I'm sure many are hoping that is what it is. But reality is -- one low level staffer on a coaching staff of 25 isn't "all this going on around him". The guys job was to figure out signs of other teams. As has been stated on here -- it is completely fine to trade info with other teams, so why wouldn't Harbaugh think that is exactly what was done?
Right. That's it. There's no text to argue against, it's an opinion. And I think it's a wrong opinion based on the information presented; which is what MIchigan will argue if/when they challenge it.
Unless it is announced today -- they won't suspend him any later this week, as they will want to give UM time to figure out who will be the HC for the game. That's why I think it will be Maryland and that's it.
They only gave them a notice of allegations, as far as I know. Basically, it lets them know they could possibly give the program some form of punishment.
Ryan Day is not satan …. That is just silly
Maybe because no one was smart enough to send someone to watch a future opponent play? I mean these people weren’t smart enough to vary their signs?
No, it isn't. "it isn't the same" is not an explanation. That's a "I want it to be different but can't explain how".
"The Big Ten Conference expects all contests involving a member institution to be conducted without compromise to any fundamental element of sportsmanship. Such fundamental elements include integrity of the competition, civility toward all, and respect, particularly toward opponents and officials."
The UM fans here have no concept of "Agency" as you have pointed out. I've posted it a dozen times. Water off the back.
Children only speak when spoken to. Pipe down and let the adults talk.Whatever you say Cheater.
I wish you understood this is the first and only cogent thing you have typed in this entire thread. 140+ pages tells me you won't understand that.
But we aren't talking liability laws here. We're talking NCAA rules. And NCAA rules very specifically say that anything not called out as illegal, is by definition legal. The rule in question about in person scouting has absolutely no language in it that would limit it to only people hired for money. If the argument is that a 3rd party providing information to a school, a 3rd party who got the information via in person scouting, is illegal; it's irrelevant WHO that 3rd party was.
You can only control what you can control. So where you can you enforce the rules and hammer those that down follow.
No, boosters get a school in trouble because in recruiting rules they are SPECIFICALLY called out by rule as someone who can get a school in trouble.
Of course Satan is in Tuscaloosa.