Donna Dangles: We Skate

[Ethnicsands]

Not for nothin, but you sound butthurt. You jump into debate by calling me out directly, with a 'you're getting crushed here' pile on and are then all up in arms when I respond to you. If you can't handle an exchange, then don't bother addressing me with your post. And your logic sucks. It just does. No one intelligent can think that it's evidence of our handling this situation well that we didn't copy USC's approach. You're taking two extremes and positing them as the only alternatives, when literally 99.9% of the choice-set is between those extremes.

Meanwhile, you say it was 'common knowledge' that we were going to lose some scholarships. What does that even mean? Common knowledge by who? Fans? I am not suggesting it wasn't a real possibility, but anyone who claims we're in a good place because their hypothesized alternative places are worse is jerking themselves off in this discussion.

Well played Ethnic,
When in doubt call people names! Dude we tried to do the opposite of USC because we saw how they got extra penalties for trying to hide stuff. We had faith that the NCAA would recognize this and we did everything on our side to hopefully get off easier and move the blame to the coaches involved to get less penalties for the institution.

Though you think I am down playing the things we have already given up, you have yet to recognize that we were in fact going to get hit with scholarship losses. And that is by far the worst punishment we could have faced. Once this thing is over and we dont have to recruit against the NCAA and other teams we will be able to pull in more kids. If we can somehow escape scholarship losses than that is a much bigger win than losing the bowl games and practices. Scholarship losses are what bury teams. I am not down playing those losses but seeing the silver lining in the things we gained by not having those practices by gaining a recruiting advantage. Its called making the best of a bad situation. If you actually thought we were not getting any scholly losses than you dont know what your talking about, even AG came right out and said it was a hard cap because of losses they knew were coming. I thought it was common knowledge we wer gonna lose some scholarships but apparently you did not think so.....

And the best for last, I am dumb because you have no idea what should have been done differently you just think something should have been done? Again well played, I got nothing on that logic. Its not so much that she was laying back and enjoying it, her hands are tied until the NOA comes. Once we did all they asked of us it is a wait and see game. Then when they come out and ***** it up, people anted her to come out and threaten to sue right then and there, but she was patient and struck at the right time. She does deserve some credit for that.

I have offered the same thing as you in this discussion, an opinion. I just dont have to call people names to bring an opinion to a conversation, you on the other hand are doing it every other post. And that says a lot more about you than anyone else. Good luck with your argument.

 

[bomb]

Are you serious? Two years ago most Miami fans thought we were in deep ****! The program was already down from a decade of irrelevance and the NCAA was about to drop the hammer on the program and put it completely out of it's misery. What would you have done differently that Shalala didn't do? Play hardball and play right into their trap like USC did? Look where that got them.

You keep talking about Miami missed out these bowl games but fail to mention that those bowl games meant jackshyt! Oh no! Miami didn't play in the echo weedeater bowl after going 6-6???? Oh no! Miami went 7-5 backing into an ACC championship game because UNC couldn't bowling either and gave up a shot at FSwho??? Give me a break! You take the self imposed bowl bans while your program is already down and force the NCAA to dig dirt to satisfy your own punishment when you know they already have a vendetta. Look at where it got the NCAA! They had nothing but minor violations and got in bed with the conman and focked their whole case.

You have an axe to grind. You don't like Shalala and won't give her the credit she deserves right now. I'll take time served of giving up some meaningless bowl games rather than waiting around all that time while we sucked to then have to give up real bowl games and scholarship reductions any day of the week.,

Are you serious, is the question. Because _some_ fans got their panties in a wad over media hype two years ago, that means Donna has done a good job? Brilliant logic.

Two bowl games plus the ACCCG means 'jackshyt'? Really? How easy for you to say so. I bet the players and coaches who missed those games don't feel that way. I bet you Donna Shalala herself doesn't feel that way. She made that clear. She feels it's been a high price. How funny that you, in a flailing effort to shield her from even light criticism, go waay past anything she'd claim herself.

