29 replies to this topic

[Bulliever]

Miami, Golden agree to 4-year extension

[DataBull]

They had to give him something in return for ambushing him.

[88Alum]

Enjoy the sanctions

[Rizman]

When are the sanctions going to come down. They should not be allowed to play in a bowl. Heard that Ray Ray Armstrong made another mistake this season and the coach suspended him for one game.

[Triple B]

They're not playing in a bowl ...

[Rizman]

I thought when they beat USF they qualified. My mistake.

[Paisa el Toro]

Miami pulled a preemptive "we'll sanction ourselves by deferring this year's bowl game" in a move of contrition, hoping the NCAA won't be too harsh on them. I hope they get the book thrown at them.

[Rizman]

They should have a ton thrown at them

[Hurricane Mutiny]

You guys are hilarious. I understand your feelings, but you have to deal with reality.

Bowl game bans are standard when you have played in one or more with ineligible players. Because our players truthfully admitted to the extra benefits that they accepted, we are DEFINITELY going to get one or more bowl bans based upon the timing of when they accepted bowl benefits. USC got a 2 bowl ban due to the fact that Reggie Bush took extra benefits in the seasons leading up to 2 bowl games. While I would hope that the UM players only took benefits in the 2010 year, it is possible that we could get a 2nd bowl ban (extra benefits in 2009) and maybe a 3rd bowl ban (extra benefits in 2008). We did not play in a bowl in 2007, and all of the players were not on the roster prior.

So this isn't some olive branch to the NCAA, in an effort to get "less sanctions". We are doing what USC did, try to get the bowl bans out of the way before embracing the scholarship loss portion. We are NOT offering any scholarship losses in the February 2012, so if we do get a second bowl ban (and no third), our bowl bans will be over before we are ever docked a single scholarship.

As for the scholarships, you are definitely not going to be thrilled about this, but it is what it is. None of our former players have agreed to speak to the NCAA, so you can forget about all of the Yahoo allegations involving former players. I know that Yahoo will never admit it, but the seemingly largest monetary violations involving former players were things that were given after guys turned pro. Even most of the "boat" photos were taken at times when guys had already turned pro.

Setting that aside, the NCAA has all of the truthful testimony from players (including those not at UM who were given immunity). Miami itself has completely cooperated with the NCAA in every way. Even when we suspended Ray Ray for a game for Tweeting about dinner with his girlfriend, it was 100% protective in nature until the NCAA could vet the situation. And you shouldn't discount the fact that while he was HC, Randy Shannon had sent numerous things to the NCAA asking for them to step in and police the problems in SoFla with street agents, traveling teams, diploma mills, and friends-and-family shopping sprees.

In light of the unprecedented levels of access, cooperation, and guidance that Miami has offered, we will get "mid-severity" scholarship losses, probably around 18 over 3-4 years, likely beginning in 2013. Once the bowl bans are over, those scholarship losses are manageable, hence our shift in recruiting over the last couple of months to more JuCo/prep kids.

We'll be fine and back on top soon. Fortunately, Golden had to rely on a lot of JuCo kids to rebuild Temple, so he knows how to do this.

[Rizman]

When was the last time Miami won a National Championship? Yeah, that is what I thought.

[Hurricane Mutiny]

When was the last time Miami won a National Championship? Yeah, that is what I thought.

When was the last time USF won a Big East Championship?

What is the relevance of these questions? I am fully aware of our history of conference and national championships. But I provided information on our NCAA case. What's next, attendance smack?

Funny thing is, we may have a stadium of our own before you do.

[Paisa el Toro]

I am fully aware of our history of conference and national championships. But I provided information on our NCAA case. What's next, attendance smack?

True, you did provide information filtered through your orange and green prism, but I'm doubful that all your program will get is "mid-severity" sanctions. Since the issues at UM appear to be systemic in nature, going back quite a few years, it shows the NCAA a lack of institutional control. I still think Miami will get the book thrown at it harder than Southern Cal did. Thanks for the posting, I like seeing your perspective, compared to your fellow compatriot Master Miami.

[Hurricane Mutiny]

I am fully aware of our history of conference and national championships. But I provided information on our NCAA case. What's next, attendance smack?

