Given lack of actually doing anything, have to figure every once in a while the staff just throw something at Warde or put a mirror under his nose just to see if he is still breathing.
FYI - advising everyone to be careful. Someone selling tickets told me that they think my number had been spoofed since someone (other than me) reached out to them using my number. And it appears there are scammers lurking/posting on this board. Advise you to approach anyone who just created their mgo account with caution.
Good luck to everyone that is looking for tickets!
To the degree these guys are not bullshitting, a lot of solid posts suggesting that ticket prices will be very stomachable come monday. just have to have the resolve to wait it out
I know that this is his first stab at a mock, but, given his limited pass rushing upside, having JTT going in the first round (to the Lions no less) gives me a lot of doubt about Brugler's prognostication ability.
Part of the argument in the letter is that it doesn't matter if it violated NCAA rules, but rather violated the sportsmanship policy, which is not limited to NCAA or B1G rules violations.
The problem for the Conference is that it assumes the conduct had a material impact on games (highly debatable) and the fact that everyone is stealing everyone else's signs, a problem that the Conference deals with by stating that the conduct of others is immaterial to whether Michigan's conduct violated the Sportsmanship Policy.
And to add, the taking the action it did on the basis put forth in the letter, the Conference has implicitly acknowledged that it does not have a direct mechanism by which it can punish Harbaugh. So it came up with a workaround to do indirectly the thing it could not do directly.
It would seem odd to be able to levy a punishment in this manner, but given that the Sportsmanship Policy appears to grant broad powers to the Commissioner, it is not a sure thing that the University and JH will succeed on a TRO.
Of course, dropping this on a Friday when the team and its HC is already in transit to its next game is not good optics. And optics can matter a lot in these circumstances where the action can be characterized as being done in bad faith.
Agreed. Since there is a mechanism to punish "offenders," the Conference has acknowledged JH is not an "offender," leveling the sanction against the HC - WHO JUST HAPPENS TO BE JH - is certainly novel.
The other point that will be hit (and I'm not sure which side has it correct) is the argument in the letter from the Conference that says Rule 32 (which governs violations of conference and NCAA rules) and the Sportsmanship policy are separate such that the Commissioner can impose punishment under the Sportsmanship policy even “where the offensive actions are premised on actual or potential violations of NCAA rules.”
Does not say that it is suspending Harbaugh rather this is a sanction against the institution as taken against its Head Coach. Direct quote "This not a sanction of Coach Harbaugh. It is a sanction against the University."
Also says "We impose this disciplinary action even though the Conference has not yet received any information indicating that Head Football Coach Harbaugh was aware of the impermissible
nature of the sign-stealing scheme.”
I'll leave it to others who have spent more time parsing the rules to weigh in, but this seems too cute by half to me.
Though it appears to have been voted on by the Joint Group Executive Committee.
I floated this as a possibility in one of the lengthy legal threads earlier this week. Obviously preemptively filing makes the imminent harm prong of the TRO standard more difficult to demonstrate. But I agree with you and my guess is PR/political (not legal) considerations are the reason they didn’t go that route - the University doesn’t want to be seen as the party escalating this unnecessarily, still have to account for interested parties who are more accustomed to capitulating; recognition that litigation could just be a disaster for the conference, etc.
What is the basis for you claiming that "the reality is that Warde is doing *something*"? Signing this letter, which is a purely ministerial act. Besides this, we've heard nothing from him.
It seems pretty clear that Tony didn't have a plan for the possibility that Michigan would fight back here. Now he's up against it since he either proceeds to levy a suspension to placate the other schools and the conference gets destroyed in court or he relents in the face of a pretty devastating letter. Either way, as Brian noted yesterday, his tenure as B1G commish is unlikely to be long.
JH and the University could each file (and in theory file in different places) but if they did that, the separate filings are sure to be consolidated so as to avoid disparate results.
But if it becomes necessary to file an injunction, there will be one case with JH and the University both as plaintiffs. The University will submit a set of papers which will either be signed by counsel for the University and JH or JH's counsel will submit separate papers signing on to the University's brief and also covering any issues that are individual to JH.
As expected, more focus on why JH cannot be held accountable based on current evidence and absence of "Head Coach Responsibility" rule. And spends a lot of time undermining any claim that JH "should have known" about what CS was allegedly doing.
Also, letter is far less the equivalent of a molotov cocktail through your window than the University's letter, but to be expected given the University's letter was written by Williams & Connolly.
