RR and Bill Stewart guilty of practice time violations at WVU

Submitted by MichTits on July 8th, 2011 at 4:10 PM

WVU applies self-imposed sanctions similar to what we are dealing with right now.

Former West Virginia coaches Rich Rodriguez and Bill Stewart have been found by the NCAA to have failed to monitor the duties and activities of graduate assistants and non-coaching staff members while they were at the school, a source said Friday.





July 8th, 2011 at 4:14 PM ^

Wow, I was just about to post this.  I was going to post the Freep link just to get Section 1 all riled up.  Looks like the same things happened when Rich Rod was at West Virginia.  How can anyone call this the Freep jihad anymore?  


July 8th, 2011 at 4:27 PM ^

"How can anyone call this the Freep jihad anymore?"


Is this even a serious question? I'd recommend reading these to re-familiarize yourself with the circumstances around the original Freep article and what a load of crap it was:





July 8th, 2011 at 4:46 PM ^

Until RR became the poster child, every program in the NCAA counted stretching as voluntary.  RR spit on the sidewalk in two places instead of one.  Big fucking deal...

As for the Freep's role, their reporters lied to a bunch of 18-19 year olds to get their information.  They turned RR in for the same thing they knew LC had been doing for years.  Rosenpuke's sole motivation was to get RR fired.  He was rewarded for being a dick by eventually getting his wish and a job writing for a national publication.  

Subsequently, DB hired a coach whose program at BSU got two years of probation on his watch.  Does that mean you're going to bitch about Hoke, too?  Give it a fucking rest.


July 8th, 2011 at 5:04 PM ^

None of the stretching with Rich's coaches was ever alleged to happen under Lloyd. The Cara forms not being done carried back to then, but that's not a violation, just a means to track things.


July 8th, 2011 at 7:26 PM ^

...in fact occur. It's undeniable that RichRod instituted practice practices that were meant to stretch (pun intended) the rules. It's telling (yes, telling) that essentially the same violations (incorrect interpretations of what constitutes countable activities and the misuse of non-coaching football staff) happened under his watch at two schools.

Who cares that CARA forms weren't kept religiously during the Carr regime? It wasn't until RichRod took over that the violations took place. CARA forms and violations do not equal cause and effect.


July 8th, 2011 at 8:26 PM ^

Maybe if CARA forms were kept regularly before RR got here, our compliance deparment would have caught this much earlier (since RichRod would have been filling them out since the day he stepped on campus) and we could have self reported them and nothing would have happened. You act as though CARA forms have nothing to do with possible violations. You are right, CARA forms and violations don't equal cause and effect. But how much of this entire mess could have been prevented had RichRod filled out CARA forms from day 1?


July 8th, 2011 at 8:32 PM ^

It would be telling if the violations happened at WVU, were caught, and then RR continued those practices despite having been punished previously. Like Kelvin Sampson at IU.

It would also be telling if the violations did't take place at WVU but did at Michigan as it would be indicative that Rodriguez received adequate compliance while at WVU and knowingly changed his practices when he came to Michigan. But that's clearly not the case and infact the violations occurred under two different coaching staffs.

Who cares about the CARA forms? I guess if you don't care that the purpose of the compliance department is:

"to maintain control of its athletics programs through the responsible administrators, faculty, and institutional bodies; to educate coaches, staff, student-athletes and other individuals involved with the athletics program in their institutional responsibilities under the rules; to develop operating systems within the athletics department and the University that provide guidance in how to work within the rules; and to discover and report any violations of the rules that occur."

then yeah, who cares? The lack of CARA forms and general compliance/Brad Labadie ineptitude shows that Michigan's compliance department only struck out on 4 out of those 4 semi-colon separated mission charges.

And while it's true that the violations only took place after Rodriguez took over (not sure how meaningful that statement is because if I remember correctly we never investigated the seasons prior), it's also true that we never had a newspaper dramatically overexaggerate the occurrence of major violations during the pre-Rodriguez years. If after all that they only found 15 minutes of stretching and some non-coaches watching 7-on-7s and conducting film sessions, then they certainly would have found something, especially with our piss poor compliance department and football administrators at work.


