Matt Hayes article on the investigation
I did a search on this and did my best to look at everything I could and can't see that I've duplicated effort. Additionally, I'm sure this could be viewed as more info on a topic we already know about, but a very supportive take on the road ahead of the program, and somewhat gives me some hope that this will eventually blow over.
Matt Hayes article, again during my search couldn't find anything suggesting his stuff was verboten, that feels essentially says that unless there is direct video evidence of wrong doing, the charges won't stick. He also takes a few shots at sparty, which made me laugh.
A childish, transparent and overreaching second run at a coach who embarrassed the NCAA the last time they had him square in their infractions sights — and you better believe the NCAA will do everything it can to make sure it doesn’t happen again.
This group of enforcement misfits — honestly, there’s no other way to say it — who have failed/botched/lost in court with nearly every single significant enforcement case, is coming after Harbaugh with an infraction that will be next to impossible to prove.
We'll see, it sounds like it will be quite a while before any investigation is complete and any sort of infractions could be made...besides who knows where Harbaugh will be employed by that point. I'm hoping still in Ann Arbor, but Jim gonna do Jim.
Link: https://saturdaytradition.com/michigan-football/hayes-jim-harbaugh-is-laughing-at-the-ncaa-while-leading-michigans-playoff-bid/
October 23rd, 2023 at 3:22 PM ^
To be fair.......
Harbaugh's exact words were along the lines of "he wasn't aware of anything illegal (against the rules) that had been done.'
If M was getting people to submit footage Free of charge to Stalions/M that would not fit the bill as "illegal" to the letter of the law and thus Jim would not be lying even if he was fully aware of what was happening.
I happen to believe that the truth is probably in between ... Stalions was most-likely doing this (nearly) as a lone wolf to build his rep/resume in coaching circles. Even if some on the staff suspected, they were probably doing a "don't ask, don't tell" on the topic.
If M was doing more and/or actually had paid staff traveling to opponent games - particularly after knowing the NCAA was going after M for Burger-gate - they deserve penalties from the NCAA. I think those should be suspensions etc. not vacating wins based on past precedent and direct admission from OSU etc. that they changed their signals as they knew M was trying to steal signs...
PS - Screw you Matt Dudek. I can never look at that stupid Ralph Wiggum gif again without cursing your name for starting this whole NCAA thing.
October 23rd, 2023 at 12:51 PM ^
And if he outsourced the work to the "vast network" I would bet anything they would want some sort of payment/renumeration for their time and trouble for attending and recording the signals for him.
Why would it required expense reimbursement? If there's a text or email going from Stallion to anyone asking for them to do this, that would be enough to show paid football staffer requesting someone do this act.
October 23rd, 2023 at 12:56 PM ^
Its not clear if that is even against the rules. Possibly if they video taped it, less so if they just wrote it down by hand.
October 23rd, 2023 at 3:34 PM ^
The interpretation from Stalions/M would be that if no paid staff were involved it doesn't break the letter of the NCAA rules.
Granted -- It COMPLETELY violates the spirit of the rule, but this was also a rule created before every single person had a high-quality video recording device in their pockets at all times. It was intended to stop the P5 schools from sending video crews out to games that G5 teams couldn't afford.
If Stalions (or M) somehow renumerated those who submitted the video/info it gets a LOT murkier but still comes down to a "define the term staffer" legal question --- quite similar to a tactic used by one our former US Presidents back in the day.........
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:03 PM ^
So let's say you are an analyst at UM and I am your buddy. Pretend that I live in Chicago and happen to go see the Northwestern game during a season where they have not played Michigan yet. I text you some of my thoughts on Northwestern. Does that violate the rules? Do you need to immediately delete the text or turn something over to the NCAA? Not arguing with you at all by the way, I'm more just curious what the line is on whether or not this rule is violated.
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:09 PM ^
That's not what I'm saying. If you're my buddy and you go to NW (which... way to waste a Saturday) and then tell me "what you think" of NW, that's nothing.
If I tell you go to NW and let me know what you think, again, probably nothing. Edit: Actually this is wrong, would probably be considered advanced scouting.
However, if I tell you "go to NW and get me their signs" then we have a problem.
