RR's Connection to WVU Allegations, Why is This a Big Deal?
So, I was listening to the radio on my way home from work and the big dicussion was how horrible the WVU allegations are for Rich Rodriguez. The argument that was being made ws that with the allegations here at Michigan everyone fell on one side of the fence or the other. Either you felt it was an honest mistake, or you thought he was dirty, dirty, dirty. However, now that this happened at WVU, they didn't understand how you could believe it was an honest mistake.
I don't see how this woudl change anyone's opinion one way or the other. If he's dirty, he's probably going to be dirty everywhere he goes (for the record, I don't believe he's a blatent cheater). However, if it's an honest mistake, wouldn't he keep to the same practice schedule he used at WVU? Why would it be different? Hell, I'd be more upset if the practice issues only started once he got to Michigan. That seems worse to me. So, if I'm missing how the WVU cement his reputation as a dirty guy, please let me know.
Stuff like this is just getting so incredbly old. It's just another reason to hear people bitch about the guy, and I can't stand it. Thank God the season is less than a month away.
This is a big deal because part of the allegations concern the conduct and the attitude of Rodriguez himself. Up until now, the Michigan violations have been blamed on a combination of Athletic Department idiocy and one overzealous assistant who got fired. It's a lot harder to make either one of those arguments now.
August 6th, 2010 at 10:05 AM ^
See any of the multiple posts pointing out that the practice continued at WVU after RR's departure.
August 6th, 2010 at 10:15 AM ^
Was the assistant who got fired from UM working for West Virginia?
Were the compliance department people from UM working for WVU at the same time?
Michigan can no longer blame this on a few isolated dumbass beauracrats who suck at paperwork or an overzealous assistant.
The practice may have continued under Stewart, but it started under Rodriguez. Two different sets of compliance people. Rodriguez is the common denominator. That makes it harder to persuade somebody that Rodriguez promotes an atmosphere of compliance.
August 6th, 2010 at 10:24 AM ^
This is a very good point. At the end of the day, I still view these violations as ticky-tack stuff that probably occurs in most programs, but for those of us that have been defenders of RR (myself included), the defense becomes that much more difficult to make with a straight face. Michigan did NOT have these issues prior to RR's arrival. The problems started when RR came. Now, we find out that these problems were something that RR was doing for a couple of years while he was at WVU, as well.
That said, it really could be that he simply had an erroneous interpretation of these rules, and he carried that interpretation with him from WVU to UM, but from a purely "optics" point of view, this doesn't look good.
August 6th, 2010 at 11:04 AM ^
UM stated in their response to the allegations that they found instances of non compliance back into the '07 season (or was it '06?).
I see your points (Hannibal and michgoblue) and I'm not trying to pick a fight. I'm just saying I don't believe it's as big of a hit as you're making it out to be. I'm more in line with the poster who earlier wrote that these new developments really don't move the needle either way.
August 6th, 2010 at 11:35 AM ^
...because if RichRod receives a show cause order from the NCAA after Michigan's hearing, the WVU allegations could result in a potential finding of repeat violator and additional punisments/restrictions. A2.com has the details.
What might change is Michigan’s approach to next week’s NCAA meeting, at least according to Michael Buckner, a Florida attorney who frequently represents universities in NCAA cases.
“For the Michigan hearing, the West Virginia Notice of Allegations will not have a direct impact on the actual proceedings of the hearing because they are separate and distinct cases,” Buckner said. “However, it’s going to be the silent entity in the hearing room. Everyone’s going to know about it but no one’s going to talk about it.
“And if I was Michigan and if I was coach Rodriguez, the West Virginia case would impact my hearing strategy.”
The reasoning behind this, Buckner said, is because the NCAA can place a “show cause” order on Rodriguez out of the Michigan hearings, which the school would then have to monitor.