July 8th, 2011 at 8:49 PM ^

...abuses, the fact is that under RichRod, Michigan's football program committed violations that were the result of practices he brought from WVU. The compliance dept asked for the forms and were continually ignored. That they didn't aggressively follow up at a level above RichRod when that happened is certainly their fault and if they had, perhaps these would have become self-identified and self-reported violations. But the fault for the violations rest squarely on the shoulders of the HC.

RichRod was a crappy administrator who pushed the envelope on the rulebook (in this case at least) and ultimately pushed too hard to his and to Michigan's detriment.

#2 FEI offense, though. So he's got that going for him. Which isn't much.


July 8th, 2011 at 9:29 PM ^

...out of the failure to comply charge. But the COI's decision certainly doesn't mean it wasn't his own decision to count practice time the way he did and to assign his non-coaching staff to conduct coach-like activities. He's the person who made these decisions. Not the AD. Not the compliance dept. Not the Schembechler Hall janitorial staff.

No one else decided to do these things other than one Richard A. Rodriguez, Michigan Football Head Coach. So, yeah, he and he alone is responsible for the fact that the violations occurred.

Section 1

July 8th, 2011 at 9:38 PM ^

Not "Failure to comply," sport.

That's "Failure to promote an atmosphere of compliance."  Unilaterally withdrawn by the NCAA.  Rodriguez did no "squirming."  He attended the hearing.  He defended himself.  The University put its reputation on the line behind him.  They won.  Together.  They beat the NCAA after a full, exhaustive investigation on Allegation Four.

An unspecified institutional charge of "failure to suprevise" was hastily substituted, and that is what the parties settled on in the WVU case.


July 8th, 2011 at 9:53 PM ^

...sport. None of that changes anything about who was responsible for the violations. Not who was responsbile for leaking them. Not who was responsible for blowing them out of proportion. Not who was responsible for not uncovering them. But who actually directed that the Michigan Football program act in a manner inimical with its traditional dedication to doing things the right way (notwithstanding Yost's barnstormers, Kipke's phantom jobs program, and who knows what the hell else).

Section 1

July 8th, 2011 at 10:22 PM ^

You sound like Rosenberg, which is the worst thing I can say about anybody. 

Rosenberg and his compadres couldn't have made a big stink out of self-reported Secondary Violations.  And you couldn't, either.  No, it was Major Violations that made headlines.  Precisely the kinds of violations that Maryland avoided, and that Michigan got hit with, for no apparent reason than the way the story got started.  It is a perfectly self-fulfilling kind of idiocy.  It's a big story, because it is on the front page of one Detroit paper, and then in a thousand other places.  And so it gets a big investigation, and then a big finale. 

Major violations is what Rosenberg and Snyder wanted, and needed.  It is why they never once went to anybody in authority, who might be able to respond in a serious and meaningful way,  who might ask about what they were investigating, who might think to self-report Secondary Violations if they were thought to really exist.  No; Rosenberg and Snyder quite deliberately hid their story until the last possible moment.  To make sure that the best case could be made for Major Violations.

I fucking have a copy of Mark Snyder's FOIA email to Pat Sellinger asking for copies of "all U-M football-related rule violations (primary and secondary) in the past 12 months, since August of 2008..."  Dated August 19, 2009 at 10:12:51.  It was so that he and Rosenberg could get all preachy in their Sunday story about how Michigan hadn't any Major Violations in the past, but now, not so much.  Just like you're doing now.  If you're now feeling creepy, being in such close ideological proximity to Mark Snyder, it's for a reason.


July 8th, 2011 at 11:40 PM ^

I think you're creatively interpreting the findings. While it was certainly true that the harsh "promoting an atmosphere of non-compliance" was tossed, because no one thought he was actively telling/making people cheat, that's a big difference than making rules violation mistakes and not correcting them, by actions that started when he took over. He wasn't blameless, an innocent bystander, just one of many to blame. One of them with the most power... So while not an out and out, knowing cheater (which no one has argued), he was one who let HIS staff undertake actions that were against the rules. Maybe barely, but the NCAA didn't really care about barely. The original point wasn't that others shouldn't have told him to stop; they should have. (But basically telling the most powerful guy in the department to "stop" when he's the legacy of the other most powerful guy in the department, as you're trying Ronaldo with him isn't easy). But the acts that were violations were commuted by staff Rich brought in, doing practices he did at WV, piddly though they may have been.


