Around the Big Ten

[froot loops]

The mob boss at the top never has to directly tell the hit man to take someone out. But when he sees the laminated card of every sign the other team has, he is assured the job has been done.

[iam416]

Jeff Buchanan

I thinkt he B10 is proceeding under Rule 10 (Sportsmanship), so I'm not sure Rule 32 applies, but if it does:

The B10 is taking interim action. The provisions in 32 re interim action provide the Commissioner lots of discretion. It's blindingly obvious that the Commissioner is currently following the interim action protocaol set forth in 32.2.1(a). How that interplays with 32.2.2(C) re NCAA-initiated investigations is, I guess M's argument according to that mgoblog entry or whatever.

Here is exactly what the B10 will argue -- and, FYI, they'll have really good attorneys, too. They'll argue that 32.2.1 says the COMMISSIONER may take interim action upon receiving information from ANY SOURCE. "Any source" -- by it's own terms, necessarily means the NCAA. So, by the plain terms of 32.2.1(a), the Commissioner may take interim action upon receiving information from the NCAA. So then the question is whether any other rules says "actually, no you can't" -- and M, I guess, will point to 32.2.2(C). For NCAA-initiated cases, 32.2.2(C) says that the "Compliance and Reinstatement Subcommitte" (not the Commissioner), can impose additional penalites after the NCAA has issued a final ruling. 32.2.2(C) -- by its own terms -- thus does not limit the powers of the Commissioner to acting only after the NCAA has acted in NCAA-initiated cases. And, in fact, the plain terms of 32.2.1(a) specifically allow the Commissioner to act in NCAA-initated cases.

So, the B10 rules contemplate a scheme where the Commissioner has authority to act prevent harm to the interests of the Conference and then the Compliance and Reistatement subcommittee has final authority issue additonal, final ruling whether NCAA-initiated or Conference-initiated.

That's the B10's argument, and, IMO, they have the better of it. But, anyway, that'll get argued in court.

The TRO is extremely temporary. It usually only lasts 10 days, then you have to get a preliminary injunction. M will probably ask that it get bumped to 20 days, but that's a huge ask.

The preliminary injunciton can be indefinite, but it requires a full hearing. The Court isn't just going to take your word for it. The TRO -- you can even move ex parte and get a TRO in some cases (the other side doesn't get a chance to argue). But the preliminary injunction hearing is a full-on evidentiary hearing.

M's only winning argument in any of these is that the B10 broke its rules. They cannot win on the underlying merits. So they hope to get the TRO, extend it 10 days to HARBAUGH**** through the Ohio State game and then deal with the preliminary injunction hearing --- which I think they'll lose -- after that.

As I said, the name of the game for M is to salvage 2023. Their little 3-year Dantonio-esque blip is coming to an end they're gonna regress back to their mean. And everyone knows it.

[THE_WIZARD_]

Stay of execution.

[iam416]

That's all they want.

[Hannibal]

There needs to be a lot more evidence of Harbaugh doing something wrong before the conference suspends him. It's bullshit from a commonsense standpoint, although I admit that it might be legal and I don't know if we have a case to the contrary.

[THE_WIZARD_]

Nothing to see here. Everybody does it.

[iam416]

There needs to be a lot more evidence of Harbaugh doing something wrong before the conference suspends him. It's bullshit from a commonsense standpoint, although I admit that it might be legal and I don't know if we have a case to the contrary.

I would expect the conference to provide what it feels is a full justification as to why it does whatever it does. I don't suspect that will satsify M fans, but that's not the intended audience.

[Hannibal]

The conference hates Michigan and they are ganging up on us. It's literally that simple. They would not do this to anyone else under these circumstances. For any other program, they would let the process play out. Once again, it might be within the rules to gang up on us and we might simply be at the mercy of the rest of the conference because the rules don't prevent this from happening. I don't know enough about those rules to speculate on whether we can fight a punishment in court. But I guarantee you we wouldn't be having this discussion if it was anyone but M.

