2025 scUM Shenanigans, Arguments, etc.
- College Football
- 4249 Replies
Just a piece of jerky to keep us going:
Ahh Saturday 8 HOURS AGO
Question for Premierdrum, I have been following your posts and Brohio's since the two of you started covering this scandal, and the one point where there seems some significant space between the two of you is, unfortunately, on the most important question of all. What comes of this?
Brohio seems to be in the wrist-slap category whereas you have always been more confident that michigan is facing serious consequences. Brohio has openly stated that his is a bit of a gut feeling. How much of your position is similarly based on your gut feeling? From the outside, your opinion seems based on the "minimum framework" presented by the NCAA in the NOA, a document that has not been made public. Obviously you won't be outing your source here, but my question is are there indeed multiple sources for this minimum framework? How old is that information, and are your sources still communicating with you? Are they still expressing confidence that the punishments for these infractions will match what many on this board believe are merited?
Once again, I appreciate the work you've been doing on this, and I hope you're closer to right than Brohio on how this all winds up.
+ 23 HS
Premierdrum 7 HOURS AGO
The framework as reported here last summer will ultimately bear out as fact. My sourcing throughout this saga has been through folks I know - some for decades - and folks I trust. These aren't strangers in trench coats or random emails to my burner. We're still in contact, even if just chatting about bourbon or baseball, but the flow of information has been choked off in this final run up to the hearing.
As to my confidence that the panel will land on something in line with the framework? I'd call it an informed gut feeling. Enforcement staff has some very strong feelings about not just UM's lack of cooperation, but the active measures they took to avoid and derail the investigation. Members of the committee have already studied not just the base documents from this case, but also reviewed approved the 2 negotiated resolutions against Minter and Clink... both of whom gave up info. And if the proposed resolutions up to this point weren't devastating to UM, they would have tripped over themselves running to sign them. The last place an institution wants to be is in a COI panel hearing... there's no upside for them.
Nobody can say what the committee will decide, but given the unprecedented nature of the scheme and its direct impact to on-field results, the abject indifference to NCAA bylaws, their complete lack of cooperation, multiple coaches destroying evidence, the AD and university president thumbing their nose at the NCAA, the lack of self-reporting, their status as repeat offenders and the fact that they're already on probation? None of that bodes well for them.
Ahh Saturday 8 HOURS AGO
Question for Premierdrum, I have been following your posts and Brohio's since the two of you started covering this scandal, and the one point where there seems some significant space between the two of you is, unfortunately, on the most important question of all. What comes of this?
Brohio seems to be in the wrist-slap category whereas you have always been more confident that michigan is facing serious consequences. Brohio has openly stated that his is a bit of a gut feeling. How much of your position is similarly based on your gut feeling? From the outside, your opinion seems based on the "minimum framework" presented by the NCAA in the NOA, a document that has not been made public. Obviously you won't be outing your source here, but my question is are there indeed multiple sources for this minimum framework? How old is that information, and are your sources still communicating with you? Are they still expressing confidence that the punishments for these infractions will match what many on this board believe are merited?
Once again, I appreciate the work you've been doing on this, and I hope you're closer to right than Brohio on how this all winds up.
+ 23 HS
Premierdrum 7 HOURS AGO
The framework as reported here last summer will ultimately bear out as fact. My sourcing throughout this saga has been through folks I know - some for decades - and folks I trust. These aren't strangers in trench coats or random emails to my burner. We're still in contact, even if just chatting about bourbon or baseball, but the flow of information has been choked off in this final run up to the hearing.
As to my confidence that the panel will land on something in line with the framework? I'd call it an informed gut feeling. Enforcement staff has some very strong feelings about not just UM's lack of cooperation, but the active measures they took to avoid and derail the investigation. Members of the committee have already studied not just the base documents from this case, but also reviewed approved the 2 negotiated resolutions against Minter and Clink... both of whom gave up info. And if the proposed resolutions up to this point weren't devastating to UM, they would have tripped over themselves running to sign them. The last place an institution wants to be is in a COI panel hearing... there's no upside for them.
Nobody can say what the committee will decide, but given the unprecedented nature of the scheme and its direct impact to on-field results, the abject indifference to NCAA bylaws, their complete lack of cooperation, multiple coaches destroying evidence, the AD and university president thumbing their nose at the NCAA, the lack of self-reporting, their status as repeat offenders and the fact that they're already on probation? None of that bodes well for them.
Upvote
0