July 8th, 2011 at 9:34 PM ^

...defended themselves to the hilt and it's great that they brought in the professionals to do so. If I had been hired to do so, I sure as hell would have worked every angle possible to minimize the damage wrought by our screwed up head coach since my loyalty is to the institution, not to a person. On the other hand, if defending said person to the hilt worked to protect the institution, I'd have done that as well. Then I would have fired his ass as soon as he gave me the chance to do so.

No, my name is not Dave Brandon.


July 9th, 2011 at 9:03 AM ^

According to the NCAA, the practices that resulted in major violations and the loss of 3 football scholarships for Ball State started in the spring of 2003.  Brady Hoke was hired in December 2002 - after 8 years at Michigan. 

Do you think he brought those practices with him or are you going to be inconsistent?  




July 9th, 2011 at 8:32 PM ^

...that were about excessive practice were for the softball program, not the football program. The football program was hit because there was poor oversight of the book loan program resulting in players obtaining impermissable benefits by obtaining books for classes they weren't enrolled in and profiting from that. Since it appears that Ball State corrected its oversight of the book loan program and there's no allegation of similar practices at SDSU during Hoke's tenure, I doubt that that's followed him. So no, I'm not being inconsistent. Of course, if it turns out that Hoke sucks at administrating a football program to the degree that RichRod does, I'll be just as critical of him. My guess is that I don't have to worry about that.


July 11th, 2011 at 11:49 AM ^

I agree. I don't think the RR's handling of practice time rule were worth of fraction of the Freep jihad, but they were pretty clearly pushing the limit and it looks like its been going on long enough with him it was intentional or at least a habit.  I loved a lot of things about RR, but opening us up for a slap on the wrist from the NCAA was disappointing even if not for anything with great moral failings.


July 8th, 2011 at 7:18 PM ^

and related to textbooks. 




"The infractions involved 89 athletes in 10 sports from the spring semester of 2003 to the end of the 2004-05 school year. A separate investigation is ongoing involving former men's basketball coach Ronny Thompson, who resigned in July amid accusations that he and his assistants broke NCAA rules by attending voluntary offseason workouts in 2006 and 2007 and lying about their involvement."


"At the time, the university's bookstore had a computerized system that placed $1,000 per semester in each athlete's account, but there was no system to check the class schedules to make sure the books corresponded with the classes the athletes were taking.

Those whose schedules did not require $1,000 worth of textbooks were able to use the balance to obtain books for friends and other athletes who were not on scholarship, the NCAA found.

The university has been reimbursed for the value of the books and "all books involved were accounted for," Collins said."


July 8th, 2011 at 11:18 PM ^

I guess I don't see what the issue is with the books? Kids arent able to use unused textbook money to aid other students?

Perhaps if they were accused of selling the textbooks they got for free, I would get it, but that doesn't appear to be in the allegation.


July 11th, 2011 at 11:40 AM ^

Hoke suspended the offending football players involved before any investigation took place for what it's worth.  The compliance officers didn't communicate to the athletes in like a dozen sports that the book purchase pre-paid account wasn't theirs to use to help friends. The athletes returned all the books that were purchased. Those compliance people were disciplined by the University.   

It had nothing to do with Hoke.   

Rodriguez was ultimately  in charge of correctly reporting practice time and it looks like he bended the rules before.  Athletic compliance is obviously more on a football coach then Academic. Quit making excuses for a guy that thankfully is no longer Michigan's problem.   



July 11th, 2011 at 11:53 AM ^

Whenever someone says stuff like "thankfully is no longer Michigan's coach" it always seems a little cheap, even when I agree.  The guy was a nice guy who worked really damn hard for our program.  Yes, the buck stops with him for the violations and his management of the team was inadequate to the level of being dismissed, but its not like he did anything to screw over the team so badly we can't manage a respectful goodbye.

Section 1

July 8th, 2011 at 6:19 PM ^

I've been working all day, and was very busy this afternoon because I took a little time out earlier to read the complete text of the Response by Gene Marsh and Bill King on behalf of Tressel.