Axe to grind? Sorry, but that's you and a bunch of other idiots here, who without thinking proclaim DS brilliant for putting out a tough statement years into an investigation, then when I have the temerity to suggest maybe she's not been the flawless leader of the football program that her acolytes proclaim, y'all turn to attack me. Well, you fail at it. And your agenda is clear. I have none, by contrast. I've simply called bull**** on the folks who think at this point in this investigation, that DS deserves crowning for brilliance at card playing, as well as those who seem to forget how mismanaged our program has been for a decade. When speaking the truth becomes an agenda, try responding back to me. Until then, maybe you can apply some ointment to your butthurtness.

Oh, and the real irony here is folks proclaiming her brilliant for how she played her cards, who when pushed on it, turn up their hands and ask 'what would you have had her do differently -- she had no alternatives.' If there was nothing for her to do differently, then she hasn't been brilliant to date, either. So which is it?

Sands... You're just wrong here. If we get off just losing those post season games... It will have been one of the most masterful displays ever seen.

You might remember in both cases, the incoming recruiting class thought the bowl bans were behind them. Look at the 2012 class AG was still able to bring in with this cloud over us.

Guess what? Miami ****ed up. We cheated. Kids got paid. Coaches violated the rules. If this is what we get, we need to go out and get a bronze statue of Donna and put it in front of Hecht.

She waited until she saw the whites of their eyes. She didn't waste any bullets, and were the good guys now. We're the program that investigated itself, helped the NCAA, didn't try to cover up, and still had a vendetta placed on us.

She's a genius. She's playing chess and you're playing checkers.

You go on believing that, bomb. I surely don't.

All you're doing is being a sycophant. There's really nothing to say to someone who thinks a terse press release years after an investigation is done is somehow evidence of the hand of God.

And since she couldn't have known when the investigation started that the NCAA would step on its own ****, giving her credit for engineering their own mistakes seems like overreaching.

Why are you insulting me? There was nothing sycophantic about anything I said. I think she played it perfectly, based on where we are right now, today. That is all.

 

[caneman73]

FYI... VP of Enforcement Julie Row Lach was just CANNED!!!!! Things are looking Up

JC

NCAA's form of self imposing

 

[bomb]

This is playing out exactly like a few of us said it would. Excellent salvo by President Shalala. She played her hand perfectly here waiting for the exact right time to unleash some fury. Had she made this statement prior to the conclusion of this fake self-investigation it wouldn't have been nearly as powerful.

Furthermore, as I've told you since finding out about the latest bit of malfeasance from the NCAA perpetrating a fraud on the bankruptcy court, the ENTIRE investigation is corrupt. President Shalala clearly agrees with that take. Trusting the NCAA to ferret out the "bad" parts of the investigation and then to proceed to impose a penalty simply because they conducted some fake self-investigation would be akin to trusting Ted Bundy to babysit your hot 14 year old daughter after he admitted to having some murderous inclinations.

Here's another point that came to mind today after reading again that the NCAA paid Pig ***** Perez $20,000.00 for her assistance in this case. Based upon what I've seen from her, her hourly rate can't be much more than $200.00. Simple math would tell us at $200.00/hour, she would have spent 100 hours of billable time working on this matter for the NCAA. I haven't seen anyone broach the breadth of this payment and the work that it would entail. 100 hours!! Let that resonate. That deposition with Allen couldn't have taken more than 8 hours.

That leaves approximately 92 hours of her time unaccounted for. What else did she do for them that no one is talking about? 92 hours of billable time means that she would have had to spend over two 40 hour work weeks (5 days per week at 8 hours per day) doing nothing but working on this NCAA stuff. Something's extra rotten in Denmark, lads.

Add to this the fact that the NCAA became partners with Shytzero by paying him $4,500.00 while he sat in jail, and you have one of the most egregious acts of civil terrorism that I've ever seen.

Mr. Chise,

If you add up every allegation (the Behinana dinners, the $10K to DQJ etc.) it is amazing how little they are compared to the amount of money the NCAA was willing to spend on their shady business. The NCAA spent a lot more then the alleged benefits received. It is amazing how much BS is going on.

From day 1 this all seemed like BS with very little out there that could be provable or mattered.

Congrats NCAA, thanks for wasting 2.5 years to get here.

It would be interesting to see the grand total wasted by the NCAA and by UM having to defend this fraud all based on the allegations of a slimy piece of **** rotting in jail for bilking people out of a billion dollars. Does not compute.

