More Trouble Brewing in Ann Arbor?
- Thread starter MWes11
- Start date
Does anyone think the commissioner cares what coaches want? Honestly it's getting ridiculous now. It's also weird that our fan base who complained about "a rush to judgment" is now doing the same. Let it play out and then complain when Michigan doesn't get what you expected.
Reading comprehension. You said the CMU forum was fearful CMU was complicit… so I asked what rule CMU would have broken, and you didn’t provide it…
Obviously he can’t be there, but thats covered by the no advanced scouting rule from Stalions perspective, so show me the rule that CMU would have violated inviting him (if they did). I don’t think it exists even if it’s inappropriate.
Would Franklin be violating any rule, obviously it’s inappropriate, being on the sideline for Purdue Northwestern on Nov 18 if the schedule allowed it? We already played Northwestern and there’s no chance we play Purdue so it’s not advanced scouting. Serious question.
Last edited:
Well, they are complicent as coconspirators. Scouting opponents in person is illegal, CMU knew that, and aided a team in doing so. Like driving the car of a bank robber. Accomplice to the crime.
If there was video of Sandusky fondlng a boy, you bet I would've been on the "rush to judge" train.
I don't know if he does or if he doesn't. I'm fairly certain that Tony doesn't need 13 of the current schools pissed off about this if he wants to keep his job.
Sharing the current information isn't weird. Discussion of the matter is what is being done. I, and many others, find it far more weird that you are only of the "let it play out" stance regardless of the information.
Why are you complaining about the discussions of the information? This isn't blowing over. It keeps leaking out new information near daily. It's an interesting topic. Apparently much more than Maryland.
Believe you are quite wrong. CMU's HC was coaching at scUM when Stalions was hired by Hairball - he knows who Stalions is and knows that scUM was playing MSU (CMU's opponent that day) the very next Saturday. You really believe it is not an NCAA Violation to knowingly assist someone else in committing a blatant NCAA Rules Violation? The NCAA is a "Collegial" Organization and I'm pretty sure you're incorrect that CMU can not be held responsible for knowingly assisting in a scheme that is a blatant violation of NCAA Rules.
Exactly. He just does not want his 'precious' to get punished. Hoping, Wishing, Praying goes the song..
Yep, I was about to reply. It is like opening the store door for a thief to rob it then claiming you did nothing wrong.
It’s not illegal to open a door and neither of you have posted the rule CMU broke.
I didn’t say they did nothing wrong but that’s different than violating a specific rule. What rule would be broken if Northwestern invited Franklin to attend the Purdue game? It’s not advanced scouting.
Last edited:
CMU invited him to attend the MSU game (scUM's opponent the next Saturday!). How precisely is that not a blatant violation of the advance in-person scouting rule? (including prohibitions against taping, etc....). Again, it is a violation of NCAA Rules to knowingly participate in an illegal cheating scheme - CMU is an NCAA Member. You clearly don't understand the meaning of a "Collegial Organization" which the NCAA Membership most definitely is.
It is illegal to aid someone to steal from a store by unlocking the door. Really? No one here knows what the by-laws says (or can be interpreted) bc it is unprecedented. Also, UM plays Purdue this weekend. We play UM on Nov 11. What are you talking about?
You said open not unlock. Unlocking and opening a door are not the same thing. If you open the door while leaving Starbucks and hold it for someone to go in you are not responsible if they rob the store.
Northwestern plays Purdue on November 18. If we didn’t have a game and Franklin went and stood on the Northwestern sideline (with an invite), would that be a violation? It’s not advanced scouting.
This was in a post that had some dirty words so am just posting the article regarding the B1Gs conference call on this and other issues:
Here is the thing: The scope of the impact is obvious. 16-8 in conference under Booger Man. This scheme starts and in last 3 years he is 22-1. The bullshit meter is off the charts on those stats. It is like the Lance Armstrong turnaround.
For example, 2 years ago, PSU was beating Michigan late in 4th. How do we know the pick play that led to game winning td pass was not due to Michigan knowing the PSU scheme?
Last year in Ann Arbor, game was a 1 score game late in 3rd when Michigan not only unusually breaks 2 huge runs, but then also sniffs out a 4th and 1 in an uncharacteristic defensive formation in which they had to have known what PSU was running.
