Thanks for the shout out, Bri!
"Rodrick Williams Jr.'s 10-month old, 2-foot-long savannah monitor named "Kill" gets the RB some strange looks when they go for walks together."
I'm not sure if this is news or not, but it kind of sounds newsy. Sort of.
ANN ARBOR, Mich. -- University of Michigan President Mary Sue Coleman today (Monday, Oct. 26) announced that the University has received a "Notice of Inquiry" from the NCAA, indicating it will continue its investigation of allegations made about the U-M's intercollegiate athletics football program. The investigation is being conducted in cooperation with the University.
Statement from U-M President Mary Sue Coleman
"As I said at the onset of this review, we place the highest importance on the well-being of our student-athletes and the integrity of our program. We continue to work with the NCAA to ensure that a thorough and objective investigation occurs."
Statement from U-M Director of Athletics Bill Martin
"We continue to cooperate with the NCAA on this matter, which is why we reached out to both the Big Ten and the NCAA as soon as we heard the allegations. We remain committed to following both the letter and the intent of the NCAA rules."
I don't think this means anything other than "there is an investigation," but I could be wrong. I'm sort of on the radio (LINDA!) at the moment so can't research if this is serious or not.
Thanks for the shout out, Bri!
If we serve them back, will that mean that it's on?
I'd prefer to handle it Dance 360 style. Head-to-head dance battle.
How do I get more? I should have more, right? I've been watching Michigan since the '60s and I saw Lloyd at Kroger once.
You are my favorite Michigan fan evah! Teach me your tao.
I am sure a certain Detroit-area newspaper will spare no ink when choosing the font size for its headline about this.
Like an idiot, I strolled over to this particular Detroit-area newspaper for a look, and lo and behold, it was front-page reading material. They even included a link to the article that led to the whole situation in the first place.
My take - this reads like a standard notice letter sent by law firms during ongoing investigations. I work for a large university on the East coast and we get notices similar to this every couple of months. It basically states that there is enough evidence to continue investigating the matter - nothing more, nothing less. Since a front-page article in a major newspaper claimed violations occurred, it would be irresponsible for the NCAA to not look into the matter closely. My guess is that they will find some minor infractions but nothing more, and this whole incident will be nothing more than an afterthought in a couple of months.
IT WAS ME
i know it was you, big boutros. you BROKE my heart.
But can he unbreak your heart?
Big B: Hasn't Rich Rod taught you anything? It Was I! Stop those voluntary work out sessions and get back to class.
but apparently the ncaa gets involved when there is "reasonble" expectations that something was afoul. I don't know much about it other than I'm slightly more worried than what I was 20 minutes ago
I'm with you. the quote that i found was "The notice suggests that the NCAA has found reasonable cause to believe that violations may have occurred."
That's just because you're a stick in the mud who sees everything about Rodriguez in the worst light possible. The only people worrying over this are the people who want to.
I drafted these in the past for the NCAA and it's nothing more than a formal letter that an "inquiry" is underway. If we receive a Notice of Allegations, that is when we should panic because it's akin to the federal government indicting you on federal criminal charges (you're basically already guilty and just need to worry about the sentencing). The Notice of Inquiry is like the NCAA making a telephone call saying "hey we heard the Free Press allegations and need some additional info" and then putting it in writing the next day and shipping it out.
Note: This wasn't posted by me, so I don't have any answers to clarify any of this quote.
Here's the direct response taken from the NCAA's FAQ section:
When reasonably reliable information has been obtained indicating that an intentional violation has occurred, that a significant competitive or recruiting advantage may have been gained, or that false or misleading information may have been reported to the institution or to the enforcement staff, the enforcement staff will undertake a review of the information in order to determine its credibility. At that time, the involved NCAA member institution is informed of the enforcement staff's inquiry by a notice of inquiry to the institution's chief executive officer (CEO). The review of this information generally entails the use of an enforcement representative (investigator) to conduct in-person interviews.
It says later on that it is the school's choice to release the notice, the NCAA itself will not.
And for anyone who wants to read the entire thing....
It seems to me that this is no more than, 'hey show us your report when you're done self-investigating and we may want to ask you a few questions about it.' It's not an outside NCAA investigation
From what I have read, this so-called "investigation" is being carried out during an NCAA power struggle for the next leader. One candidate is an internal candidate. The other is a UM grad. I really am just speculating about what this means. But I cannot help wondering if the internal candidate may have a vested interest in putting UM in an awkward position, since his main competition is from UM.
Otherwise, it's hard for me to imagine why the NCAA is not--to be fair--investigating all of the institutions that one might suspect of working their players beyond NCAA guidelines during the UM season being investigated: 2008. I mean, let's get serious! Does anyone really think that there were not some more successful programs that were demanding far more from their players during that season?
I don't see light at the end of this tunnel.
Quite simply, this will not end well. Letters of inquiry are only made when credible evidence exists.
That said, if Michigan is punished for this, I want full scale investigations at every school in the country as far as whether they practice too much. Also, there had better be something more substantial than something a transfer said.
Finally, if the NCAA concludes that Michigan committed violations by having playing time be dependent on voluntary practice hours, then the NCAA infractions committee should lose whatever shreds of credibility it has left based on its ineffectiveness in policing top programs for substantial violations, rather than something that makes sense.
How do you open a letter of inquiry (implying that you would like to ask questions), when you already have evidence?
Even if they do have evidence, it could just be the same as the Freep had (quotes from disgruntled ex-players).
It seems more like a formality to me.
...but at this point you are probably way too optimistic. There is way too much smoke for there to be no fire. We are past "is something bad going to happen?" and have arrived at "how bad is this going to be?"
As I doubt that you want to read through a long set of NCAA procedures (trust me, it's not fun), here's the gist of it, courtesy of ESPN:
I agree. In fact, I just tried to make the same point in the Detroit News.
Maybe, while the US Congress is considering an investigation of the BCS, they should turn their attention to an investigation of the broader political and financial motivations and myopic investigative priorities of the NCAA.
...like what they started to do with major league baseball when the MLB commisioner would do little or nothing.
So the Free Press has yet to answer questions about their article's credibility? Why not?
i think "newsy. sort of." is a PERFECT description.
I can't believe they say they have credible evidence if they are going off the Free Press.