| FTBL Crimson Tide Self-Reports Three Violations

[bamafan4ever]

Delta,

You know you are my buddy and I agree with you 99% of the time but I think you may be, could be, overreacting just a bit. These are secondary violations and that is it. Regardless of who the coach is at Alabama or any other school, secondary violations will occur. South Carolina just reported 7 of their own and I don't think anyone in their right mind will accuse Steve Spurrier of not running a tight ship.

Here is a sampling of secondary violations that are self-reported every year:

Clemson: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=2851569

South Carolina: http://sportsline.com/collegefootball/story/10234207

Ole Miss: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/sec/2006-02-09-ole-miss-violations_x.htm

Oklahoma: http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2007...reports-giving-banned-supplements-to-players/

...and here is one from 2006 that involved Spurrier's wife: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/15/AR2006121501672.html

In other words, this is an annual event and is only a story today because the Birmingham News wanted to make it a story to sell fish wrappers and yes, the national media loves to run with stuff like this.

C&W Gecko,

Your post just sounds a little too alarmist but hey, I know you were not for "regime change" anyway so maybe this wouldn't have happened under Shula? Oh, that's right! Two of these self-reported violations did!

My point (and I am really not trying to be a smart ass here but...) these type of violations could happen under any coach and any coach at Alabama would be under the microscope. Just because Saban is under increased scrutiny by the media because of who he is and how much he gets paid is totally irrelevant in my opinion. Bring on those two National Championships. I don't think Saban is dumb enough to land us in the proverbial penalty box.

 

[HiTide]

I think you may be....overreacting just a bit. These are secondary violations and that is it....these type of violations could happen under any coach...

Agreed. I know it's easy (considering what we've been through the last 10 yrs) for folks to expect the worse, but I wouldn't lose too much sleep over it.

 

[Crimson&WhiteGecko]

C&W Gecko,

Your post just sounds a little too alarmist but hey, I know you were not for "regime change" anyway so maybe this wouldn't have happened under Shula? Oh, that's right! Two of these self-reported violations did!

My point (and I am really not trying to be a smart ass here but...) these type of violations could happen under any coach and any coach at Alabama would be under the microscope. Just because Saban is under increased scrutiny by the media because of who he is and how much he gets paid is totally irrelevant in my opinion. Bring on those two National Championships. I don't think Saban is dumb enough to land us in the proverbial penalty box.

Did I miss-read the article or did you? The article article stated that 2 of the violations occurred in '07. Who was coach of the team at the time?

Look, my emphasis was not to say I have a problem w/ CNS & that I want CMS back. Besides I've stated very clearly in the past that my problem w/ the termination was not about what CMS was/wasn't doing but about the challenges it created for finding a top notch coach to replace him...enough said about this.

I said that any coach, no matter the credentials, would be under the microscope here, especially regarding NCAA compliance issues.

I'm all for how much CNS gets paid & the reasons for how he handled his departure...I don't blame him one bit for the ways he handled things. However, the anti-bama/anti-CNS media will be watching like a dog in heat for any little hick-up & not look the other way like some coaches, such as Pete Carroll for ex. Heck man, our media is probably a greater liability to CNS than others. Like you said, that paper was just looking for a way to sell more papers.

I truly hope you are right that those issues will not be a concern.

As stated in my last post, I'm not really concerned about the current violations bringing any penalties.

 

[TerryP]

The problem with reining in boosters is the very broad definition of booster as defined by the NCAA.

While many think that boosters are monied people with skyboxes and campus priveleges, any one who gives time or money to the university, OR is an alumnus can be considered a booster.

UA has literally tens of thousands of boosters as defined by the NCAA. You don't have to be Logan Young.

I was about to post the same thing. Members in the Touchdown Club (and other levels of course) of TidePride are considered boosters, and many probably don't even realize it. I'm sure folks who subscribe to CrimsonTradition could even be labeled boosters under the broad definition. It isn't just millionaires and the bigwigs in the Red Elephant Club that are given "booster" status.

I see a lot of people ticked off at these boosters because of these secondary violations. However, the facts are as these.

If you post on this forum, you are considered a booster. If you promote Alabama in any manner, you are a booster. Yes, that includes wearing a Alabama shirt and talking to a possible recruit.

