• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

2010 TSUN News offseason (football)

U-M could be seen as repeat offender

Michigan has repeatedly made clear one thing since it first received the NCAA's notice of allegations in February and after filing its response earlier this week: The university shouldn't be considered a repeat offender.
In its response delivered to the NCAA on Monday, Michigan mentions its position on being treated as a repeat offender.
"When I read (Michigan's) argument, I thought it was an innovative argument because they had to try to limit the repeat violation impact," said Michael Buckner, a Florida-based attorney who has represented universities in NCAA investigations. "I don't think they could argue otherwise."
Michigan, in admitting to four of the five major football violations the NCAA alleged during 2008-09 under coach Rich Rodriguez, this week revealed self-imposed penalties, including two years of probation, reduction of 130 hours in practice and training time the next two years and reduction of quality-control staff from five to three.
When the university goes before the NCAA Committee on Infractions on Aug. 13-14 in Seattle, the committee could accept Michigan's self-imposed sanctions as punishment.
The committee, however, could deem Michigan a repeat violator under bylaw 19.5.2.3 because of the men's basketball case that concluded May 8, 2003.
If that's the conclusion -- the purpose of the repeat offender bylaw "is to penalize institutions with multiple major infractions within a relatively short time" -- the NCAA could hand down harsher penalties, such as reduction in scholarships, or postseason and television bans.
Michigan believes the committee should understand the time frame of the basketball infractions and realize that while the bylaw applies "from a technical standpoint," the lengthiness of the investigation and Michigan's persistence during the investigation should be a factor.
The bylaw states a five-year period "particularly where the cases involve similar issues or the same sport. Bylaw 19.5.2.3 applies here only because the men's basketball investigation case took seven years to complete."
The basketball investigation began in 1996 and ended in 1997 when the NCAA and Michigan agreed there was no evidence to suggest major violations. In 2002, booster Ed Martin, at the heart of the case and who had refused to cooperate in the school's investigation, was investigated by federal authorities and pleaded guilty to criminal charges. As part of his plea agreement, Martin had to cooperate with the university's investigation.
"The last major case (involving Michigan) was in and of itself unique," Buckner said. "Because of that uniqueness and time frame, the five-year repeat timetable, how it was originally designed, would not fit Michigan's case. They were, to me, in their argument, telling the committee, 'Look, you can't say the intent of the repeat violator fits here, therefore we shouldn't be punished.' "
The university's point is the violations didn't occur in the five-year period. It also believes that because there are significant differences in the cases, the basketball violations should have no impact when it comes to the football violations.
"Not only do the cases involve different sports, the issues themselves are entirely different," Michigan's response stated. "The men's basketball case involved the provision of impermissible benefits to the student-athletes and their families, while this (football) case involves violations of bylaws governing coaching limits and CARA."
Josephine Potuto, a University of Nebraska law professor and former chair of the Committee on Infractions, said she can't speak to the specifics of Michigan's case nor predict how the committee will rule, but said the eight committee members will examine all information.
"That doesn't mean a committee has to say, 'Ah-ha! A repeat violator,' and all these things are going to happen," Potuto said. "That just tells you if, in fact, this major violation was in the five-year window of the last case, that tells you, you are in the world of repeat violators.
"There's no way to say without knowing all the information before the committee, how much weight they're going to give to it. It's not a standalone. There are so many other things you have to think about."
Potuto said it's relevant to the case the football program had never before been investigated.
Buckner, who has read Michigan's response, said if he were preparing Michigan for the committee hearing, he'd suggest strongly arguing Michigan should be absolved of repeat-offender status.
"And hope the committee will buy their argument and say, 'You're right. You had unique circumstances,' " Buckner said. "They might have to make an exception for Michigan.
"Michigan makes a very good case. I think they do have a very good shot."
 
Upvote 0
Attorney: NCAA might add one year to U-M probation

At least one expert who has been involved with NCAA investigations believes the length of Michigan's self-imposed football probation in its response to the NCAA's Notice of Allegations was well-conceived.
But, Michael Buckner, a Florida-based attorney who has represented universities during NCAA investigations, believes the NCAA could tack on another year.
Michigan, in admitting to four of the five major violations the NCAA alleged, self-imposed penalties that include two years' probation, the reduction of 130 hours in practice and training time over the next two years, and the reduction of its quality-control staff from five to three.
It will go before the NCAA Committee on Infractions on Aug. 13-14 in Seattle, and the NCAA will either accept Michigan's self-imposed sanctions as punishment enough or could further punish the program.
"I felt the two-year probation was a smart move based on case precedent," Buckner said. "I wouldn't be surprised if the committee added an extra year.
"What I was surprised about (from Michigan's response) was the lack of coaching restrictions."
Buckner suggested that could have been a strategic move by Michigan. His feeling is that in self-imposed penalties, the idea is to not over- or under-penalize.
Michigan athletic director Dave Brandon has said he wants to be "transparent" as this moves forward, which is why, he said, the response was made public Tuesday. Buckner, however, takes issue with the transparency of the response.
Buckner has prepared similar responses and said he goes into great detail about who he has interviewed and when. That is not included in Michigan's response.
"Michigan didn't list investigative methodology," he said. "They didn't list how they get to this finding. In all my reports, I list every single person I interview, date I interview them, my methodology, all the techniques I use, so they know where I'm coming from.
"When you're reading that (Michigan) report, they don't even quote individuals a lot, so they're just summarizing."
 