Except to Shapiro because this is what he does. No doubt he has been laughing his a** off for the last 2 1/2 years over all of this.

It's hard to laugh when you're getting raped in the yard.

 

[Ethnicsands]

It will have been one of the most masterful displays ever seen.

She's a genius. She's playing chess and you're playing checkers.

we need to go out and get a bronze statue of Donna and put it in front of Hecht.

All you're doing is being a sycophant. There's really nothing to say to someone who thinks a terse press release years after an investigation is done is somehow evidence of the hand of God.

Why are you insulting me? There was nothing sycophantic about anything I said.

Uh, otay.

Also, interesting for you to now claim the following as a defense of DS: "the incoming recruiting class thought the bowl bans were behind them. Look at the 2012 class AG was still able to bring in with this cloud over us." Somehow I expect when it comes to defending AG, you're going to admit that this investigation's length has harmed our recruiting, and yet here you are minimizing that in defense of DS. But you're not being a sycophant. Got it.

 

[JHallCanes]

Ah, the good ole days

 

[The Franchise]

Sands reminds me of Stallone in Over the Top. My dude is taking on all comers. Sands double-taped his right wrist this morning, pulled his ballcap down low and popped a couple Alleves.

 

[Canesfan1899]

Sands reminds me of Stallone in Over the Top. My dude is taking on all comers. Sands double-taped his right wrist this morning, pulled his ballcap down low and popped a couple Alleves.

LOl.

 

[Ethnicsands]

Sands reminds me of Stallone in Over the Top. My dude is taking on all comers. Sands double-taped his right wrist this morning, pulled his ballcap down low and popped a couple Alleves.

lol. i could use a few alleve.

 

[dycane]

I don't understand folks who keep insisting she's played this out well. This investigation has been extremely damaging to the U and we haven't even gotten the NOA yet. Nothing that has happened so far looks 'well played' to me. If she could go back to the beginning, she'd be wise to just do whatever Ohio State's President does whenever they get in trouble. Cough, fire someone, burn a few file cabinets, tell a joke at a press conference, and move on. The acquiescence strategy the U settled on certainly extended the investigation and reduced the pressure on the NCAA to do anything other than keep looking for trouble.

The really sad irony is if Emmert has any brains (or the BOD of the NCAA does), he should really resign. But if he resigns, it will just further drag this all out.

I'm actually surprised Emmert hasn't resigned yet. He reminds me of Bud Selig -- another owner/President who took on this type of role and decided he liked it, and became power hungry and entrenched as a result. If Emmert had any character or dignity, he'd hand his head over on a platter.

What would you suggest she should've done? Specifically.

You realize there was nothing she could've done to expedite things, correct? You realize that if she resisted, given who we are (the most hated university within the NCAA), the investigation may have dragged on even longer, right? You realize that by failing to cooperate she would've handed the COI a silver bullet to put into our collective head, right?

I know you think you're smart, and I'm sure you are, but I'm also sure that the people advising the President, as well as the President herself, are also quite competent and capable -- they certainly are more experienced in these matters and understand the dynamics (and people) of the NCAA better than you.

I'm also certain that our President knows more facts about the case than you, me, or anyone else pontificating on these boards. I'm guessing -- just a hunch -- that she is more politically astute and connected than you as well.

And in the end, whether you want to admit it or not, the fact is we sit here today in a position to get out of this mess relatively unscathed -- a prospect that NO ONE who understood how the NCAA works thought possible a year ago. Shockingly, moreover, the public and the media are behind us. Who would've thunk it in the aftermath of the Yahoo article when every talking head was calling for the death penalty?

So whatever winding road we took to get to this point means nothing; all that matters is that we are in a great position to emerge from this mess as a going concern. And the person driving the whole thing is the President. She let them dig their own grave as they praised her cooperation with each pitch of the shovel. And after praising her contributions and cooperation, Emmert is now absolutely stuck, standing in his grave, as he futilely tries to climb out and salvage his career. He can't unring the bell.

If I presented that as a likely scenario in September 2011, you would've said I'm dreaming. No chance. Well it's happened. So that, in a nutshell, is why I think she played this perfectly.

You know what they say about what happens when you assume, right?