 

[TerryP]

To interject some logic here guys. The contact with the boosters was along these lines.

One guy gave a recruit a book on Alabama football and our history. Violation.

One guy had a conversation more than "Hi, how are ya?" Violation.

Consider...

"Hi, how are ya?" That's cool.

"Hi, how are ya? How's the family?" Violation.

"Hi, how are ya? How's school going?" Violation.

I know we are leaving a dark period in our history with the NCAA violations. And, while the actions by the GA are shocking, people seem to be getting up in arms about this when, realistically, there isn't much to be worried about here.

What disturbs me the most is this...

I've only see a few, and I could count them on one hand, who have mentioned the FACT that our compliance department and Chris King are on their toes.

 

[Kirk Van de Graaff]

I've only see a few, and I could count them on one hand, who have mentioned the FACT that our compliance department and Chris King are on their toes.

Well Said. Looks like they are doing whats expected of them to run a smooth program, not covering it up. Relax Bama faithful.

 

[Supergenius]

Nothing to see here folks, now move along.

RTR

 

[Guest]

The problem with reining in boosters is the very broad definition of booster as defined by the NCAA.

While many think that boosters are monied people with skyboxes and campus priveleges, any one who gives time or money to the university, OR is an alumnus can be considered a booster.

UA has literally tens of thousands of boosters as defined by the NCAA. You don't have to be Logan Young.

I was about to post the same thing. Members in the Touchdown Club (and other levels of course) of TidePride are considered boosters, and many probably don't even realize it. I'm sure folks who subscribe to CrimsonTradition could even be labeled boosters under the broad definition. It isn't just millionaires and the bigwigs in the Red Elephant Club that are given "booster" status.

The way I understand the "booster rule" is like this: If you ever went to school there, bought a ticket, joined a website, or otherwise supported a team you are considered a "booster". Therefore, I do believe that if I bought a beer for a player of my favorite team, that would be (in the most technical way) a violation.

 

[Guest]

The problem with reining in boosters is the very broad definition of booster as defined by the NCAA.

While many think that boosters are monied people with skyboxes and campus priveleges, any one who gives time or money to the university, OR is an alumnus can be considered a booster.

UA has literally tens of thousands of boosters as defined by the NCAA. You don't have to be Logan Young.

I was about to post the same thing. Members in the Touchdown Club (and other levels of course) of TidePride are considered boosters, and many probably don't even realize it. I'm sure folks who subscribe to CrimsonTradition could even be labeled boosters under the broad definition. It isn't just millionaires and the bigwigs in the Red Elephant Club that are given "booster" status.

The way I understand the "booster rule" is like this: If you ever went to school there, bought a ticket, joined a website, or otherwise supported a team you are considered a "booster". Therefore, I do believe that if I bought a beer for a player of my favorite team, that would be (in the most technical way) a violation.

To further explain, it would work like this: Let's say I'm eating out and I see Joe the LB from my favorite team out with his girl. Under NCCA rules, I can't buy them a round of drinks or offer to pay for their meal. That's considered a violation. To my best knowledge, all players and boosters are well aware of this.

 

[Guest]

The problem with reining in boosters is the very broad definition of booster as defined by the NCAA.

While many think that boosters are monied people with skyboxes and campus priveleges, any one who gives time or money to the university, OR is an alumnus can be considered a booster.

UA has literally tens of thousands of boosters as defined by the NCAA. You don't have to be Logan Young.

I was about to post the same thing. Members in the Touchdown Club (and other levels of course) of TidePride are considered boosters, and many probably don't even realize it. I'm sure folks who subscribe to CrimsonTradition could even be labeled boosters under the broad definition. It isn't just millionaires and the bigwigs in the Red Elephant Club that are given "booster" status.

The way I understand the "booster rule" is like this: If you ever went to school there, bought a ticket, joined a website, or otherwise supported a team you are considered a "booster". Therefore, I do believe that if I bought a beer for a player of my favorite team, that would be (in the most technical way) a violation.