And when West Virginia goes in front of the committee, if Rodriguez is found guilty there, the punishment on Rodriguez could escalate in the number of years the order is in place, the number of days he can be on the field coaching or the number of days Rodriguez can recruit off-campus. Plus, he can be found as a repeat violator during the West Virginia hearings if he has a show-cause order attached during the Michigan hearings, Buckner said.
Buckner said the typical show-cause order lasts between two and three years.
“So for Michigan,” Buckner said, “your hearing strategy will be to get into this hearing and try to make sure that there’s no show-cause order against Rodriguez.”
and discipline against WVU results in Michigan is brought back in front of the infractions committee as to why additional discpline should not be imposed, the "cause" is that the conduct at WVU predated the conduct at Michigan, could not have been readily ascertained by the Michigan athletic department, and had nothing to do with Michigan. How would WVU sanctions make Michigan a repeat offender?
The crime is KNOWINGLY receiving stolen property. Not buying something you later find out is stolen.
While one legal expert said this latest revelation should not affect Michigan's appearance before the Committee on Infractions, the committee undoubtedly will know of this latest issue that also involves Rodriguez. "It's going to be that silent person in the room that everyone knows is there but that no one is going to talk about," said Michael Buckner, a Florida lawyer who has represented universities in NCAA investigations. "The committee only considers the case before it -- West Virginia is not before them." Buckner said this latest information should directly affect Michigan's strategy before its hearing. He said it's unlikely U-M brings up the West Virginia investigation either directly or indirectly. "The only way I can see West Virginia coming into the Michigan case is if there are questions for Michigan about when they hired coach Rodriguez, what type of due diligence did they do."http://www.detnews.com/article/20100806/SPORTS0201/8060325/NCAA-accuses…
August 6th, 2010 at 12:08 PM ^
it could cause him to be suspended for practices, recruit visits, maybe even more. The ncaa really smells blood and is going after RR imo.
WVU claims they told and warned him that he was not following the rules. WVU in hindsight shot itself in the foot. It released that claim seemingly to distance itself from UM and RR and the ncaa investigation but now it shows that they knew he was noncompliant but did not enforce the rules with him or Stewart.
It is a nightmare for RR to say the least, now he will have to provide 2 responses, go to two hearing, and get two verdicts. Lots of money going to defend this too. If RR doesn't succeed at UM, his prospects look extremely dim in the college FB world.
August 6th, 2010 at 12:15 PM ^
who has been supplying quotes, on demand, to the Free Press and AA.com, since the beginning of the NCAA investigation.
"imo."
I think you have wildly exagerated and misinterpreted the WVU response. Bill Stewart is now the bearer of the exact same allegation as to Rich Rodriguez; "failure to encourage an atmosphere of compliance."
The Florida attorney "expert" mentioned that in other cases involving (one can only presume, since he didn't make it clear) violations, coaches were sanctioned with restrictions on recruiting visits. There were no recruiting violations alleged at Michigan. There are no recruiting violations alleged at WVU. There will be no "recruiting" sanctions imposed on Rich Rodriuguez.
imo.
but that's me. I don't see how any coach who is personally implicated by the ncaa for actions taking place at two schools walk away with no punishment, however innocent his acts may be or seem. The ncaa will direct some of its ire or flex its muscle directly at the coach, just to prove a point, which seems to be the ncaa's new mantra. I also don't recall any of UM's self-imposed sanctions that limit RR individually. RR is claiming to be 100% non-culpable which is fine but I just find it hard to believe the ncaa will let him move on unscathed.
And then read the University of Michigan's response. There is only one allegation pertaining to Rodriguez in the Michigan case; it is for his allegedly failing to "encourage an atmosphere of compliance."
The NCAA expects all of its member schools to be self-enforcing. That is the credo that they all sign onto, with participation in the NCAA. The NCAA says that it doesn't have the power or the resources to be essentially a prosecutor.
