Quote:Ole Miss officials announced Wednesday that they are self-imposing a one-year bowl ban for the 2017 season after receiving a new NCAA notice of allegations that detailed eight additional allegations of rules violations.

The NCAA has now accused Ole Miss of 21 rules violations by current or former members of its football coaching staff.

Ole Miss had self-imposed a double-digit reduction in scholarships for football in May 2016, as part of its response to an NCAA notice of allegations it received in January 2016.

In a 154-page response to the NCAA, Ole Miss announced that it had self-imposed the loss of 11 total scholarships in football over a four-year period from 2015 to '18, including a reduction of three initial scholarships in each of its next three recruiting classes, which would allow the school to sign a maximum of 22 players in each class.

(02-22-2017 05:39 PM)JRsec Wrote:  allegation of lack of institutional control.

(02-22-2017 05:43 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  What's the Ultra-Cliff Notes version of this whole thing?

Ole Miss did a bunch of cheating the NCAA rules for recruiting football players?

No criminal stuff, though, correct?

(02-22-2017 05:44 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(02-22-2017 05:39 PM)JRsec Wrote:  allegation of lack of institutional control.

Sounds like a made up blanket term letting the NCAA arbitrarily determine violations and punishments, as it pleases.

Sue them, then. Worked for Penn St.

(02-22-2017 05:55 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-22-2017 05:44 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(02-22-2017 05:39 PM)JRsec Wrote:  allegation of lack of institutional control.

Sounds like a made up blanket term letting the NCAA arbitrarily determine violations and punishments, as it pleases.

Sue them, then. Worked for Penn St.

No. The allegations phase of an investigation simply formalizes the areas to be determined for any subsequent charges against the school. In this phase Ole Miss will cooperate with the lesser charges and accept them, deny the lack of institutional control allegation (which does provoke a larger turnover of information by Ole Miss and therefore gives the NCAA a clearer access to administrative oversight issues) and from this negotiation when the charges are finally leveled, punishment can follow.

So right now they enter a dialogue with the NCAA in which they will quickly settle on some allegations, deny others, and seek a compromise (plea bargain) position.

The allegation of lack of institutional control merely means they will have to settle on a lot more in order to defend against that charge, and they will have to give the NCAA a much greater look into their program.

That said, I'm fine with all of this and it's fair. But it's fair only inasmuch as the same happens at Chapel Hill with regards to bogus classes, billed through the bursar's office, recorded by the records office, complete with falsified signatures of instructors who were on the payroll of the University. It's fair if the textbook definition of lack of institutional control is actually investigated and adjudicated at Chapel Hill.

And by the way if any of those classes were paid for with government money, or paid for by actual students unrelated to the athletic department then of course there are criminal charges that are possible there for fraud.

(02-22-2017 07:38 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-22-2017 05:55 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-22-2017 05:44 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(02-22-2017 05:39 PM)JRsec Wrote:  allegation of lack of institutional control.

Sounds like a made up blanket term letting the NCAA arbitrarily determine violations and punishments, as it pleases.

Sue them, then. Worked for Penn St.

No. The allegations phase of an investigation simply formalizes the areas to be determined for any subsequent charges against the school. In this phase Ole Miss will cooperate with the lesser charges and accept them, deny the lack of institutional control allegation (which does provoke a larger turnover of information by Ole Miss and therefore gives the NCAA a clearer access to administrative oversight issues) and from this negotiation when the charges are finally leveled, punishment can follow.

So right now they enter a dialogue with the NCAA in which they will quickly settle on some allegations, deny others, and seek a compromise (plea bargain) position.

The allegation of lack of institutional control merely means they will have to settle on a lot more in order to defend against that charge, and they will have to give the NCAA a much greater look into their program.

That said, I'm fine with all of this and it's fair. But it's fair only inasmuch as the same happens at Chapel Hill with regards to bogus classes, billed through the bursar's office, recorded by the records office, complete with falsified signatures of instructors who were on the payroll of the University. It's fair if the textbook definition of lack of institutional control is actually investigated and adjudicated at Chapel Hill.

And by the way if any of those classes were paid for with government money, or paid for by actual students unrelated to the athletic department then of course there are criminal charges that are possible there for fraud.

So who do you think turned them in? A Big 12 school? The SEC has sworn to protect each other. (or Dabo and Clemson?)

(02-22-2017 07:43 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(02-22-2017 07:38 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-22-2017 05:55 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-22-2017 05:44 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(02-22-2017 05:39 PM)JRsec Wrote:  allegation of lack of institutional control.

Sounds like a made up blanket term letting the NCAA arbitrarily determine violations and punishments, as it pleases.

Sue them, then. Worked for Penn St.

No. The allegations phase of an investigation simply formalizes the areas to be determined for any subsequent charges against the school. In this phase Ole Miss will cooperate with the lesser charges and accept them, deny the lack of institutional control allegation (which does provoke a larger turnover of information by Ole Miss and therefore gives the NCAA a clearer access to administrative oversight issues) and from this negotiation when the charges are finally leveled, punishment can follow.

So right now they enter a dialogue with the NCAA in which they will quickly settle on some allegations, deny others, and seek a compromise (plea bargain) position.

The allegation of lack of institutional control merely means they will have to settle on a lot more in order to defend against that charge, and they will have to give the NCAA a much greater look into their program.

That said, I'm fine with all of this and it's fair. But it's fair only inasmuch as the same happens at Chapel Hill with regards to bogus classes, billed through the bursar's office, recorded by the records office, complete with falsified signatures of instructors who were on the payroll of the University. It's fair if the textbook definition of lack of institutional control is actually investigated and adjudicated at Chapel Hill.

And by the way if any of those classes were paid for with government money, or paid for by actual students unrelated to the athletic department then of course there are criminal charges that are possible there for fraud.

So who do you think turned them in? A Big 12 school? The SEC has sworn to protect each other. (or Dabo and Clemson?)

Miss State...plus I think they got caught incidentally with the La Lafayette investigation. I think it was Lafayette, don't jump in me if it was one of the other Louisiana schools.

(02-22-2017 10:09 PM)p23570 Wrote:  We always knew there were some things going on at ole Piss. Hopefully the bag man is getting shut down but I think he just moved to LSU.

I look forward to hearing the stories as they come out.

(02-22-2017 05:44 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Sue them, then. Worked for Penn St.

(02-22-2017 11:33 PM)Nittany_Bearcat Wrote:  Penn State never sued the NCAA. What are you talking about?