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:35 PM ^
So the NCAA needs some proof of a direction coming from you telling me to scout in some way? The rule would be that a football staffer cannot direct a third party to scout on his or her behalf? What is the difference between the second and third scenarios? Like does there need to be a degree of specificity in your direction to me?
October 23rd, 2023 at 2:40 PM ^
The rule would be that a football staffer cannot direct a third party to scout on his or her behalf? What is the difference between the second and third scenarios? Like does there need to be a degree of specificity in your direction to me?
My scenario 2 is actually wrong. The whole crux of this issue is that in-person scouting of opponents is not allowed. If some random superfan goes to a game and then emails Stallions and says "here are my thoughts" that's not the university/football staff directing someone to go scout. It's just some too-involved fan.
If there is evidence that someone employed by Michigan football told someone to go scout, then it's pretty straightforward coordination.
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:39 PM ^
I respectfully disagree on the third scenario. It might not be the most upstanding thing to do. But if the sign stealer isn't affiliated, isn't getting paid, and bought their own ticket to a public event, I don't see any reasonable way to enforce an NCAA rule. That's literally something that any of us could go do this weekend. And I'm guessing that's how Connor Stalions operated here. Even if they were paid (and my guess is no given the likely amount of friendly local volunteers), there's a high probability that it was cash or something else that isn't feasible to prove.
Dan Wetzel noted in an article that information often gets emailed to coaches from (stranger) fans unsolicited. How can you possibly draw that line? It would have to be an actual coach or proven compensated person doing the scouting to trigger any sort of violation in my opinion.
Edit: It appears that Stalions did buy the tickets, albeit on his own dime (great work doing that under your own name, savvy). That makes the compensation question murkier.
October 23rd, 2023 at 2:53 PM ^
This is just naive.
Dan Wetzel noted in an article that information often gets emailed to coaches from (stranger) fans unsolicited. How can you possibly draw that line? It would have to be an actual coach or proven compensated person doing the scouting to trigger any sort of violation in my opinion.
The key word you're missing here is unsolicited. Its like contractors versus employees. It's the coordination and direction that changes the equation. If some random dude went to a game and sent you his thoughts, fine. But if you tell him to do it, even without paying him, you're coordinating an advance scouting operation.
Bigger programs could have swarms of these guys and just say "he paid his own way so we're good" which is exactly what the rule change tried to get rid of - rich programs having the resources to do this. You can't hide behind "guy paid out of pocket" when the problem is a football staffer telling him to do it.
October 23rd, 2023 at 3:05 PM ^
I hear you on the spirit of the rule, I just don't know how you draw the line and reasonably enforce it when you have willing volunteers. Your comment on directing them to do it may make sense from a fairness standpoint but again seems difficult to apply when you get unaffiliated third parties involved. I don't know how you'd define where the unsolicited part ends and the direction begins when it could be any fan helping out the team on their own dime. That's why I think it's reasonable to read that rule as only applying to employees or contractors of the school or team.
October 23rd, 2023 at 3:11 PM ^
How is that difficult?
Did Stallion send out an email to 10 guys and ask them to do this?
Yes? Ok then he's screwed.
Did 10 random guys Stallion had never heard of get together, plan this, and send him tape from future opponents?
Yes? Ok then he's probably fine.
The problem would be a long-running culture where fans/boosters know "hey, he doesn't know who you are, but send tape to Dave and he'll use it to prepare for next week" so the staffer doesn't have to explicitly say "do this". Then you'd get into issues with "well, he should delete the email and not use that" but then they guy could just upload his thoughts to mgoblog and then you'd have to tell Stallion he couldn't read mgoblog. THAT would be hard to police. But we're not there yet, we're way the hell back at a very simple question. DID HE ASK PEOPLE TO DO THIS? It's not hard guys, it's a very straight forward situation.
October 23rd, 2023 at 3:21 PM ^
My only point to you though is that the NCAA rule doesn't speak to that one way or the other on direction vs. no direction. All it says is "Off-campus, in-person scouting of future opponents (in the same season) is prohibited." Given the scope and enforcement challenges, I think it's fair to limit that to affiliated/paid people.
