"3 Strikes"

Submitted by A_Maize_Zing on

I saw some people wondering what the "3 strikes" thing was.  Hoke talked about it at the recent coaching clinic and it goes as follows

 

If you do something dumb that hurts the team or the school you get a strike.  This would be something like skipping a class.

Strike 1 - You get up at 5 in the morning with the S+C coach and push a 45lb weight plate up and down the field for an hour.

Strike 2 - You do the same for multiple days

Strike 3 - Your whole unit comes in and participates with you...ie... if Obi had 3 strikes the whole linebacker core would come in,

Strike 4 - Hoke said no has come back from a 4th strike...at this point your whole side of the ball would come in at 5AM and push the plate.

Section 1

January 30th, 2011 at 2:57 PM ^

Hahahaha!  This is rich! 

Because it certainly isn't Rich.

If Brady Hoke does what was mentioned in the OP, I am guessing that it had better be carefully counted and recorded as a CARA item if it occurs during a season, and that it had better not occur at all outside of the allowed football season.

"Voluntary," you say?  I'll give you "voluntary":

 

According to NCAA Bylaw 17.02.13, in order for any athletically related activity to be considered "voluntary," all of the following conditions must be met:

  • The student-athlete must not be required to report back to a coach or other athletics department staff member (e.g., strength coach, trainer, manager) any information related to the activity. In addition, no athletics department staff member who observes the activity (e.g., strength coach, trainer, manager) may report back to the student-athlete's coach any information related to the activity
  • The activity must be initiated solely by the student-athlete. Neither the institution nor any athletics department staff member may require the student-athlete to participate in the activity at any time
  • The student-athlete's attendance and participation in the activity (or lack thereof) may not be recorded for the purposes of reporting such information to coaching staff members or other student-athletes
  • The student-athlete may not be subjected to penalty if he or she elects not to participate in the activity. In addition, neither the institution nor any athletics department staff member may provide recognition or incentives (e.g., awards) to a student-athlete based on his or her attendance or performance in the activity

So, as some of the more intelligent MGoBloggers (Purple Stuff being the star pupil in the class) have noted, we had a bit of an issue with 17.02.03.

From NCAA Case Number M324 (Yes, That Case) and Part 2(c) of the University of Michigan’s Response to the Notice of Allegations, Pages 2-4 and 2-5:

{Allegation 2(c)}  During the summer of 2008 and 2009, strength and conditioning coaches who monitored and conducted some voluntarily athletically related activities occasionally used additional conditioning activities as disciplinary measures when they required football student-athletes to participate in such activities for missing class. [NCAA Bylaw 17.02.13]

The University agrees that the allegations in Allegation 2(c) are substantially correct and constitute violations of NCAA legislation. The violations occurred on only a few occasions (one strength and conditioning coach estimated a total of six occasions during the summer of 2009) and without the knowledge of athletics administrators, Rodriguez or the head strength and conditioning coach, Mike Barwis. The disciplinary measures consisted of the student-athlete pushing a 45-pound weight for 200 yards and lasted a few minutes.

 

Just imagine the God-fucking-awful irony in all of this. We had the Free Press, hammering away at Rodriguez and Barwis, personally, for alleged NCAA violations. When the joint Michigan/NCAA investigation showed that Rodriguez and Barwis had "no knowledge" of the frankly trivial offenses.

But now we've got Brady Hoke, the Michigan-savior-hero of today's Free Press, rather casually suggesting the same thing himself!

Of course I don't think that Brady Hoke is a bad guy, or an NCAA rules-violator. 

I suspect that if we wanted to talk to Brady Hoke right now about Bylaw 17.02.03, he'd ask for his personal attorney and David Brandon, please.  He probably wouldn't bother with asking for a copy of the 20 or so phone-book sized volumes of NCAA bylaws.  Brady Hoke probably has no idea what any of this is all about.  If anybody wanted to be fair to Brady Hoke, they wouldn't run off with a headline like the one I used to title this post.  They'd talk to Brady.  They'd talk to Compliance Services.  They'd talk to Brandon, or else the AAD who is in charge of football operations.

Of course, this is a perfect object-lesson in what was one of the worst aspects of the Free Press attack on Rich Rodriguez; nobody ever did anything except talk to "former players" and some of their parents(?!).  (I challenge any notion that Rosenberg and Snyder ever talked to any "current" players beyond their unethical abuse of quotes from Je'Ron Stokes and Brandin Hawthorne.)   It is the equivalent of interviewing only the OP of this thread, and perhaps a half dozen other guys who were at the same clinic, learning about Brady Hoke's "Three Strikes."  And then launching the story in a Sunday edition of the Free Press, just six days before the start of next football season.

MaizeAndBlueWahoo

January 30th, 2011 at 11:10 PM ^

Well damn.  I guess this confirms our worst fears about Hoke - no imagination at all.  Hoke just ripped this exact same thing off Dantonio's rule book for his players and replaced "beating the piss out of someone half your size so they can't move for a week" with "skipping class."