True, you did provide information filtered through your orange and green prism, but I'm doubful that all your program will get is "mid-severity" sanctions. Since the issues at UM appear to be systemic in nature, going back quite a few years, it shows the NCAA a lack of institutional control. I still think Miami will get the book thrown at it harder than Southern Cal did. Thanks for the posting, I like seeing your perspective, compared to your fellow compatriot Master Miami.

Orange and green prism? So you would dismiss every bit of information from someone connected to a school because of their love for alma mater?

Give me a break. "The issues at UM appear to be systemic in nature, going back quite a few years"? You mean all the Yahoo allegations which are NOT considered evidence in this case, since a newspaper article is not admissible and the former players have not testified. I know it is going to be a bitter pill to swallow for our rivals, but the only evidence the NCAA currently has involves the recent players and recent coaches, not the old stuff.

The mid-severity sanctions will be a product of two things, the fact that the NCAA will have a lot less "evidence" than the Yahoo article alleged and that Miami has been tremendously cooperative. Emmert knows what the future holds, with some schools even debating the wisdom of breaking away from the NCAA, so he is building towards a new model where you will not be punished as severely if you go out of your way to cooperate with the investigation.

That's not speculation. The stuff that I hear, while indirect, is a product of the conversations between UM, the NCAA, and our representation. Barring any new revelations, our administration and coaching staff are very confident on the penalties.

I don't expect you to like it, agree with it, or take it as a done deal yet. We can discuss further when the final sanctions are announced.

[Rizman]

You will not have a stadium of your own once the sanctions come down. Yeah, USF has only had a football team for 13 years or so.

Miami needs major sanctions thrown at them. Yahoo allegations are well researched, 1 year in processes and fully documented. Take off your orange ibis glasses and think reality. Your school did not have the things in place to stop it, and it happened again with Ray Ray which required him to get suspended again. Not to bright good thing he is a fantastic athlete.

Edited by Rizman, 12 December 2011 - 12:20 PM.

[Paisa el Toro]

I am fully aware of our history of conference and national championships. But I provided information on our NCAA case. What's next, attendance smack?

True, you did provide information filtered through your orange and green prism, but I'm doubful that all your program will get is "mid-severity" sanctions. Since the issues at UM appear to be systemic in nature, going back quite a few years, it shows the NCAA a lack of institutional control. I still think Miami will get the book thrown at it harder than Southern Cal did. Thanks for the posting, I like seeing your perspective, compared to your fellow compatriot Master Miami.

Orange and green prism? So you would dismiss every bit of information from someone connected to a school because of their love for alma mater?

Give me a break. "The issues at UM appear to be systemic in nature, going back quite a few years"? You mean all the Yahoo allegations which are NOT considered evidence in this case, since a newspaper article is not admissible and the former players have not testified. I know it is going to be a bitter pill to swallow for our rivals, but the only evidence the NCAA currently has involves the recent players and recent coaches, not the old stuff.

The mid-severity sanctions will be a product of two things, the fact that the NCAA will have a lot less "evidence" than the Yahoo article alleged and that Miami has been tremendously cooperative. Emmert knows what the future holds, with some schools even debating the wisdom of breaking away from the NCAA, so he is building towards a new model where you will not be punished as severely if you go out of your way to cooperate with the investigation.

That's not speculation. The stuff that I hear, while indirect, is a product of the conversations between UM, the NCAA, and our representation. Barring any new revelations, our administration and coaching staff are very confident on the penalties.

I don't expect you to like it, agree with it, or take it as a done deal yet. We can discuss further when the final sanctions are announced.

I'm not dismissing your intel, just taking it with a grain of salt. Whatever you or your sources "speculate," it'll be just that, until the NCAA renders its ruling. The NCAA has its own investigators, and I'm sure they'll be using that Yahoo Sports report as a starting point, rather than as "evidence" of any wrongdoing. If the NCAA can even prove just half of the stuff alleged in that report, UM will be in more hot water than Southern Cal, in my humble and speculative opinion. If it works out as optimistically as you're stating, then consider your alma mater lucky for having just been the greatest participant in the game of college football Russian Roulette.

[Hurricane Mutiny]

You will not have a stadium of your own once the sanctions come down. Yeah, USF has only had a football team for 13 years or so.

Miami needs major sanctions thrown at them. Yahoo allegations are well researched, 1 year in processes and fully documented. Take off your orange ibis glasses and think reality. Your school did not have the things in place to stop it, and it happened again with Ray Ray which required him to get suspended again. Not to bright good thing he is a fantastic athlete.