October 23rd, 2023 at 3:59 PM ^
^^^^^^THIS is the point I think "watching from afar" is struggling with. I think he/she is looking at this from a 2020s viewpoint.
Perhaps the rule should be amended to prohibit what "afar" describes due to the current tech available and the ease of transferring files over the web but that is not how it is currently written.
As noted in my comment further up - this rule was created in 1994 when when personal video cameras still required tapes and were fairly large and expensive. (Per google the first Sony digital video camera came out in 1995).
This rule was created to stop Alabama, Michigan, OSU etc. from sending film crews out to try to film games and practices of their upcoming opponents with budgets that Eastern Michigan et. al couldn't match.
With today's tech I am pretty sure any random person could film a chunk of a Michigan practice from a drone or the roof of one houses near facility and text it to Ryan Day long before M staff could notice and attempt to stop it. There would be way to much plausible deniability for the NCAA to prove a connection to a school.
TLDR -- Unless it was a salaried staffer or direct paid outside university contractor doing the actually filming it will be very difficult to pin this on M --- not to mention the levels of deniability between Stalions and the true target of the NCAA.
October 23rd, 2023 at 8:05 PM ^
This rule was created to stop Alabama, Michigan, OSU etc. from sending film crews out to try to film games and practices of their upcoming opponents with budgets that Eastern Michigan et. al couldn't match.
Now change "film crews" to "random guy" and what do you get? It's the same thing. IF Stallion directed people to go watch games, record, and report back on signs, it's the same thing as 1994 Alabama sending crews to film games because it's still:
A. A representative of the football program
B. Directing an outside person/group of people
C. To film a future opponent
Is this going to result in a bowl ban or something? Probably not because he seems to have acted alone, but everyone is parsing through this and that when it's not that complicated. The guy was a paid Michigan staffer who coordinated with people to go watch opponents and get their signs. This isn't some random dude going to a game and sending in film to the staff unsolicited. It's not some a group of boosters organizing a campaign to do this and chatting with Stallion on the weekend.
October 23rd, 2023 at 3:07 PM ^
I don't see how you prove the one scenario versus the other. I mean, the thing I am taking away from all this is that MGoBlog needs to organize a vast network of in-person opponent scouts.
Why aren't we doing this???
October 23rd, 2023 at 3:13 PM ^
I don't see how you prove the one scenario versus the other.
Do I need to draw everyone a freaking picture?
Did Stallion email 10 guys and ask them to go scout teams in advance?
Yes? He sent an email or text? Ok then he's fucked.
Did he NOT do that? Ok, then he's probably fine.
October 23rd, 2023 at 4:07 PM ^
I see much of this quite differently from you (see above) but do agree that Stalions is screwed if there is a trail showing he solicited this info -- NOT because what you describe it is illegal under my interpretation of the NCAA rules, but because someone will have to be the sacrificial lamb to show contrition from U of M.
October 23rd, 2023 at 12:53 PM ^
Exactly. This will be extremely easy to prove which is why I have said from the start this was not a “nothing burger.” Stupid and arbitrary, of course. But that is the NCAA’s specialty and they are out for blood.
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:00 PM ^
The guy seems smart enough and young enough to know how to create separation between himself and the University if he knew he was doing things outside the lines. If he turned over his University issued laptop immediately, it's probably bc he's not dumb enough to put anything incriminating (in NCAA terms) on his work computer. I'm sure he'd have personal devices to do his dirt, and I'd expect those devices to be well encrypted and never connected to any University networks, WiFi, and so on. I'm assuming they would never even physically be near Michigan's campus/offices.
As for the money, there are certainly other avenues to fund your operations outside of payments on an expense report. That's like assuming bag men report all their contributions. Furthermore, I'd expect a guy like this to use Bitcoin or a similar untraceable (or damn near untraceable) method of payments. I don't think there's going to be cashed checks, withdrawals, or venmo payments for this stuff (if it's actually real).
There's also the scenario where it's all bullshit anyway. But in a scenario where it is real, I'm guessing this guy covers his tracks and knows how to keep moats between him and his external cohorts, as well as between him and Harbaugh/Michigan (whether Harbaugh knew or didn't know). This type of stuff is common in corporate espionage.