Welcome to there. You're trying to talk yourself into something I'm not even sure you believe. Be my guest. But save me the condescending crap about what I know or don't know.

And your comment that we might get out of this 'unscathed' is so ignorant it's incredible. If this is unscathed, I can't wait to see what harmed looks like. We've suffered a ton already.

The death penalty? Because YAHOO! said so? Great logic.

You sound drunk. Go on thinking Donna did great here. I'll bet you a lot that Donna don't think she did great here.

Thanks for the concrete suggestions on what she should've done. I figured you'd skip past that and launch into some ad hominem attack to avoid the issue.

And if you're going to quote what I said, at least get it right. I said relatively unscathed, as in much better off than anyone imagined, except maybe you. That's beyond dispute for reasonable men. We're looking at worst case scenario loss of 15 scholarships. We were talking in USC terms a year ago.

Of course, my reference to the death penalty was in relation to public perception, not to what I or anyone else with a level head thought we were facing. But, again, continue with your mischaracterizations.

For such a professed contrarian who ostensibly supports open dialogue, you sure turn into a little testy b*tch when challenged.

Ah, Mr. whiny punk calls me names but says I'm the 'ad hominem' one. I'd tell you what I think of you but this isn't the WEZ.

Your post was arrogant and condescending and vapid, and I responded. You re-upped, because that is what stupid people do when challenged. Have at it.

'Relatively unscathed'? Really? Because people who know nothing were worrying about worse a year ago? Great thinking!

We've self-imposed two bowl bans and a third Conference Championship game ban. No one has ever done that. We've suffered a cloud over recruiting for years now. We've self-imposed various other limits. And that's 'relatively unscathed'? Maybe in your world. In the real world we've already paid a higher price than these allegations warranted, and we aren't done paying the piper yet.

And this investigation has dragged on forever, and while I can't prove it, I do think that it is in part because of the compliant poster the U took in the face of the investigation. Donna made quite clear that posture when the investigation was announced. And yet you ask 'what could she have done differently?' If she's done nothing differently from what anyone else could have done, I guess I'd ask you why you compliment her?

The real world? Here's reality: whatever you think the allegations warranted in your world, the NCAA was intent on burying us. And up until recently, so was the media and the public at large. Nothing could be more clear after reading the Report. The tactics employed and the scope of the investigation belie your suggestion that we could be in a better position now if under someone else's leadership. Instead of calling people stupid, drunk, etc, piece together a coherent argument based on facts as to what Donna could have, within reason, done differently to put us in a better position. Would love to hear it...

You ask me why I compliment her and I've already answered that. Today, right now, we sit in a position of leverage that I never thought possible. The President of the NCAA is on life support. The only reason he's not engaging in serious efforts to get this summarily disposed is because he doesn't think he can get the necessary committee approval. The case going to COI is tainted. The malfeasance of the investigators, the star witness, and the star witness' lawyer is firmly established in the record. Mitigating facts that would have never came to light are now in the record that will be reviewed by the COI, including the fact that the NCAA subsidized its star witness' prison account and phone.

If, for example, Miami would've taken a different approach, intervened, and successfully protected against Perez's line of questioning, then the NCAA would not have hung itself. And the appearance of Miami trying to object and intervene would have looked bad to the COI.

Instead, as I've stated time and again, we look golden (no pun intended). The COI will see that at every turn and juncture we cooperated. As Donna pointed out, we followed through on our commitment. We never interfered with the investigation. We were transparent throughout. And that history, especially when juxtaposed against the NCAA's behavior during the investigation, will be significant at the hearing. Donna took all their bullets out of their gun. The NCAA cannot say, "yes, we screwed up, but listen UM was uncooperative and obstructive. What our people did was inexcusable, but UM didn't help things by being uncooperative."

Moreover, Donna had to be careful about prematurely launching a PR campaign against the NCAA. She picked her spot perfectly. She gave the NCAA more than ample time to conduct its investigation and never openly criticized the institution. When the story about Perez broke, she issued a tempered statement of concern but again refrained from openly criticizing the NCAA and allowed it to perform an investigation, knowing of course that nothing good would come of that for the NCAA. And once the Report hit and the anti-NCAA sentiment was at an all-time high, she launched her first salvo.