The stadium is independent of sanctions. Two sites are being researched, one on, one off.

Yahoo allegations are NOT well-researched and NOT fully-documented. I say that based on zero love of alma mater, just pure law school education. First, the NCAA found, on ALL instances involving current players, that the proof was less than what Shapiro alleged. Did you COMPARE the Yahoo "claims" of extra benefits to what the NCAA has already ruled on the current players? In every instance, the ACTUAL dollar amounts proven were less (and in some cases, substantially less) than what Shapiro claimed to have given.

Side note, this is EXACTLY what multiple sources have alleged for months, that Shapiro is exaggerating his $$$ claims so that the court believes he has "accounted for" all of the money spent, but in actuality, he has stashed millions for his eventual release. His step-father was a con artist, and this is not Nevin's first Ponzi scheme. He had an exit plan well in advance.

Back to the main. In addition to all the exaggerations of how much he spent, Nevin's frequent claims of times, dates, frequency, and details have NOT been "well-researched" and "fully documented". There were numerous "photos" of "well-connected booster" Nevin Shapiro claiming to be on the sidelines with players at the Fiasco Bowl vs. Ohio State...you know, because the Yahoo author ADMITTED to giving credence to Shapiro's claims because of Nevin's great recall of details of games, photos, and other corroboration. Yet the multiple photos Nevin claimed to take while "on the field" in Arizona were disproven by pointing out such trivial details as the fact that the game jerseys didn't match and, oh, the signs in the background said things like "Welcome to Miami" and "The Orange Bowl". And then you have photos on a boat that Nevin claims were taken while some players were still in school, even though one of the players was from NEBRASKA and has told the NCAA that the photos were taken after he turned pro, not while he was enrolled in classes in Nebraska.

Now, sure, you're going to try to minimize the probative value of these..."inconsistencies" in Nevin's Keyser Soze stories. I'm sure that you will discount the reality that con men and Ponzi schemers frequently embroider their enormous lies with smaller, easily provable truths, so that when their marks find truthful elements of the story, they are less likely to question the harder-to-prove falsehoods. But then you have to confront the fact that Yahoo (a) does NOT have receipts for much of anything, they only have credit card SUMMARIES that are taken from credit card billing statements, and ( Yahoo does NOT have any transcripts of phone calls or text messages, they only have SUMMARY BILLING STATEMENTS.

Look, gents, not only did I ace my Evidence class at UM with an authority (Michael Graham, look him up, he writes numerous texts, guides, and handbooks), which is relevant to analyzing what evidence is (admissions by players) and isn't (nearly everything in the Yahoo article involving former players) admissible in the NCAA case, but I also aced Analysis of Evidence at UM with another authority (Terrence Anderson, look him up, he consulted on the case where Alcee Hastings got off and then was elected to Congress), which teaches one how to assess the relevance and proof value of items of evidence via Wigmorean charting and analysis.

Sorry, but the NCAA doesn't have much. No former UM players have spoken with the NCAA. Shapiro's billing statements have not been provided to the NCAA. Yahoo can't testify to the NCAA. So while all of those wild and crazy allegations from the old days make for an interesting internet story, they have no bearing on the NCAA case (in addition to being beyond the 4-year statute of limitations).

As for your nonsense about "the school did not have things in place to stop it", you are wrong. And for the "it happened again with Ray Ray", you are delusional. Ray Ray was out with his girlfriend. Because UM is cooperating fully with the NCAA, we took a precaution in suspending him. If you bothered to research, he was eligible again in the next game. No wrongdoing was determined. No suspension was issued. Ray Ray did not have to pay his girlfriend back for his chicken dinner (yes, I know it is idiotic to order chicken at a steakhouse). Ray Ray did not have to make a donation to charity for the value of his chicken dinner.

Personally, I am happy that all of these guys are turning pro. Now they don't have to speak to the NCAA any longer. Look for a final resolution of our case in 2012. Medium severity penalties. Possibly a second bowl ban to be served next season, followed by scholarship losses starting in 2013. Manageable. Not as severe as our rivals would like.

Now you know why Golden is recruiting the way that he is. He has a good idea of what our scholarship losses will be, hence the focus on JuCo and prep kids for now and the next few years to come.