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:00 PM ^
I totally agree. If there is some sort of "payment," i.e. direct compensation for services or other types such as free tickets, etc. there is likely a problem.
However, I liken this entire kefluffle to recruiting during the dead period. We know that staff is not allowed to have certain types of contact with recruits during the dead period, but what if alumni were to have contact with a recruit or possible recruit and send along info or even video of games to the football staff. If the individual receives no direct or indirect benefit from the program, is this contact against NCAA rules?
What if the Boise Alumni club hosted a get-together with Colston Loveland during the dead period and he brought Gatlin Bair along. Is that a violation?
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:07 PM ^
If I had a friend / associate that worked for Michigan and he said: "Hey, you live in the DC area, would you mind going to some Maryland, Penn State, and Rutgers games and do some scouting for me? I especially want you to take videos of those colorful signs they hold up and those strange hand signals they make before each play, then video the play." . . . I would do it in an instant. I wouldn't even know there is any rule against it.
It's not that hard to get a "vast network" of just regular people to video things with smartphones without them knowing there is anything wrong with that.
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:53 PM ^
Correct, and I think you can argue that there isn't even anything wrong with that. A reasonable interpretation of the rule is that it only applies to school/team employees or contractors.
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:12 PM ^
I think Michigan already knows the answer to the allegations. If it's a clear violation, they're probably not going to try to deny it. They'll self-impose, like they did with the (also incredibly moronic) cheeseburger incident. There's really no need for receipts to be turned over. As dumb as this whole thing is, Michigan wants to avoid the look of impropriety. Some may blame Warde but I can't imagine Santa Ono or the BoR want us to even have the appearance of being cheaters.
October 23rd, 2023 at 2:15 PM ^
I think they know what happened factually but the facts may have landed squarely in a grey area of the rules, depending on interpretation. Obviously, there's no prohibition against stealing signs, and there was no in-person scouting in this case.
The rule is slient on non-staff proxies doing what would be considered "in person scouting" so one could argue UM just doesn't know how the rules are going to be interpreted by the NCAA. Hence suspending Stalions with pay instead of firing him. But it's early yet.
Cooperating with the investigation is 100% the way to handle. Stonewalling would be a disaster.
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:31 PM ^
There is no vast network. There are only 5 of us. UNCWolverine wasn't paid in Bond girls. I wasn't paid in bananas. Hotel Putingrad wasn't paid in caviar. Maizinator wasn't paid in WD-40 and BuckeyeChuck wasn't paid in fertilizer. That's our story and we're sticking to it.
October 23rd, 2023 at 3:14 PM ^
Jill Masterson ... superb reference... "Leave the gun, take the cannoli."
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:32 PM ^
He outsourced. And the rules governing what you can pay for is very clear when it comes to "commercial entities" but extremely vague for any other party. He was not hiring commercial entities.
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:57 PM ^
I think the whole thing could have been done very easily with unpaid and unaffiliated friends/volunteers who bought their own tickets to the games. And those games obviously are open to the public with cell phone videos allowed. There's a strong argument that the (vague) NCAA rule wouldn't apply in that situation.
October 23rd, 2023 at 3:14 PM ^
I would not bet anything that the "vast network" would have needed to be paid. At least not in cash. After all, Stalions himself apparently covered his own expenses while volunteering prior to his employment by the football program, and I can't imagine he's the only one who would do that. Lots of people spend lots of money in demonstrating their support of the team they love (and not just Michigan) -- many of them even read this blog.
October 23rd, 2023 at 12:29 PM ^
We'll see, I agree that this will take a very long time to unfold and that Michigan will successfully fight it if the allegations are false/wildly overblown. However, disagree that the charges will only stick with "direct video evidence." The NCAA has the guy's laptop and phone. If he was orchestrating an illegal in-person scouting operation, the laptop will have conclusive evidence of that.
*IF* that's the case, the questions are then (1) whether this still breaks the NCAA rules assuming the scouts were non-Michigan affiliated volunteers (2) who else knew (relevant mostly for penalty determination)
October 23rd, 2023 at 12:33 PM ^
"The NCAA has the guy's laptop and phone. If he was orchestrating an illegal in-person scouting operation, the laptop will have conclusive evidence of that."
