The NCAA had initially taken a bowl ban
"off the table," according to one source, who added that Oregon was willing to accept scholarship reductions and recruiting limitations.
Seems like that should have set parameters for a "plea bargain" agreement, right? Well, those are very broad parameters; some of the finer details of the discussions between Oregon, its representatives and the NCAA remain unknown.
Similarly, as
Yahoo Sports reported, the disagreement likely centered on the exact wording in the drafts of "proposed" findings — namely, whether Oregon "failed to gather" recruiting information from Willie Lyles for its $25,000 payment or whether Lyles' company "did not disseminate" the information.
Basically, it comes down to culpability. And when Oregon appears before the COI, it could come down to believability. Who does the committee believe and what evidence does the committee have?