To further explain, it would work like this: Let's say I'm eating out and I see Joe the LB from my favorite team out with his girl. Under NCCA rules, I can't buy them a round of drinks or offer to pay for their meal. That's considered a violation. To my best knowledge, all players and boosters are well aware of this.

ok, well that doesnt make much sense because what if someone was posing as a "booster" of my favorite team and bought their meal. ok, like if a recruit is in t-town with his family eating at ej's, and an auburn fan, or lsu fan, or whoever is in town on business and trys to by their meal posing as an "alabama fan" would that be right? who could tell the difference who he was a booster or fan of? seeing how that im a member of this website and buy tickets to the games that makes me a booster right? seems, if that were the case, there would be alot of room for faulty play...right? sorry, just doesnt make alot of since to me. :roll:

 

[Guest]

From everything I have heard about secondary violations are they are not very meaningful unless you have them over and over again. Almost every school reports secondary violations every year. I keep hearing nothing will happen.

 

[Guest]

Delta,

You know you are my buddy and I agree with you 99% of the time but I think you may be, could be, overreacting just a bit. These are secondary violations and that is it. Regardless of who the coach is at Alabama or any other school, secondary violations will occur. South Carolina just reported 7 of their own and I don't think anyone in their right mind will accuse Steve Spurrier of not running a tight ship.

Here is a sampling of secondary violations that are self-reported every year:

Clemson: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=2851569

South Carolina: http://sportsline.com/collegefootball/story/10234207

Ole Miss: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/sec/2006-02-09-ole-miss-violations_x.htm

Oklahoma: http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2007...reports-giving-banned-supplements-to-players/

...and here is one from 2006 that involved Spurrier's wife: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/15/AR2006121501672.html

In other words, this is an annual event and is only a story today because the Birmingham News wanted to make it a story to sell fish wrappers and yes, the national media loves to run with stuff like this.

C&W Gecko,

Your post just sounds a little too alarmist but hey, I know you were not for "regime change" anyway so maybe this wouldn't have happened under Shula? Oh, that's right! Two of these self-reported violations did!

My point (and I am really not trying to be a smart ass here but...) these type of violations could happen under any coach and any coach at Alabama would be under the microscope. Just because Saban is under increased scrutiny by the media because of who he is and how much he gets paid is totally irrelevant in my opinion. Bring on those two National Championships. I don't think Saban is dumb enough to land us in the proverbial penalty box.

Actually South Carolina had 8 in total.

 

[Guest]

Delta,

You know you are my buddy and I agree with you 99% of the time but I think you may be, could be, overreacting just a bit. These are secondary violations and that is it.

Overreacting? me? :wink: Not a chance.

The GA mistake is inexcusable as I said earlier. To be honest I don't even see how that could be secondary. No recruit receives paid travel for family or friends...pretty simple. I don't see how this rule gets misconstrued. How could it not be intentional unless this GA is new or clueless?

I'm really not furious...I'm just amazed though. We've been on probation since like 1982 and just about to come off and what does one GA do a week before we come off? I just don't get such.

My biggest concern is the repeat offender status. Maybe that has nothing to do with a few secondary violations. Heck, the article stated we had two last year under Shula. Then again, what if those two plus these three equal more weight now? I don't see the death penalty or anything as dark as that, but I could see the NCAA using a much tougher standard with us. :?

 

[GoodScotch]

Delta,

You know you are my buddy and I agree with you 99% of the time but I think you may be, could be, overreacting just a bit. These are secondary violations and that is it.

Overreacting? me? :wink: Not a chance.

The GA mistake is inexcusable as I said earlier. To be honest I don't even see how that could be secondary. No recruit receives paid travel for family or friends...pretty simple. I don't see how this rule gets misconstrued. How could it not be intentional unless this GA is new or clueless?

I'm really not furious...I'm just amazed though. We've been on probation since like 1982 and just about to come off and what does one GA do a week before we come off? I just don't get such.

My biggest concern is the repeat offender status. Maybe that has nothing to do with a few secondary violations. Heck, the article stated we had two last year under Shula. Then again, what if those two plus these three equal more weight now? I don't see the death penalty or anything as dark as that, but I could see the NCAA using a much tougher standard with us. :?

I agree with you completely. If anything happens, it will only prove the double standard in how the NCAA operates -- picking and choosing its battles. If everyone was treated equal, it seems USC / Reggie Bush would have been pursued harder by now.