This is 100% accurate which makes me believe we know there's nothing on it. I mean not even Warde would be stupid enough to hand over evidence of wrong-doing to a 3rd party with no subpoena power and therefore no ability to force compliance in their request.
October 23rd, 2023 at 12:39 PM ^
You sure about that dot gif
October 23rd, 2023 at 12:55 PM ^
Thrawn seems to keep having to learn not to underestimate a Jedi.
We seem to keep having to learn not to underestimate Warde's stupidity.
October 23rd, 2023 at 12:42 PM ^
All he has to do is swap out the hard drive, which I assume our ex-Navy officer is more than capable of. If he has it in a cloud account they'll have no authority to look at that.
October 23rd, 2023 at 12:43 PM ^
I’m not so sure on that one….sarcasm?
October 23rd, 2023 at 12:44 PM ^
I've seen people claiming that the NCAA would like Connor's laptop (and presumably his phone too) but I haven't seen anything indicating that they already have them. Did I miss something?
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:09 PM ^
I read somewhere that the Michigan AD has already turned over the laptop to the NCAA.
October 23rd, 2023 at 2:51 PM ^
And the phone. I know that for a fact.
October 23rd, 2023 at 9:01 PM ^
Still got the shovel?
October 23rd, 2023 at 12:44 PM ^
IDK about Warde. Not that it's coming from stupidity but rather an overriding impulse to cooperate, look like a team player, and not let holding on to the laptop become an issue that made us look guilty. That said, I do worry those impulses might've kept him from making sure the laptop didn't contain evidence that could either be misconstrued or actually prove guilt.
October 23rd, 2023 at 12:46 PM ^
This is where I'm at. Let's assume he set up a "vast network", the only way they would be able to prove that is if he was dumb enough to use his university computer/cell phone and had files titled "Penn State/Ohio State in game signs - 10/21" on his computer. Every article I've read makes me think the "evidence" of the vast network to this point is complaints from opposing teams and I don't know how they would be able to prove that. Either there's an electronic or financial paper trail or there's no evidence and I don't know why you'd just hand that evidence over willingly if there is.
October 23rd, 2023 at 12:58 PM ^
Wouldn't he have just used his personal computer if he was trying to hide it from his bosses?
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:01 PM ^
I've watched enough "better call saul" to know that you always use a burner phone for such business.... I suspect a "burner ipad" as well.
I served with enough second and first lieutenants to know that all military officers aren't the sharpest tools in the shed..... but he was a Cpt. from the academy and by all indications a pretty sharp dude.
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:03 PM ^
In all seriousness, if we handed a computer over that we knew had incriminating evidence, we would just admit the violation at that point.
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:07 PM ^
"The NCAA has the guy's laptop and phone. If he was orchestrating an illegal in-person scouting operation, the laptop will have conclusive evidence of that."
Unless Warde Manuel and everybody else in the Athletic Department are complete idiots, they took a thorough look at Stalion's laptop before they turned it over to the NCAA.
If there was even mildly persuasive evidence that Stalion was orchestrating a vast network, would Manuel have suspended him with pay, as opposed to suspending him without pay, or firing him outright? I doubt it.
October 23rd, 2023 at 2:24 PM ^
I've said this elsewhere but I suspect the internal issue in the AD is less about the facts and more about whether any rule was genuinely violated depending on if you take a broad view or a narrow reading.
October 23rd, 2023 at 2:51 PM ^
Maybe i am just a blind, maize and blue glasses wearing homer...
My question is with Connor's military background and seeming expertise to gather intelligence out of sight wouldn't the reverse also be true? Wouldn't the flip side also be that no one would find your intelligence either?
What am I missing?
October 23rd, 2023 at 2:53 PM ^
One would hope, which is one reason I'm saying less than I know about the details, but unfortunately what I do know also suggests Cpt. Stalions was at a minimum a little sloppy about segregating work/personal texts to different devices. And didn't necessarily follow best practices that would be second nature to someone actually trained in intelligence gathering.
October 23rd, 2023 at 3:12 PM ^
My question is how did other schools (read Ohio State) find out about this "vast network" and how were they able to gather the "evidence" that has been reported on?