And the outrage over Michigan stealing signs is totally fake and hilarious. It's possible that we gained a minor competitive advantage by doing this, but it's not as if the core integrity of the game is being threatened like some people are saying. You can avoid the risk of someone cracking your signals by going to wristbands, and if you suspect someone of stealing your signals then you can exploit it by burning the defense with a deep pass when they expect a run. And you can probably get footage of other programs' signals very easily. It's already being reported that Purdue was handed a bunch of info on our signals. Nobody would have that info unless they had been attending our games all year and recording footage.

If we broke the rules by sending our assistants to opponents' games then fine, give us a penalty that is commensurate with the seriousness of the crime and the competitive advantage that we gained -- which is microscopic compared to the competitive advantage that programs that were paying players pre-NIL gained by breaking the NCAA's rules on amateurism.

I'm not optimistic though that clearer heads will prevail. The torch and pitchfork mob is out in full force.

[Hannibal]

Report: Big Ten schools ganged up on Michigan last year (msn.com)

Michigan is being investigated by the NCAA over allegations that they stole signals from opponents, but one former Big Ten staffer says schools in the conference banded together to do the same to the Wolverines last season.

A former employee at a Big Ten football program told Larry Lage of The Associated Press that his job with his former team was to steal signs. The ex-staffer, who chose to remain anonymous, said multiple Big Ten programs gave him details about Michigan’s signals that he used to compile a spread sheet.

The former Big Ten employee said he has documents and screenshots of text messages that show staffers from different programs within the conference shared information about Michigan’s signs to help one another.

He said he gave the details to Jim Harbaugh last week in hopes of helping Harbaugh show that sign-stealing is prevalent and that Michigan is being unfairly scrutinized for the actions of Connor Stalions.

Lage reports that Michigan shared the information from the ex-Big Ten staffer with the conference on Friday.

Stalions had been suspended by Michigan after evidence began piling up that he stole signals from opposing teams using illegal means. Stalions then resigned on Friday.

The biggest issue for Michigan is that Stalions allegedly scouted Wolverines opponents in-person, which is a violation of NCAA rules. He also may have used electronic devices (or had others use them for him) to gather information, which is also illegal.

[iam416]

How many times you guys gonna post the Joe Bolden story alleging no rule-breaking?

[Jeff Buchanan]

That's all they want.

I don't think that's all they want. They want exoneration for JH and the U. Your take is that they won't get it. My take is that they will ...... different blinders and all that.

Like Mike, I've never scene a circling of the wagons around allegations of wrong doing. Like Mike, I've watched the U fold in it's resistance to NCAA allegations of rules violations. The people making the decisions at M, in particular Ono, clearly believe they've got the upper hand in protecting Harbaugh. There not going to fold this time around. That factor is a big deal.

This is an otherwise hesitant administration to take an unequivocal position on anything - they are accommodating fence sitters. Huge departure from that behavior, reading into the intent of Ono's letter to Petitti. Along with that, I think it's pretty obvious that there are leaks coming from the U that outline a step-wise approach to prove JH didn't break applicable NCAA rules That's why certain individuals think the U's legal staff have told the decision makers they have a good chance to prevail in a claim that JH or the U have not broken any NCAA rules.

As you say, "we'll see.

[THE_WIZARD_]

Yes the B1G hates Michigan. LMAO. If this was any other school something would have been done by now...and iffen it was UNL Desmond Howard would be calling for banishment from the B1G like when we wanted to actually play games in 2020...

GTFO

[Jeff Buchanan]

How many times you guys gonna post the Joe Bolden story alleging no rule-breaking?

About s many times as you've repeatedly posted Michigan is cheating.

[THE_WIZARD_]

M cheated? Please expound Talent...

[iam416]

Well, M is going to exonerate HARBAUGH***** even though it's undeniable that M cheated and it's undeniable that NCAA rules make the HC responsible for the actions of his staff. But, other than that, they have an airtight case. I mean, I can't, for the life of me, figure out why M fired CS if the did nothing wrong. That is the great disconnect -- M fans seem to think CS wasn't part of M's staff or acting as part of the University. Or they think CS didn't operate a huge cheating operation. Whatever. The M Bubble his hilarious.

LMAO.