I don’t think there’s more incentive to cheat now. Remember that the SMU death penalty predated big TV money as well. CFB is a competitive business, and there will always be people who want to win by any means possible (and who believe the old NASCAR proverb, “if you ain’t cheatin’ you ain’t tryin’”). The impetus for SMU was rich alums in Dallas who got tired of UT and OU alums bragging about their successes every Monday morning at the Petroleum Club. And coaches who know they get fired if they lose have (and have always had) plenty of incentive to cut corners to keep the paycheck coming. It was true when head coaches made $50,000 a year and it’s true now.
[quote=“SwineFusion”]
You are correct in many ways, but I think you have to consider one concept - heirarchy of cheating. In the early days, the cheating was focused at the coach and AD level. In the early days, the visibility, investigative nature of media, and TV were not a massive part of the influence upon the NCAA. Today the NCAA has so many rules about cheating that the coaches have to try much harder to cheat so the cheating has moved up the chain of heirarchy. Today the TV contract is so massive that it is the controling factor for the NCAA, Conf Commissioners and AD’s. Now it is an issue of WHO the NCAA values the highest and that is the group of schools that the NCAA looks the other way for. Those are the teams that get to cheat MORE. The internet has created instant communication to the masses but it has also documented communication.
Call me an old fashioned goody two shoes optimist, but I still believe in the prevalent overall integrity of collegiate sports. Yes, there are undeniably cheaters. The odious Can Newton episode was neither the first - nor the only - payola scandal prior to this Ole Miss debacle. Twenty years ago, high profile star University of Oklahoma football players were driving expensive new cars courtesy of a local dealership.
I’m an unapologetic purist when it comes to being adamantly unwilling to condone anything that would unfairly give Arkansas an edge on our competition. I believe that Bielema is an extremely high caliber straight arrow who would not stoop to such deplorable tactics, - - and I am very proud of his sterling reputation as a “do-right” devotee.
I firmly believe that those who follow a persistently repetitious regimen of cheating will inevitably slip up and receive their comeuppance.
It was Tark who said the NCAA was so mad at UK they put Cleveland St on probation
Before I go into depth about Ole Miss football program, let me fully disclose that this is from the perspective of a complete outsider without any facts or details beyond what has been in the media for everyone to see.
That said, I think one can deduce from the circumstances that there has been a very high level of improprieties occurring since the arrival of Hugh Freeze. Almost immediately upon taking the job, Hugh Freeze oversaw a meteoric rise in Ole Miss recruiting. Now, this could be explained if he had name recognition on par with, say a Nick Saban or Jim Harbaugh, but he was coming from little Arkansas State in the Sun Belt conference with one year as a D-1 head coach. This recruiting success could also be explained if Ole Miss was a football powerhouse like USC or Texass, or if the in-state talent happened to be exceptional in that given year, but neither of those are the case either. Instead, what we see is a man takes over the head coaching job at a mid-tier football program with one year of division one head coaching experience, and immediately out-recruits top-level programs with household name coaches. In and of itself, it doesn’t necessarily mean he is cheating, but it probably does warrant a watchful eye.
Since that time, other coaches - including our own - have hinted that things at Ole Miss have been extreme - even for big time college football. I would believe that, out of everyone, opposing coaches would have the most insight into what recruits want: “Well, Ole Miss is giving me X. If you can match that I’ll sign with you.” I would never expect coaches to explicitly call out other coaches by name and offense because it would serve them no purpose (school/coach would deny and without proof it’s just added scrutiny on yourself), but some coaches are clearly frustrated with having to compete with some of the Ole Miss recruiting tactics.
To top it off, the Tunsil situation really served more as a confirmation of what was already being speculated. To me it seems unlikely to me that this is an isolated incident, and that they just happened to get caught the one time it’s occurred. This is where fans will typically stick their heads in the sand and say “One time!” and try to convince the rest of the world that it was an isolated incident because, you know, the coaching staff and administration at the university say so.
The most concerning thing I noticed from the Ole Miss report is that they are doing everything they can to pre-date the violations to the current coaching staff when, to an observer, the circumstances certainly seem to indicate the program has done more in recent years. One must also note, however, that the current staff has had more on-field success than Ole Miss has had in a long time and wonder how much of a role that plays.