Now Emmert sits in an impossible situation. He's got millions of dollars into this investigation. He's got years into this investigation. His enforcement staff is going to produce NOA built on a house of cards. The harsh self-imposed penalties were necessary to mitigate the uncertainty for our recruits and coaches, and the COI will now probably view them as sufficient. The public is demanding that the NCAA reform its practices because of this investigation. No one is calling for UM's head. To the contrary, the consensus is UM should walk at this point.

Hopefully that was clear enough for you.

 

[Ethnicsands]

That's actually a reasoned, well articulated perspective.

I don't agree with all your assumptions and inferences, but it's possible you're right.

It's also possible that the bend over and say 'ah' strategy led to an expanded and lengthened investigation.

You assume that because the NCAA seems like it's been **** bent on ******** UM that that was always the case, but that ignores basic truth about bureaucracies. They tend to get dug in on whatever they dig in on. The longer the investigation went on, the more the investigators had personal and institutional incentives to dig further, find more, find anything.

There is no way to know if DS's strategy was a good one or not. But insofar as the NCAA's current situation was self-inflicted and could not have been anticipated by DS, to defend her strategy you'd have to think it was the right one even if we were staring down the barrel of a serious NOA right now. Otherwise you're just crediting her with luck.

 

[dycane]

That's actually a reasoned, well articulated perspective.

I don't agree with all your assumptions and inferences, but it's possible you're right.

It's also possible that the bend over and say 'ah' strategy led to an expanded and lengthened investigation.

You assume that because the NCAA seems like it's been **** bent on ******** UM that that was always the case, but that ignores basic truth about bureaucracies. They tend to get dug in on whatever they dig in on. The longer the investigation went on, the more the investigators had personal and institutional incentives to dig further, find more, find anything.

There is no way to know if DS's strategy was a good one or not. But insofar as the NCAA's current situation was self-inflicted and could not have been anticipated by DS, to defend her strategy you'd have to think it was the right one even if we were staring down the barrel of a serious NOA right now. Otherwise you're just crediting her with luck.

All of my perspectives are reasoned and well articulated, my man...But, you're right that Donna is not a brilliant puppet master who has control over all the moving parts. There's a huge element of chance. And I also concede that the reason the NCAA is in this dreadful position has more to do with its incompetency and less to do with Donna and her team. But, the fact remains, our strategy set us up to be in this position rather than foreclosing it. And that's the best anyone could do in her position. That's not to say that many other Presidents would not have done the same thing. I simply think Donna and her team created and implemented a plan that was informed, proactive, patient, and well-measured. And as a result, I believe we are in the best position imaginable in light of all of the circumstances.

 

[DMoney]

John Infante's bylaw blog said it best: the cleanest option for the NCAA is to put out a conservative NoA, follow procedure up to the CoI, and let Miami off with time-served.

The best thing for us would be if the NoA is so neutered that they can't charge any more than Failure to Monitor. That way, we'd be able to operate this entire summer knowing there likely won't be additional penalties.

http://www.athleticscholarships.net/bylaw-blog.htm

 

[The Franchise]

John Infante's bylaw blog said it best: the cleanest option for the NCAA is to put out a conservative NoA, follow procedure up to the CoI, and let Miami off with time-served.

The best thing for us would be if the NoA is so neutered that they can't charge any more than Failure to Monitor. That way, we'd be able to operate this entire summer knowing there likely won't be additional penalties.

http://www.athleticscholarships.net/bylaw-blog.htm

Could you imagine the public outcry if an institution that clearly lost control of itself attempts to penalize UM for losing institutional control? The absurdity would prove too much for even an absurd organization like the NCAA to withstand.

 

[The Franchise]

That's actually a reasoned, well articulated perspective.

I don't agree with all your assumptions and inferences, but it's possible you're right.

It's also possible that the bend over and say 'ah' strategy led to an expanded and lengthened investigation.

You assume that because the NCAA seems like it's been **** bent on ******** UM that that was always the case, but that ignores basic truth about bureaucracies. They tend to get dug in on whatever they dig in on. The longer the investigation went on, the more the investigators had personal and institutional incentives to dig further, find more, find anything.