And so with the investigation of 2009-10, Michigan's own lawyers co-investigated with NCAA lawyers. And Michigan admitted to all but one allegation, and self-imposed sanctions that were responsive to each and every self-admitted allegation.
The one allegation that Michigan denied, and the only allegation that Rich Rodriguez needed to respond to, was the allegation that Coach Rodriguez failed to encoruage and atmosphere of compliance.
I expect the NCAA to accept Michigan's self-imposed sanctions, because I think that is all that the evidence supports. Yes, I do not think that there should be any additional sanctions with respect to, or in the form of a show cause order regarding Rich Rodriguez, because I believe my University and its very fine lawyers, and I believe Coach Rodriguez and his lawyer, and I haven't seen a shred of evidence of Coach Rodriguez failing to encourage an atmosphere of compliance.
I don't know why one illegitimate allegation by the NCAA should give credence to another allegation.
August 6th, 2010 at 12:17 PM ^
[double-post, sorry; is the Board working very badly today for anyone else?]
August 6th, 2010 at 10:48 AM ^
And by bowling, I mean crush the living hell out of UConn.
I'm now crabby as hell.
I don't care what comes first.
The Zombie Apocalypse or Sep 4th I'm ready for both just fucking get here please.
interpret this stuff. I moved on months ago and just want to see one of our players knock someones helmet off on Sept 4th. Go Blue!!!
I'd be more convinced that RR is willing to cheat if his behavior changed under different compliance departments. To me, that would be more indicative of someone pushing the limits of what they can get away with.
Seems to me the one thing consistent between U of M + RR, WVU + RR, and WVU + Stewart is the NCAA's incomprehensible rules.
Has anyone pointed out that Rodriguez is the one who told the NCAA to go investigate WVU?
He flat out told ncaa investigators that he had been running things the same way since 2005. The WVU allegations have no bearing on the August hearing. The NCAA was already fully aware of how Rodriguez was running things and the length of time he was doing it.
.... MgoShoe and wolverine1987, that is.
The WVa allegations make Michigan's hearing in a week more complicated and Coach Rod's defense more difficult.
They also place Michigan squarely back in the press spotlight on the eve of a new season for all the wrong reasons. It's not just the [PAPER REDACTED] anymore.
It was good that AD Brandon put out a quick statement in support of Coach Rod. The latter's margin for error at this point is exceedingly small.
I like the Coach, I think he can succeed, but any Michigan fan that doesn't see all this as very negative for the program and the University are just trading the rose colored glasses in for blinders.
.....
In related news, according to the [PAPER REDACTED], one of the members of the NCAA panel hearing Michigan's case is a deputy AD of Notre Dame!
The fix is in?
more difficult. If the NCAA even ASKS about WVU, RichRod merely says the truth, that he has been running things the same way because he though that was correct. As did Bill Stewart, as did Lloyd Carr. Yes, we had GA doing wrong things under LC too. It will not upset our defense nor make our punishment any worse.
Edit: Also, the last thing ND wants is for us to get totally screwed. They love their moneymaking rivalry with us way too much.
August 6th, 2010 at 10:03 AM ^
Sven... the NCAA already knew. This cannot affect Rodriguez in anyway. So now he misinterpreted the rules for 4 years instead of one and a half. The NCAA knew this. He told the NCAA that he had been running things the same way at WVU. The CARA forms not being turned in is a UofM compliance problem. Did anyone notice that in 3 years at WVU, Rodriguez only exceeded practice limits by a totaly of 1 hour and 15 minutes?
Too many grad assistants and non-coaches being involved in coaches meetings and unofficial practices are the allegations that fall squarly on Rodriguez for misinterpreting rules. He'd been doing this for 4 years, and let NCAA investigators know about it.
August 6th, 2010 at 10:17 AM ^
... but all I know is the only "violation" Michigan is challenging is that Coach Rod "failed to promote an atmosphere of compliance."
The WVa allegations would seem to support this finding by showing some historical pattern.
