🏈 Oregon releases documents concerning NCAA "alledged" violations...

[TerryP]

"The draft documents released Friday, which are heavily redacted, suggests Oregon's use of three scouting services "did not conform" with NCAA rules, and the Ducks exceeded the number of coaches allowed to recruit.
The documents state that the scope and nature of the violations "demonstrate that the athletics department failed to adequately monitor the football program's use of recruiting or scouting services."
Oregon has not received a formal notice of allegations from the NCAA. The documents released Friday do not include any possible penalties."

ESPN's report with video...

Just to use one of the new emoticons we "found" yesterday...

In a letter to boosters on Friday, Oregon Athletic Director Rob Mullens reiterated his commitment to cooperating with the NCAA.
"While we have no specific timetable on the inquiry, we remain in close communication with the NCAA as the process advances cooperatively through each stage. Currently, pursuant to the NCAA's process, we are in constructive discussions with the NCAA on the draft of their proposed findings," he said in the letter.

:jackoff2:

 

[BamaFan615]

Any word on possible punishments?

 

[psychojoe]

Hard to speculate on penalties until the PLOI comes out and we know the charges. "Failure to Monitor" was mentiopned in the article and that is usually considered major. Having too many coaches recruiting is the kind that is usually punished by a corresponding future reduction in the number of coaches recruiting.

 

[planomateo]

here is what one of the writers for addictedtoquack thinks.

Now we just wait to hear what the punishment will be, but at this point I don't think it will be anything too significant. Oregon has complied with the NCAA, and Oregon is learning from these mistakes and we will hopefully not see this kind of lapse in the future.

If I had to guess, I'd say we may see some coaches receive some recruiting restrictions, and we might lose a handful of scholarships, but I don't expect this to have any significant impact on the Ducks moving forward.​

 

[TerryP]

Hard to speculate on penalties until the PLOI comes out and we know the charges. "Failure to Monitor" was mentiopned in the article and that is usually considered major. Having too many coaches recruiting is the kind that is usually punished by a corresponding future reduction in the number of coaches recruiting.

Hard to speculate. That sums it up.

However...here's what crosses my mind.

The link Matt posted indicates that Oregon blogger doesn't think much will come of this. What is that based on? I can't think of another situation where recruiting services, like that of Lyles, has been involved in a case where sanctions were coming down.

Secondly, Lyles was linked to investigations in Louisiana, Arkansas, Auburn, and also Oregon. I tend to equate this to what a sitting judge might think when a case continually comes up and is constantly continued. He finally gets tired of seeing the case over and over again.

Is the NCAA tired of seeing Lyles, and schools he's worked with, come up in their investigations? They've yet, as far as I recall, made one of their examples of a school dealing with this. It's a safe assumption they are tired of the "handlers/agents" involved with high school kids. It's a safe assumption they see this a lot like AAU in basketball—a circuit they are trying to get some handle on.

We've seen some of the "evidence" in this story with Oregon. IE: the 25K paid for evaluations for a recruiting class that had kids that had graduated years before. We've seen this 25K cover nothing but what could be described as a hastily thrown together package that is so poorly done one could wonder if it actually was the real thing.

Do they let this just slide? I'm pessimistic.

 

[planomateo]

I don't really pay attention to Oregon football, so I'm going to take this comment in the link above as truth.

seems like an awful lot of AD's in a few years doesn't it... 5 in 5-6 years, jeeze.

Failure to Monitor

I’m disappointed that this charge might be levied … but not surprised. If you are surprised, you haven’t been paying attention to Oregon athletics over the past four years.
2007: Bill Moos loudly shown the door as athletic director.
2007-2009: Pat Kilkenny takes over as athletic director. He is given one task: Smooth over relations with top donors, and grow the department like a business. That meant adding “revenue-generating” elements like a new basketball arena and a baseball stadium. As a booster himself, he had no desire to meddle in compliance-related affairs.
2010: Mike Bellotti takes over as athletic director. His legacy at that position will be an outstanding ability to collect paychecks.
Sometime in 2010: Lorraine Davis takes over as athletic director: She was a spokeswoman with no power.
August 2010: Rob Mullens takes over as athletic director. Finally, an adult in the room — who has two NCAA investigations hanging over his head and a couple massive athletic gifts he’s supposed to shepherd into existence.
Meanwhile, Dave Frohnmayer was planning his exit into a cushy law firm position with a generous pension in tow, and Richard Lariviere was trying to shore up funding and govern the actual university, which has led to his dismissal.

No one is in charge of the athletic department, and no one has set the ground rules for behavior. That’s failure to monitor in its most pure distillation.​

 

[TerryP]

Wow! Nice find!

Five in five sounds like a playing card!