In case anyone was wondering, it makes sense for JH to have sent his own letter for a few reasons:
There are points JH would want to spend more time on as they relate specifically to him
JH's interests and the University’s interests could diverge at some point (though that seems unlikely right now based on what we know) such that it makes sense for him to have his own counsel and for that counsel to submit its own letter
Having to respond to two letters means more work for the conference's attorneys
Whole letter makes pretty clear that its amateur hour over at the Big Ten offices. No surprise that Tony is waffling - the conference has been shown to have no clothes.
I particularly enjoyed this: "We have not seen or been provided virtually any of the evidence on which you purport to rely in your email. We have also not seen any of the videos allegedly taken for scouting purposes -- and as far as we can glean from your email, you have not seen them either."
My point is that the article does a poor job that what Michigan is accused of doing is "nothing." The article explicitly equates the situations-- "Like most coaches, Clawson has followed the Michigan storyline, and can empathize with their opponents. Some of it felt very familiar."--when we all know that sign stealing is common. Anything about what happened to WF being worse is, at best, implied.
Not super helpful to the narrative given that Feldman doesn't check Clawson equating the situations when what happened to WF is much worse than sign stealing.
Conference has used Mayer Brown in the past as the firm was outside counsel to the conference before it hired an internal general counsel, so it may use them again here.
Recent Comments
This presumes that Warde made the decision. A questionable presumption given that we know Warde's preference is to do nothing.
Now do Warde
Pete is sorry
I agree but another year with Warde is going to be sooooooooooooooo painful.
"Pay to Play" is out. It's "Pay for Work"
It makes me glad that "Fire Warde" has become the majority opinion (I'd love unanimity on it but when do we get unanimity on anything).
But it makes me sad that he has not, you know, actually been fired.
Given lack of actually doing anything, have to figure every once in a while the staff just throw something at Warde or put a mirror under his nose just to see if he is still breathing.
Better late than never if it happens, but some of us have been on this train for a loooooong time.
Please direct all corrections to [email protected].
I'll worry about next season next season. Enjoy the moment!
I had tickets for 937.5 (with fees) in my cart on Ticketmaster.
FYI - advising everyone to be careful. Someone selling tickets told me that they think my number had been spoofed since someone (other than me) reached out to them using my number. And it appears there are scammers lurking/posting on this board. Advise you to approach anyone who just created their mgo account with caution.
Good luck to everyone that is looking for tickets!
Not sure what happened to the spreadsheet but can someone resort it? Thanks!
To the degree these guys are not bullshitting, a lot of solid posts suggesting that ticket prices will be very stomachable come monday. just have to have the resolve to wait it out
Sorry to hear that! What happened?
Removing my post - have been informed that someone may be spoofing my phone number.
At a certain point it becomes painful to watch
you jinxed it man!
Why does Warde Manuel exist?
I know that this is his first stab at a mock, but, given his limited pass rushing upside, having JTT going in the first round (to the Lions no less) gives me a lot of doubt about Brugler's prognostication ability.
Agree otherwise you run the risk he'll turn out like Ryan Day /s
https:/…
Full lists here:
https://bigten.org/documents/2023/11/27//2023_Big_Ten_Individual_Award_Winners_DEF_ST.pdf?id=9526
Of course the Iowa punter was Punter of the Year lol
There were a number of ST HM's from both the coaches and media - the media list is really long.
so he's a broken clock?
Already posted: https://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/michigan-state-hires-oregon-state%27s-jonathan-smith-next-head-coach
"A source initially told ESPN that Stalions had been fired, before Michigan later announced Friday that he had resigned."
https://abcnews.go.com/Sports/michigan-football-analyst-connor-stalions-resigns-amid-investigation/story?id=104623836
Seems par for the course for that rag
Part of the argument in the letter is that it doesn't matter if it violated NCAA rules, but rather violated the sportsmanship policy, which is not limited to NCAA or B1G rules violations.
The problem for the Conference is that it assumes the conduct had a material impact on games (highly debatable) and the fact that everyone is stealing everyone else's signs, a problem that the Conference deals with by stating that the conduct of others is immaterial to whether Michigan's conduct violated the Sportsmanship Policy.
And to add, the taking the action it did on the basis put forth in the letter, the Conference has implicitly acknowledged that it does not have a direct mechanism by which it can punish Harbaugh. So it came up with a workaround to do indirectly the thing it could not do directly.
It would seem odd to be able to levy a punishment in this manner, but given that the Sportsmanship Policy appears to grant broad powers to the Commissioner, it is not a sure thing that the University and JH will succeed on a TRO.