They aren't directly relevant to the Michigan facts, but they could exert an influence on panel members. They read the news, too, even, heaven forbid, [PAPER REDACTED].
And certainly WVa has the means and the motive to throw Coach Rod under the bus.
August 6th, 2010 at 10:36 AM ^
Incorrect. This only means that compliance departments around the country have no idea how to interpret NCAA rules. The fact that WVU and UM thought what Rod doing was within the rules validates his actions as honest mistakes. Compliance is responsible for interpreting and certifying coaches' actions. Further, the actions continued under Stewart and WVU compliance did nothing. If they throw RR under the bus, they are also throwing Stewart under the bus. Not going to happen.
... my experience with (non-NCAA) compliance matters tells me that "there are no technical violations." The violation in question is explicitly directed at Coach Rod, fairly or unfairly.
From the standpoint of a regulator, whether a violation is an "honest mistake" goes to penalty, not the existence of the violation in the first place. The fact that "others do it" will fail in front of the NCAA, as it will in front of your local judge when you fight a speeding ticket,
I'm getting the feeling that the NCAA sort of knew about some of this stuff at WVa before they handed down the Michigan violations, especially #5. Sort of a scholastic/athletic sandbagging, if you will.
If we start winning -- this is water under the bridge and it doesn't matter.
If we don't start winning -- RR will be fired for a lack of winning, not because of this, and it doesn't matter.
August 6th, 2010 at 10:00 AM ^
August 6th, 2010 at 10:20 AM ^
You make good points here and in your response to me above. I guess I've always read into compliance asking for the job descriptions to indicate that they knew something was up, but as you point out, that isn't necessarily true.
As for Labadie, I agree. It just seems like he got cornered into a no-win situation and decided to just stop doing anything. Certainly not appropriate, but maybe not as nefarious as previously indicated.
August 6th, 2010 at 12:05 PM ^
August 6th, 2010 at 10:40 AM ^
Labadie ROYALLY screwed up, and that's why he is now out of athletics and with Blue Cross/Blue Shield. If the CARA forms had been turned in on time, there is no NCAA investigation.
August 6th, 2010 at 11:47 AM ^
August 6th, 2010 at 12:22 PM ^
If all of Michigan football's CARA reports had been timely and properly handled according to Michigan's own procedures (not, as you rightly point out, any NCAA rules), then there would have been no July, 2009 CARA-Audit memo.
Without that memo being leaked (despite the fact that the Auditors themselves thought there was no violation, and they said so), there would have been no August, 2009, Rosenberg/Snyder/Free Press story.
Without that (fabricated) story, there would have been no NCAA investigation.
But in any regard, that would mean the violations would still be going on. Which isn't a good thing. Not a great thing we're the only one getting hoisted on our own petard (well, one of two, now, at this point)...but your logic that if the violations were done, but if reporting went on normally, and it wasn't caught, so no one had to ask if there were violations being committed, so there wouldn't be paperwork that someone could wrongly leak, that the Freep could run with, and make stuff up with, so the NCAA would come in, and find the original stuff that did happen but the Freep wasn't claiming...is more than a bit convoluted. So I think I'm still more right than you.
I've read your post three times, and I can't understand it.
August 6th, 2010 at 10:09 AM ^
If WVU continued to follow the previous practice of practice, then it would seem the new incoming coach (Stewart) would also be unaware of the rules. Do we actually think for one minute that Stewart would knowingly break the rules as a newly crowned HC? For anyone to insinuate that RR is a cheat is a huge reach. It appears that these so-called rules are arbitrary and capricious at best. The NCAA should clean them up before punishing anyone. I think we need to keep this in perspective; these charges are about stretching, not about buying athletes vehicles and other goodies. This is ridiculous in my opinion.