Upvote 0
Here's the View from Ann Arbor: Waaah! Everybody cheats and we get blamed for it! Waaaah!

At least he takes some whacks at USC and the SEC -- oh, and MoC -- what a surprise.

John Borton
TheWolverine.com Senior Editor
Talk about it in The Fort
Major (adj) - Greater in size, extent or importance. Okay, so let us consider semantics for a moment, because this one might have you scratching your head until your ears fall off.

If a non-relative benefactor provides, say, a USC football player with a luxury apartment, a luxury automobile, and all of the Snoop Dogg CDs he can stuff into the glove compartment, it's a major violation of NCAA rules. Got it.

If Michigan football players have to push a 45-pound plate for 200 yards as a reminder to attend class, it can become a major violation of NCAA rules.

If your garden variety SEC school has a fleet of Cadillac Escalades on hand for top recruits, and somehow, some way happens to get caught, it's a major violation of NCAA rules.

If Michigan football players stretch too much before practice, over a period of time, it's a major violation of NCAA rules.

If a school fixes grades, secures jobs for the parents of high-profile recruits, or otherwise operates in a fashion that reveals its competitive integrity to be a sham, those are major violations of NCAA rules.

If a Michigan junior wannabe coach tosses a taped towel to a running back, it can be a major violation of NCAA rules.

Just what is major, Major? Maurice Clarett's head is spinning, and he's not even halfway to the halfway house. Then again, he didn't have any major NCAA problems while at Ohio State ? upon further review.

Welcome to the world of the NCAA, where serial killers and cereal shoplifters get the same label - major violators. That's the sad part of this whole business, for those interested in Michigan football's reputation.

Anyone with a speck of fair-mindedness gets the fact that Michigan is no rogue outfit, and that the Wolverines' transgressions involve sloppy bookkeeping and misunderstandings, rather than the NCAA equivalent of mass murder. But the label is the same. Major violations. The hunt turned up some witches ? or so they say.

Shari Acho, co-director of Michigan's Academic Success Program, tipped off U-M's strength & conditioning staff when players skipped class. The strength staffers applied a punishment they didn't realize was against NCAA rules, an activity head coach Rich Rodriguez didn't know was taking place, he stated in his answer to the NCAA.

"They usually had the student-athlete push a 45-pound plate 200 yards," the response noted. "They said it took 10-15 minutes."

It would take less time for a $100 handshake to ensure the Wolverines understood the importance of attending class, but those weren't forthcoming. U-M tried instead to emphasize the books, but wound up with some wanting to throw the book at it.

But how about all those extra hours, during which Rodriguez no doubt had the doors to Schembechler Hall chained shut so that nobody could get out?

Rodriguez's response to the NCAA carries a slightly different take.

"Another category of CARA [Countable Athletically Related Activities] overages resulted from the strength staff miscalculating countable activities during winter and summer workouts," the response noted. "Specifically, the strength staff did not count certain warm-up and stretching activities. This error was caused by a good faith misunderstanding that certain activities did not count because they were done for injury prevention and student-athlete welfare.

"In the spring and summer of 2009, the strength staff and compliance staff communicated about which components of the off-season workout counted toward the eight-hour weekly limit. First, in the spring of 2009, [strength and conditioning coordinator] Mike Barwis spoke to Matt Stolberg, Michigan's assistant athletic director for compliance. Barwis told Stolberg that he understood that warm-up and stretching activities did not count toward the eight-hour weekly limit because they were being done for safety and injury prevention purposes. Stolberg said he initially balked at Barwis' reasoning but after more discussion, he was satisfied those activities could be exempted because they were focused on health and wellness.

"Several weeks later Barwis and assistant strength coach Dennis Murray spoke to assistant athletic director for compliance Ann Vollano about the same subject. Barwis and Murray understood Vollano to confirm that warm-up/stretch, cool-down/stretch and injury prevention do not count. On June 23 and June 25, 2009, Murray sent emails with weekly calendars of workout activities to Vollano. Rodriguez was not copied on the emails. Vollano responded to Murray with a voice message which seems to confirm that warm-up and stretching activities do not count?

"Barwis and Murray said Vollano also observed some summer workouts in 2009. Murray said he and Barwis offered to take Vollano through a workout so she would know exactly what they did and could tell them what counted and what did not count. Murray said Vollano declined to go through a workout but confirmed that the warm-up, cool-down and injury prevention components would not count. Barwis said Vollano also told the entire football staff and team at the start of the 2009 season that warm-up, stretching and cool-down do not count toward the CARA limits.