There is no way to know if DS's strategy was a good one or not. But insofar as the NCAA's current situation was self-inflicted and could not have been anticipated by DS, to defend her strategy you'd have to think it was the right one even if we were staring down the barrel of a serious NOA right now. Otherwise you're just crediting her with luck.

Couple questions for you, sir:

1. How do you suppose that UM's extreme cooperation led to the NCAA trying to bury us and prolong the investigation? Logic would tell us that it would be just the opposite result in the face of such cooperation. Is it possible that they would have gone even harder on us and dragged it out even more if we were recalcitrant?;

2. How could UM have controlled the investigation and made it shorter and less broad by being less cooperative?

 

[Ethnicsands]

That's actually a reasoned, well articulated perspective.

I don't agree with all your assumptions and inferences, but it's possible you're right.

It's also possible that the bend over and say 'ah' strategy led to an expanded and lengthened investigation.

You assume that because the NCAA seems like it's been **** bent on ******** UM that that was always the case, but that ignores basic truth about bureaucracies. They tend to get dug in on whatever they dig in on. The longer the investigation went on, the more the investigators had personal and institutional incentives to dig further, find more, find anything.

There is no way to know if DS's strategy was a good one or not. But insofar as the NCAA's current situation was self-inflicted and could not have been anticipated by DS, to defend her strategy you'd have to think it was the right one even if we were staring down the barrel of a serious NOA right now. Otherwise you're just crediting her with luck.

Couple questions for you, sir:

1. How do you suppose that UM's extreme cooperation led to the NCAA trying to bury us and prolong the investigation? Logic would tell us that it would be just the opposite result in the face of such cooperation. Is it possible that they would have gone even harder on us and dragged it out even more if we were recalcitrant?;

2. How could UM have controlled the investigation and made it shorter and less broad by being less cooperative?

Re 1, I guess anything's possible, but considering this has been the longest, most drawn out investigation ever already, I think it's hard to conclude it would have been longer and more drawn out if we'd been less open. DS herself made a show about being the most compliant institution ever in the face of an NCAA investigation. That could be unrelated to the time-frame that unfolded -- I can't prove otherwise -- but I doubt it. Why might her openness have led to longer and more drawn out? If, for example, openness meant more access to records and people than would normally have been the case, that could obviously have led to more follow-up, more loose ends, more conflicting statements that created the impression of cover-up or worse. Like I said, I believe bureaucracies tend to behave according to the laws of bureaucracies, and that means the more you give them to chew on, the more they'll chew.

Re 2, I guess it is just the other side of 1. If we could know and define what we did that led DS to talk about how we've been the most open and compliant institution ever, then we could know and define what we could have done differently. At this point, I'm taking DS at her word that she did in fact go past what other institutions have done in response to the NCAA. If she was just saying that but it wasn't true, then I guess I'd change my view. But in the real world, anyone who's a lawyer or has experience in investigations knows there are ways to respond that don't go out of your way to assist the other guy in their search.

 

[canecountry3]

Thread derailed.

 

[frostycane]

Again, it is really easy to sit back and say something is not right, but what would you have preferred she done? That is the only real question.
I dont think she is a jedi master mind, I do however think up until the NCAA messed up there was not much else to do but sit back, comply and pray! However since the ncaa has admitted ******** up the investigation, I think she played it well to wait until all of this blows over to make her statement. I commend her on it, it was a good job. Sure most every other person would have done it that was too, however it is still a good job on her part.
'Common Knowledge' means most people know something. And again, I actually backed that up with my comment made by AG about planning scholarship losses. Sorry that was too difficult for you to understand.
I am not up in arms over you rebuking anything I have said, however I dont need to degrade you to make my point. Speaking of points, feel free to make one at some point in this debate. Its called opinions and no matter what you say I will continue to have my own and it surely is not the same as yours. You go on and call me out for making assumptions but your posts are filled with them about me. And again, says a lot more about you than me.

 

[Biscuits]

Guys I'm away from the house all week this week and don't have much time on the Internet... Can anyone summarize what had happened here for me?

Swagger -

Shockingly, (not really) the NCAA's external review was extremely limited in scope. They will continue the enforcement process with all information gleaned from the improperly deposed information removed. They issued no timeline for the proceedings. Following that, Donna released a statement calling for time served.

Hilarity ensues.

 

[AugieDoggy]

In before the skate...