August 6th, 2010 at 10:42 AM ^
It just sucks that this is coming forward because the national spotlight is once again shined brightly on RR. This honestly did not change my opinion of him because the rules he broke does not make him a dirty man. The only thing I am concerned about is how this will affect the NCAA's ruling against Michigan on August 13th.
August 6th, 2010 at 10:49 AM ^
Here's a decent article on the investigation - except for the part where the former WVU President throws RR under the bus.
http://www.dailymail.com/Sports/201008060215
"Based on what I've read and what I understand from the letter from the NCAA, the bulk of the alleged NCAA violations are precisely the type of things Rodriguez was asking for in those final contract negotiations and precisely the type of things certain donors - and some of our more vocal donors - wanted me to give him," said former WVU President Mike Garrison.
"Whatever he wanted, they said, 'Please, just do it and whatever it costs we'll pay for it.' It was precisely the type of thing we told him we couldn't do because of NCAA rules. It goes right to the heart of why he said we blew up his deal."
August 6th, 2010 at 11:16 AM ^
At the suggestion of rule-breaking that they allowed Bill Stewart to continue it until just this very year. I call B.S.
Garrison sez "we told [Rodriguez] he couldn't do [what he wanted] because of NCAA rules." So I guess, per Garrison, WVU refused to let Rodriguez pursue his nefarious practices, so he left. Once he was gone, though, WVU evidently green-lighted the very same practices by Stewart (or so the NCAA alleges, at least). And, according to the NCAA, WVU had been doing this same stuff all along, both under Rodriguez and Stewart. So, yeah, Garrison's comments make all kinds of sense!
August 6th, 2010 at 11:25 AM ^
RR wasn't asking for the wrong type of personnel to watch summer practices or more stretching time, he was asking for textbooks and free tickets for HS coaches and a website. I think Mr. Garrison has been talking to Mr. Hand.
August 6th, 2010 at 10:54 AM ^
I like the NCAA cracking down on this stuff. If the practices are supposed to be voluntary and unsupervised, then they should be.
I have no problem believing RR had voluntary workouts at WV and M supervised. I have no problem believing that voluntary workouts are not voluntary in RR's world. If true RR needs to change his ways and get in compliance.
August 6th, 2010 at 11:13 AM ^
"Unsupervised" is distinctly not the rule, which is entirely the problem here. There are "allowed" supervisors on the field during "voluntary practices" for "safety" reasons. Those people are "not countable". The issue seems to be when "safety" becomes "coaching" and when S&C coaches and GAs are countable and not countable; again, these rules don't appear to be readily apparent, either.
Which is, frankly, the only problem I have with the "75 in a 70 mph zone" analogy. In that analogy, everyone knows the rules, but willfully disregards them. Here, its not clear that anyone knows the correct rule; not U-M, not WVU, not Coach Rod, not Lloyd Carr, not Bill Stewart.
For instance, in Michigan, there is a law on the books which says, "No man may seduce and corrupt an unmarried girl", or else he risks a five year prison term. How many people are guilty of that offense? Did you know it was even a law? Probably not. Should you go to jail for it anyway?
August 6th, 2010 at 11:57 AM ^
I don't know the correct rule either, however, I would not be surprised to find out that RR flaunted the rule. RR at his initial presser, talked about kids working harder than they ever have before. RR surely let it be known at his hiring that voluntary would not be voluntary, and in this, I disagree with RR.
August 6th, 2010 at 11:17 AM ^
The scenario leading up to last year's opener: negative press about RR, and opening game that had the potential to be an upset, but ended up being an ass thrashing by the boys in blue. Here we are a year later, and guess what? Yeah. I've said it on a previous thread, those poor bastards (being UConn) don't know what they're in store for.
... Revenge Tour, opening date 4 Sept 2010.
I will be there, screaming my fool head off when they run onto the field.
basically he has done the same thing from 2005. who was to think that he changed it up so much once he got here. he kept the same policies and no one in either department/university knew there was something wrong.........maybe check that side more.
by me