Of course, dropping this on a Friday when the team and its HC is already in transit to its next game is not good optics. And optics can matter a lot in these circumstances where the action can be characterized as being done in bad faith.
Agreed. Since there is a mechanism to punish "offenders," the Conference has acknowledged JH is not an "offender," leveling the sanction against the HC - WHO JUST HAPPENS TO BE JH - is certainly novel.
The other point that will be hit (and I'm not sure which side has it correct) is the argument in the letter from the Conference that says Rule 32 (which governs violations of conference and NCAA rules) and the Sportsmanship policy are separate such that the Commissioner can impose punishment under the Sportsmanship policy even “where the offensive actions are premised on actual or potential violations of NCAA rules.”
Brilliant!
Page 2 - second para above the header that is not "kept with next"
Definitely some rewrites of TRO papers going on right now to address the insanity of the "logic" demonstrated in this letter.
Does not say that it is suspending Harbaugh rather this is a sanction against the institution as taken against its Head Coach. Direct quote "This not a sanction of Coach Harbaugh. It is a sanction against the University."
Also says "We impose this disciplinary action even though the Conference has not yet received any information indicating that Head Football Coach Harbaugh was aware of the impermissible
nature of the sign-stealing scheme.”
I'll leave it to others who have spent more time parsing the rules to weigh in, but this seems too cute by half to me.
Though it appears to have been voted on by the Joint Group Executive Committee.
They would still need to seek to enjoin the conference from levying the fine, it just wouldn’t need to be done on an emergency basis.
We are all working on our arguments for Tom Mars to “borrow” from the board
I floated this as a possibility in one of the lengthy legal threads earlier this week. Obviously preemptively filing makes the imminent harm prong of the TRO standard more difficult to demonstrate. But I agree with you and my guess is PR/political (not legal) considerations are the reason they didn’t go that route - the University doesn’t want to be seen as the party escalating this unnecessarily, still have to account for interested parties who are more accustomed to capitulating; recognition that litigation could just be a disaster for the conference, etc.
they will file the injunction today
What is the basis for you claiming that "the reality is that Warde is doing *something*"? Signing this letter, which is a purely ministerial act. Besides this, we've heard nothing from him.
It seems pretty clear that Tony didn't have a plan for the possibility that Michigan would fight back here. Now he's up against it since he either proceeds to levy a suspension to placate the other schools and the conference gets destroyed in court or he relents in the face of a pretty devastating letter. Either way, as Brian noted yesterday, his tenure as B1G commish is unlikely to be long.
JH and the University could each file (and in theory file in different places) but if they did that, the separate filings are sure to be consolidated so as to avoid disparate results.
But if it becomes necessary to file an injunction, there will be one case with JH and the University both as plaintiffs. The University will submit a set of papers which will either be signed by counsel for the University and JH or JH's counsel will submit separate papers signing on to the University's brief and also covering any issues that are individual to JH.
…
Beat me to it this time!
As expected, more focus on why JH cannot be held accountable based on current evidence and absence of "Head Coach Responsibility" rule. And spends a lot of time undermining any claim that JH "should have known" about what CS was allegedly doing.
Also, letter is far less the equivalent of a molotov cocktail through your window than the University's letter, but to be expected given the University's letter was written by Williams & Connolly.
In case anyone was wondering, it makes sense for JH to have sent his own letter for a few reasons:
Leaking a story to Larry Lage and then citing his article about that story in your response is just a goddamn masterstroke.
Take it you are not billing your time by the hour then? haha
Whole letter makes pretty clear that its amateur hour over at the Big Ten offices. No surprise that Tony is waffling - the conference has been shown to have no clothes.
I particularly enjoyed this: "We have not seen or been provided virtually any of the evidence on which you purport to rely in your email. We have also not seen any of the videos allegedly taken for scouting purposes -- and as far as we can glean from your email, you have not seen them either."
What are we even doing here Tony?
My point is that the article does a poor job that what Michigan is accused of doing is "nothing." The article explicitly equates the situations-- "Like most coaches, Clawson has followed the Michigan storyline, and can empathize with their opponents. Some of it felt very familiar."--when we all know that sign stealing is common. Anything about what happened to WF being worse is, at best, implied.
Not super helpful to the narrative given that Feldman doesn't check Clawson equating the situations when what happened to WF is much worse than sign stealing.
Conference has used Mayer Brown in the past as the firm was outside counsel to the conference before it hired an internal general counsel, so it may use them again here.
I really needed a trigger warning for lengthy discussion of "billables" in comments.