Lest we consider Michigan magically turning the corner on OSU. OSU owned Booger. Now we have the videotape of Michigan knowing what Stroud was doing at beginning of game.
The whole thing smells of bullshit to anyone with the comprehension of a 1st grader.
No one with a straight face can say Michigan wasn't at an advantage.
Coincidentally, when Michigan is tasked with playing a team that it didn't scout due to surprise, TCU, and after TCU had a month to change signs, that heralded Michigan defense and Booger the Brain get their doors blown off them by a school with less talent. Again, I call bullshit.
Last edited:
anyone who doesn't understand the impact doesn't understand the game of football, period. It is just stupid.
I'm sure you saw the info from late yesterday about the conference's call with Big Ten coaches soliciting their input.
Here a citation:
Sources: Coaches urge Big Ten to act on Michigan
A vast majority of the Big Ten coaches expressed their frustrations with the ongoing signal-stealing investigation at Michigan in a video call with commissioner Tony Petitti on Wednesday that was described as both intense and emotional, sources told ESPN.
You are completely wrong about this.
Irrelevant to this topic.
You make a statement (e.g. teams can't opt out) and I provide an example (a citation) that shows you that you are wrong (in this case ASU)
You obviously don't want Michigan to be punished. That's supporting Michigan.
What is good for the goose is good for the gander. The evidence is there. There is no rush to judgment. It is obvious to anyone with a brain who doesn't suffer from denial or oppositional defiance disorder.
I hope Michigan is punished. I just what the investigation to be completed in full first. Just because we were screwed doesn't mean I think others should. I'd love to be wrong and see the NCAA take significant action. I just have zero faith in that happening.
It's still weird that me understanding the NCAA process and wanting to allow things to play out makes me "pro-Michigan" here.
I mean, if you just want to say you want Michigan punished without allowing for an investigation because Penn State's leaders signed away our rights that's fine but we should have learned from that and shouldn't want the same mistake to occur again. Just seems petty.
I don't know how many times i have to tell you that coaches don't control anything. I'm not wrong. The fact there's even a second call prove me right. If the coaches had power it would have happened already.I'm sure you saw the info from late yesterday about the conference's call with Big Ten coaches soliciting their input.
Here a citation:
And there is supposedly a second call to today with the ADs.Sources: Coaches urge Big Ten to act on Michigan
A vast majority of the Big Ten coaches expressed their frustrations with the ongoing signal-stealing investigation at Michigan in a video call with commissioner Tony Petitti on Wednesday that was described as both intense and emotional, sources told ESPN.www.espn.com
You are completely wrong about this.
Irrelevant to this topic.
You make a statement (e.g. teams can't opt out) and I provide an example (a citation) that shows you that you are wrong (in this case ASU)
You obviously don't want Michigan to be punished. That's supporting Michigan.
It wasn't irrelevant at all.
Because they can't opt out. Arizona State didn't opt out. They self-sanctioned. That's not "opting out" as the Pac XII agree to it. Tell me, can a 6-6 Big Ten team this year decline a bowl bid? yes or no?
I want Michigan to be punished appropriately once an investigation is completed. You don't want that to happen because you want instant gratification and you want them punished because you're still angry about what happened here. It's okay if that's your stance just own it.
The MAC bylaws don't seem to be online like they are for some other conferences so you probably won't get a satisfactory answer to this any time soon. The Big Ten has a sportsmanship policy that can be used to punish Michigan and the MAC most likely has a similar policy.
I follow this scandal closely on a lot of forums and I have not seen a single B1G team fan defend UM's behavior or take the "let's wait for it to play out with the NCAA before we rush to judgment" angle besides UM fans. There is plenty of damning evidence for the B1G commissoner to take action. This isn't a court of law and due process is not guaranteed for anyone. Imagine if UM makes the playoffs and robs a spot from the #5 team and later on the NCAA acts and vacates UM's season? This is unprecedented because the "crime" was caught in season and not after the fact.
Honest question--has a team ever been penalized in the Big Ten under the sportsmanship policy?
True. If there was a video/pictures of Paterno standing within arms length of Sandusky and a boy, that's all I'd need to say he knew.
