Ole Miss scandal recent developments and some speculation

Submitted by Arb lover on

This may or may not tangentially impact the NCAA's decision to grant eligibility to players including Shea Patterson, but I thought I'd share for those interested. 

In case there was any uncertainty, Ole Miss appealed the NCAA's infractions report stemming from the January 22, 2016 notice of allegations on a number of fronts on February 14 of this year. There is no mention of the transfers, which is not surprising, however one thing of note is that Ole Miss is arguing heavily against the ordered dissasociation between the university and Rebal Rags, essentially a quasi "M Den" type of store. It's argument directly lines up with Rebal Rags argument. That case is currently pending at the Mississippi supreme court. 

Rebal Rags original suit centered on defamation, civil conspiracy, and commercial disparagement against two former recruits at the time and a parent (Leo Lewis, Kobe Jones, and Lindsey Miller), who informed the NCAA that they had received hundreds of dollars in free merchandise from Rebal Rags in an effort to secure their committments. 

The business's main argument is that the three witnesses interviewed by the NCAA and who's testimony they relied on is not credible because Rebal Rags has no documentation of the (illegal) sale or gift of merchandise it gave to the recruits, and because no other recruits admitted they had illegally accepted merchandise. What might be interesting is that Rebal Rags just modified its suit to also file against the NCAA and the NCAA investigator, Mike SheridanJust to be clear in case anyone is skimming, the business, not the university, filed against the NCAA and the NCAA's investigator. 

While witnesses are usually seen as fairly credible when they volunteer evidence that partially implicates themselves, this is the state of Mississippi involving an out of state institution attempting to prevent a business association between two well respected Mississippi institutions. The last thing the NCAA wants to do is appear to have overreached if things might not go their way, so they might end up giving on this point in removing the dissasociation, which could more than likely be wrapped up with Rebal Rags agreeing to drop the suit against the witnesses. The NCAA should have a secondary reason to want to have the defamation/disparagement suit dropped against the three individuals, as it cannot readily conduct interviews with witnesses if those witnesses believe they will be targeted as a result of their whistle-blowing. 

Cliffnotes version as requested:

It is possible that the NCAA settles one penalty against Ole Miss and its business partner for the above reasons, but isn't happy with the business partner's tactics or the university's participation in them. I don't know if that makes the NCAA more likely to give and take with granting immediate eligibility for the transfers even if Ole Miss objects, but I thought I'd share. (Ole Miss hasn't yet submitted their response to the request for eligibility waiver).  

FauxMo

February 21st, 2018 at 12:11 PM ^

One group of Cousin Fuckers may get off of the crimes they are accused of by Giant Ridiculously Incompetent Bureaucracy because their case will be decided by another group of Cousin Fuckers. The end. 

Boner Stabone

February 21st, 2018 at 12:44 PM ^

I acutally had that happen, but it was a cousin from my dad's side of the family that was marrying a third cousin from my mom's side of the family.  When I got to the church and the usher asked me bride or groom side?  I responded "both".   He ended up putting me on the bride side.

ChiBlueBoy

February 21st, 2018 at 12:04 PM ^

My guess is Rebel Rags has a contract with the U that pays the U a percentage of whatever Rebel Rags brings in that is university-related. (Which, btw, gives Rebel Rags an incentive to have the team be successful (higher sales for a team that doesn't suck), thus an incentive to give free stuff to 4- and 5-star recruits.) The U is going to fight to keep the affiliation because, otherwise, it has to terminate a lucrative contract.

If I read you correctly, the U isn't suing the individuals, so it probably doesn't have much stake in that litigation, though RR will likely try to use any leverage it has. The NCAA could just shrug and not care who RR wants to sue, other than it doesn't want its chief witnesses to be found to be unreliable.

Bottom line: NCAA will do its thing and cave like it always does. Not sure any of this has much to do with Patterson if Ole Miss isn't arguing that it didn't lie or withhold info from the recruits.

LKLIII

February 21st, 2018 at 2:08 PM ^

I'm praying you're right, but since he doesn't have to sit out at all to go to NDSU, what would stop Patterson from enrolling in Michigan now (which he's done), participating in Michigan spring ball while he waits the NCAA ruling, and then if it's unfavorable, simply transferring out of Ann Arbor after spring term, landing in Fargo in time for NDSU's fall camp & starting for them in 2018?

Are there any rules preventing the number or frequency of transfers generally?

Because if not, the only thing that would stop him would be either his own pride, or simply the judgment that he's still better off either running the Michigan scout team for 2018 & either entering the draft in 2019 or alternatively sticking around to try to start here in 2019 and then entering the 2020 draft.

 

Mike Damone

February 21st, 2018 at 12:25 PM ^

that Mineral King is an NCAA insider, sent to Mgoblog to start effectively messaging the news of these Ole Miss players' immediate eligibility, without creating a precedent for future cases.

In fact, the more I absorb his message, the more certain I am regarding his knowledge and wisdom on this issue.  Thank you for brightening the day, Mineral King.

 

FauxMo

February 21st, 2018 at 1:29 PM ^

Fair enough. I've been here a decade, live in Ann Arbor, and know nothing "inside." But be honest...someone shows up here and a couple weeks later has deep inside information, and you're not the least bit skeptical???  

Blue in PA

February 21st, 2018 at 2:38 PM ^

Its not a tenure thing, hell Jim "Sharknado" Mackerel-wain could join tomorrow.  He'd have better intel than anyone else, even UMbig11.

 

I've been a participant since '08 or '09, for whatever reason I lost my old login and started over.

 

To quote Abe Lincoln "Just because you read it on the internet, doesn't make it true."

 

 

Blusqualo

February 21st, 2018 at 6:58 PM ^

How does one accrue so many negative points so rapidly?

I mean wow, thats a lot. I don’t think I could get a quarter of that without getting banned in the process.

I’d have to be annoying, offensive, get overly defensive, be unoriginal, stay off-topic, sprinkle in just the right amount of racism and sexism, and of course a dash of politics and religion.

Yeah, I just don’t see how its possible, my mind just can’t fathom what it would require...

Indy Pete - Go Blue

February 21st, 2018 at 12:05 PM ^

The NCAA might feel annoyed with the university more because of a clothing store affiliated with university has irritated them, and thus the NCAA, in their annoyance against Ole Miss b/c of the store, may be more likely to favor letting the transfers occur?

I don't understand that logic (and admittedly may be missing your point which is very hard to decipher), but if it works in our favor, I will take it.  It is the NCAA we are dealing with after all.

Mr Miggle

February 21st, 2018 at 12:58 PM ^

Ole Miss is siding with Rebel Rags. But I agree, the NCAA ruling on eligibility won't be affected by this. Ole Miss hasn't opposed it. The players are already gone. Making them immediately eligible in no way impacts Ole Miss.

The ruling could in part rest on the credibility of the players vs that of Hugh Freeze and a few others from Ole Miss. That battle should never have been in doubt. With the existance of texts from Freeze and assistants, there should be no question about the outcome.

LKLIII

February 21st, 2018 at 1:07 PM ^

One aspect in which the case decision DOES impact things is setting future precedent. 

Even though the "damage has been done" on a player/roster level at Ole Miss in this specific case, giving the players a favorable ruling could provide a helpful "chilling effect" for future potential violators.  Basically putting schools on notice that their willful or egregious or systematic (whatever the NCAA's internal guidelines might say) could trigger a far bigger exodous of players than what was previously thought.

One can hope anyway. 

But then again, nobody has ever accused the NCAA of doing anything that resembles logic or good policy decisions.