The guy didn't sign up for 4 extra years just to lose 30+ scholarships. We'll be fine.

[Hurricane Mutiny]

I'm not dismissing your intel, just taking it with a grain of salt. Whatever you or your sources "speculate," it'll be just that, until the NCAA renders its ruling. The NCAA has its own investigators, and I'm sure they'll be using that Yahoo Sports report as a starting point, rather than as "evidence" of any wrongdoing. If the NCAA can even prove just half of the stuff alleged in that report, UM will be in more hot water than Southern Cal, in my humble and speculative opinion. If it works out as optimistically as you're stating, then consider your alma mater lucky for having just been the greatest participant in the game of college football Russian Roulette.

See, this is the difficulty in discussing the issue with rivals. Your starting point for a discussion is "if the NCAA can even prove just half of the stuff alleged in that report."

But they can't.

First, more than half of it is beyond the statute of limitations. You can't just say "I want to junk the SoL because I HEARD that bad stuff may have happened in the past." You're going to need some evidence FIRST, and if you CAN demonstrate that pre-SoL stuff happened, then you can ask for the SoL to be waived. Neither one of those has happened.

Second, of what has ALREADY been ruled upon involving the current players...less than half of what was alleged was actually found to be true. Shapiro claimed to have provided "THOUSANDS" in benefits, yet all of the current players were found to have received mere hundreds in actual benefits. I'm not justifying here, it's still wrong, but the actual PROOF on the benefits added up to far less than what Shapiro claimed.

Third, on anything else within the SoL not involving current players, none of the former players have agreed to testify. And the NCAA has no other proof.

So, in summary, what the NCAA is able to prove is FAR LESS than "half of the stuff alleged in the report".

Has anyone else noticed...Ohio State has been notified that it is being charged with Failure to Monitor, but not LoIC. Sure, the case may have started during bowl season for 4 guys, but it really started moving in the summertime. Miami's investigation began 7 months before the Yahoo article was published in mid-August 2011, and so far....

No charges of FtM or LoIC.

Hmmmm.....

[Paisa el Toro]

I'm not dismissing your intel, just taking it with a grain of salt. Whatever you or your sources "speculate," it'll be just that, until the NCAA renders its ruling. The NCAA has its own investigators, and I'm sure they'll be using that Yahoo Sports report as a starting point, rather than as "evidence" of any wrongdoing. If the NCAA can even prove just half of the stuff alleged in that report, UM will be in more hot water than Southern Cal, in my humble and speculative opinion. If it works out as optimistically as you're stating, then consider your alma mater lucky for having just been the greatest participant in the game of college football Russian Roulette.

See, this is the difficulty in discussing the issue with rivals. Your starting point for a discussion is "if the NCAA can even prove just half of the stuff alleged in that report."

But they can't.

First, more than half of it is beyond the statute of limitations. You can't just say "I want to junk the SoL because I HEARD that bad stuff may have happened in the past." You're going to need some evidence FIRST, and if you CAN demonstrate that pre-SoL stuff happened, then you can ask for the SoL to be waived. Neither one of those has happened.

Second, of what has ALREADY been ruled upon involving the current players...less than half of what was alleged was actually found to be true. Shapiro claimed to have provided "THOUSANDS" in benefits, yet all of the current players were found to have received mere hundreds in actual benefits. I'm not justifying here, it's still wrong, but the actual PROOF on the benefits added up to far less than what Shapiro claimed.

Third, on anything else within the SoL not involving current players, none of the former players have agreed to testify. And the NCAA has no other proof.

So, in summary, what the NCAA is able to prove is FAR LESS than "half of the stuff alleged in the report".

Has anyone else noticed...Ohio State has been notified that it is being charged with Failure to Monitor, but not LoIC. Sure, the case may have started during bowl season for 4 guys, but it really started moving in the summertime. Miami's investigation began 7 months before the Yahoo article was published in mid-August 2011, and so far....

No charges of FtM or LoIC.

Hmmmm.....

Let's see how much pans out the way you paint it. I'll be watching with schadenfreudian glee.

[Rizman]

Perfect use of the term. I will be enjoying some schadenfreud as well.

[GaUSFBull]

See, this is the difficulty in discussing the issue with rivals.

So you're calling us "rivals ..."



YEAH!!!!!!!!!!


I read ya ...