Even if there weren't pictures, he wouldn't ask his DC why they were in a cover 2 on 3rd and 1. I think that's what Franklin described in his presser, could've been 4th and 1.
Just based on what happened here with Sandusky, we should all what the situation to play out
Pretending there aren't potential legal ramifications if the Big Ten acts without a complete investigation is false. Michigan has a ton of options if sanctioned in any way.
I just think people are going to be disappointed thinking the Big Ten will act before the end of the year.
Worse than that would be if Michigan beats Penn State but loses to OSU and still makes the playoff over other 1-loss teams like Oregon, Alabama, and Oklahoma. If they lose they may not be ranked above all of them but it could happen.
Fair enough
I'm just preparing for the board melting down when we're playing Michigan and they haven't been forced to forfeit the rest of their games
I can assure you FOX (or whomever has Penn State-Michigan and Ohio State-Michigan) are also in the Big Ten's ear about keeping those games.
Again, all for sanctions once a full investigation is completely--completely against any rush to judgment due to what happened here. Regardless of how obvious something seems I'm letting it play out. Also, that's largely due to my career. I already see the lawsuits being filed by Michigan if the Big Ten acts.
I don't think a 1 loss Michigan gets in because of their schedule. Same issue as us. Unless they lose to us, beat Ohio State and win the tiebreaker and the conference.
Don’t think anyone is demanding they forfeit the rest of the games. Too much money involved. But hsirball and the two coordinators should be suspended.
And opposing schools should have already filed civil lawsuits, demand all records including electronic are secured, and ask for discovery by subpoena. Make them start sweating NOW!
Oh okay--so if that's what we're all wanting the Big Ten to do (suspend Harbaugh and others until the investigation is completed) then I'm on board. Maybe I misunderstood, I thought people were saying they need to have them forfeit games and/or ban them from the post season. And, yes, the money tied to that is why it doesn't make sense but suspending Harbaugh and others--100% on board. Couldn't agree more with that proposal.
Sigh. Your lack of reading comprehension grows tiresome. I never said the coaches *control* anything. They ADs listen to the coaches. The league, to an extent, listens to the coaches. The coaches definitely have input. I never said the coaches have absolute power (nor should they).
Under extenuating circumstances a team can opt out. For example, covid. Or let's say (and I hope this never happens) half of a bowl eligible team is killed traveling home from their final game of the year. I strongly suspect they would opt out of the bowl game and the conference would agree. Furthermore, in my scenario, it would be the conference opting out FOR Michigan (i.e. post-season ban) which has certainly happened before (see OSU in 2012: )
I want there to be steps taken to stop cheaters from potentially winning the CCG and making the playoff. This isn't like a recruiting violation. This is direct, on the field, cheating. Unprecedented and requiring immediate action to protect the integrity of the game.
Not forfeit any regular season games, but definitely ban them from the post-season. They have one month to complete their investigation (which has been underway for at least two weeks). Very doable.
The bowl ban doesn't work unless the investigation is completed then it's fine but unlikely
But suspending the coaches is reasonable and realistic
See, you keep rambling about how I don't wan them punished which isn't true I just want us to be realistic.
But again there’s nothing specifically that prohibits someone from being on the sideline if they work for another staff simply because they work for another staff.
From 2020 but assuming no big changes.
Section 4 covers the Sportsmanship Rules.
Live scouting is covered on page 38.
Football starts on page 77.
2021Handbook (PDF) - Mid-American Conference
getsomemaction.com
Not seeing anything about visitors outside of the number of field passes (60). From CMUs perspective you'd need to prove they knew he was there to scout other schools it appears to. Obviously a big problem from the UM perspective.
No, the league doesn't care about the coaches. Input is great. Everyone has input. You and others keep using the coaches as some kind of proof immediate action is required. They're not.
Okay, if half the team dies we'll see what happens.
And you can "want" that. I fully understand that. The problem is the "immediate action" part. It's just not realistic. Doesn't mean it can't happen but it's not likely. Has it ever happened prior?
My bad if I missed Paye played. I thought he was hurt also. PSU lost to UM in 2021 because the defenders collided with each other. That is an execution problem.