But I don't need to post anything about this.  Everybody's doing just fine; making all the points and all the arguments that I might have made, perfectly well on their own.  My work is largely done here.  It isn't even remotely about me.  I wouldn't have linked to the Free Press today but only because the Board has expressed a preference against that.  Which I've always honored, quite happily.  I'd post any necessary Freep links if the Board felt otherwise.

The real tin-foil hat theory is the one that paints me alone as the antagonist of the Free Press.  Any major anti-Freep themes that I've hit on are ones that Brian Cook has initiated, and that I've simply tried to document very carefully.  I dare say I'd be on the winning side if there were a MGoPoll of "Do you think that the Free Press was the major force in unfair public treatment of Coach Rodriguez?"  My thinking about all of it is nothing less than the mainstream thinking of this Board.  I'm guilty only of writing about the subject in as much documentable detail as I can.

As for the idea that I cannot currently post a new thread:  The reason, all should be aware, is that I was docked something like 11,800 MGoPoints by a moderator, for reasons that have never been explained to me, and which were not clear to anybody else in the thread that led to the "punishment."  I didn't break any rule of the Board, and nobody said that I did.

But I am glad to know that everybody is concerned about my cyber-whereabouts.  Have a nice weekend!


July 8th, 2011 at 11:29 PM ^

Because I knew you'd never post "Rich dinged again at his last school", because, well, it doesn't fit your propaganda mode.
<br>And a number of people tried to nicely explain why you were docked, and what was annoying people. You just refused to listen.

Section 1

July 9th, 2011 at 12:01 AM ^

Nobody ever told me what Board rule I was supposed to have broken.  I think there was general agreement that I hadn't broken any rules.

Nobody explained nicely, and nobody explained not-nicely.  Nobody explained anything.  I asked about being docked, and nobody answered.  Actually, I asked, after getting the form e-mail telling me not to ask.  The email that assured me that life was not fair:  "Most of the time [penalization] is fair. Sometimes it's not. This is life. Please don't email me about this unless you think someone is gaming the system; I know it's not perfect... "

So don't try to put it on me.  Maybe moderators have bad days.  Maybe moderators need to police content that is in full technical compliance with all rules, in the interest of Board tranquility.  I said at the time if the humor was not welcome, they could take it down.  But I was individually punished for no discernable reason.  That's not my problem; that's a moderator's problem.

"Propaganda mode" ?

OMG Shirtless

July 9th, 2011 at 9:19 AM ^

I'm not going to look up exactly which rule it falls under, but starting a thread with the intention of starting a shitstorm is pretty obviously against those rules.  I also gave you an example, starting one thread that says, "RichRod got a raw deal" is fine, it's within the rules.  Posting the same shit every other day is trolling.  Your schtick has gotten to the point of trolling.  Maybe it's time to start looking for a new place to post your nonsense.  I've suggested starting your own blog.  Tater did, I just wish he could leave his conspiracy theories over there.  I think the GBMW board is right up your alley.  Or maybe the the Victor Board.  Some of those people are also batshit crazy, your go to crutch even posts over there under the name FunkyMoses.

Section 1

July 9th, 2011 at 10:39 AM ^

starting a thread with the intention of starting a shitstorm is pretty obviously against those rules. 

I intended only to poke some fun at Braylon, within a few minutes of the news breaking that he had driven his Audi off the road on Belle Isle at 3:40 am.

The "shitstorm" was 100% supplied by the Braylon FanBoyzz.

And as you already know, poking fun at Braylon was basically started by this Blog's host and proprietor.  Well, maybe not.  Braylon sort of started his own self-ridicule. 


July 10th, 2011 at 12:01 AM ^

To see your own culpability proves my point. The rule you broke isn't a written one, it's a common sense one - don't be a douchebag. If the rest of the "board community" needs to be placated over you, maybe it's not everyone else...and it is you. You might want to consider that, if you are able. The mods are doing just fine...they're not the one's negbombed to posting hell.


July 8th, 2011 at 4:17 PM ^

Regardless of on the field (and in spite of his cash flow) I do not envy RR since the week before Thanksgiving 2007. This is a lot of shit he's been through.