"Vollano confirmed that she spoke to Barwis and Murray about whether certain workout activities counted toward the limits, but she said she understood the strength staff was only monitoring those activities, not conducting them. In other words, Vollano said she understood the activities in question were done individually and not as a coordinated group activity. Vollano also said she never observed a summer workout. Vollano said Barwis and Murray did offer to take her through a workout, but she thought they were offering to do that for her own personal interest in physical conditioning but not to ensure they were counting activities correctly for compliance with NCAA legislation."

Aha! The plot thickens. Rather than a wholesome group activity (such as invading a fraternity to smack down rivals and female bystanders), the Wolverines dared to stretch together. Had they only known?

Well, that's fine, you say. But that's a stupid, minor example of extra practice time. What about the 23-hour Sundays, the Barwis sleepovers in which players were shackled to free weights, etc.?

Here's where the footnotes get fun. U-M compliance director Judy Van Horn "noted to the enforcement staff that Barwis has been very transparent with the compliance staff and asks a lot of questions about compliance issues."

Oh.

And then there's this little tidbit: "These overages constitute 57 of the 65 hours of CARA overages."

Oh.

Stretchgate, unmasked.

Major violations. Some will take it and run, putting Michigan into the hopper with genuine cheaters. Some will take a little time and educate themselves.

Hopefully.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
methomps;1709042; said:
Does Michigan think that nobody else stretches?

Michigan: 30 minutes of stretching not counted, followed by 2 hour workout

University who read the manual: 30 minutes of stretching, followed by 90 minute workout

Net result: Michigan gets 30 extra minutes of workout.

No, I'm pretty sure it's 30 extra minutes of stretching. Kinesiology majors know how important that is.
 
Upvote 0
methomps;1709042; said:
Does Michigan think that nobody else stretches?

Michigan: 30 minutes of stretching not counted, followed by 2 hour workout

University who read the manual: 30 minutes of stretching, followed by 90 minute workout

Net result: Michigan gets 30 extra minutes of workout.

+1
 
Upvote 0
Alas, I'm a bit late to this party, but I just read the AP story this a.m., and I was struck by the inconsistency of the AD's argument:

Brandon said the school decided not to take away scholarships or eliminate coaching positions based on precedent.

"That's usually a result of something deemed to be an offense that created a competitive advantage," Brandon said.
.
.
.
The school plans to cut back practice and training time by 130 hours over the next two years, starting this summer, to double the amount of time it said it exceeded NCAA rules. It also trimmed the number of assistants--the so-called quality-control staff--from five to three and banned them from practices, games or coaching meetings for the rest of 2010.

"It's a significant detriment to the program," Brandon said.

So...having the extra practice did not produce a competitive advantage. Yet, cutting back practice and training time is a significant detriment to the program?
 
Upvote 0
CalvinistBuck;1709361; said:
Alas, I'm a bit late to this party, but I just read the AP story this a.m., and I was struck by the inconsistency of the AD's argument:

Brandon said the school decided not to take away scholarships or eliminate coaching positions based on precedent.

"That's usually a result of something deemed to be an offense that created a competitive advantage," Brandon said.
.
.
.
The school plans to cut back practice and training time by 130 hours over the next two years, starting this summer, to double the amount of time it said it exceeded NCAA rules. It also trimmed the number of assistants--the so-called quality-control staff--from five to three and banned them from practices, games or coaching meetings for the rest of 2010.

"It's a significant detriment to the program," Brandon said.

So...having the extra practice did not produce a competitive advantage. Yet, cutting back practice and training time is a significant detriment to the program?

It's really best not to think about it too hard. You're talking about a guy who thought Domino's Pizza was delicious.
 
Upvote 0
jlb1705;1709370; said:
It's really best not to think about it too hard. You're talking about a guy who thought Domino's Pizza was delicious.

Poe McKnoe;1709379; said:
Or a guy that knows how to make a ton of cash selling a shitty product.


Exactly. This guy is the perfect hire for them. His old business model was essentially "people are stuck at home or otherwise too lazy to go out for food. They'll take anything you bring them as long as it's just good enough to not induce vomiting."

Now he puts on his "M" for moron hat and finds a customer base in essentially the exact same boat but with no alternative food supply at all. They have to eat what he delivers.

As long as the two WVU grad delivery boys get it there quick and warm vulvariene nation will gag down anything at this point.
 
Upvote 0
...and the hits keep coming. Looks like Mr. Dorsey will probably not be taking part in the "Michigan rejuvenation" that is supposed to be this year (and if not this year then next...and if not next year than the year after...)
 
Upvote 0
WolverineMike;1712260; said:
The new Dominos pizza is pretty good though. I wonder if he had anything to do with it, or if I have to wait for him to leave to see this Michigan product get better.......LMAO. pizza analogies rock!

Why do I not find it surprising that the same person likes Domino's Pizza and tSUN? At least your taste is consistent. :wink2:
 
Upvote 0
Back
Top