Basketball & Football Probation

[Turbine]

Potuto said the problem with the conditioning program began when the then-conditioning coach made written reports about which players were attending and football coaches occasionally observed the workouts and tracked attendance.

"Those observations can switch a voluntary activity to a non-voluntary activity," Potuto said.

So wait!

The football team is not being punished for a REAL violations but is being punished because the actions of a trainer COULD have turned into violations.

That is sad.

[BirdofParadise]

_ I know Jay reported on his show when they first had the meetings that we proposed forfeiting all games played by Greene, paying back a portion of the money earned from the NCAA Tourney berths (I think $20,000?), some reduced practice hours for the football team, and one or two years of probation. As he said it, that would be the minimum that we would be punished with since we proposed it, and that he thought it was a pretty thorough punishment. However, we've been hit with all of that plus the loss of one basketball scholarship in 2008 and 2009. I was fine with our proposed punishment, but I was pretty PO'ed this afternoon when I heard we'd been docked a scholarship as well. Of course, I'm drawing all this from memory so it's far from the gospel, but it's pretty close. _

Your memory is pretty good.
The sanctions we've been hit with is normal for the use of an ineligible player. Some are saying we hit ourselves too hard. Wrong. We were going to get all that anyway, and we knew it. We were really hoping to get away with not losing a scholarship, but weren't surprised that they included it.

[Turbine]

So as indicated by the David Walker quote, I am ready to hear what did UL offer up front? Anything more than a t-shirt purchase by the football players would be too much._

University officials, who appeared before the infractions committee in February, proposed wiping out the basketball records and forfeiting the conference basketball revenue, Potuto said.

If she had to issue a disclaimer on what the NCAA committee came up with vs what UL came up with, she thought it was overkill.

Talk about an overblown panic move, OF COURSE THEY ARE GOING TO ACCEPT.

[Turbine]

The sanctions we've been hit with is normal for the use of an ineligible player.

Describe normal when the rule was ambiguous at best, conflicting at least, and post violation in clarity.

Some are saying we hit ourselves too hard. Wrong. We were going to get all that anyway, and we knew it.

So let them decide. You/We have no idea what punishment ideas we planted in their head.

jmo

[AstroCajun]

Your memory is pretty good.
The sanctions we've been hit with is normal for the use of an ineligible player. Some are saying we hit ourselves too hard. Wrong. We were going to get all that anyway, and we knew it. We were really hoping to get away with not losing a scholarship, but weren't surprised that they included it.

Couldn't we put ourselves on probation retroactively?

O.G. has been gone for two seasons and this past season has felt probationary.

/kidding.
//glad this is over
///looking for better times ahead.

[BrockMeaux]

What does the "2 Years of Probation" mean? Can we participate in postseason activity?

According to what Scott Prather said this afternoon, there is no postseason ban, it's just a period in which - if we commit further violations - the NCAA can look into SERIOUSLY punishing us.talking Death Penalty-type stuff. Hey, who wants to be the first school to get a program taken away twice?

[BirdofParadise]

_ Describe normal when the rule was ambiguous at best, conflicting at least, and post violation in clarity.

So let them decide. You/We have no idea what punishment ideas we planted in their head.

jmo_

Big mistake. Had we gone into it with "your rule sucks, we don't think we deserve these penalties," we'd have been hit harder.

[MiamiCajun32]

_ i agree with ya'll.

two more thoughts:

1.) Our NCAA compliance officer is the one who should be held responsible (forget his/her name at the moment)

2.) Can we please just forget about this? Seriously, let's forget about it. We were already depressed about men's basketball as it is, so this is not really that big of a deal. let's concentrate on the stuff that's not depressing us and dragging us down. We've got too many other good things goin on to let this rain on our parade

God Bless _

It is hard to forget about when the next time the Cajuns are in the NCAAs they media will not include those two appearances in talking about Cajuns' basketball. It is also difficult to think that the banners will be coming down.

Clearly, the NCAA wanted to set an example re this minor inadvertant infraction, as long as it was not a major BCS program. I can guarantee you that if the Gators had this same infraction last year, the NCAA would not even consider taking away the two nati championships. Same goes for LSU re their final four appearance last year. Same goes for any major program.

While the program is in such a bad state, the recent success is very important to fall back on. I would rather have post season ban for the next two years than lose the championships and NCAA appearances already earned. The likelihood of this current team going to the NCAAs or NIT is remote anyways, but even if they were the favorite in sunbelt this year, I would rather not lose the already earned championships and wins.

[derf]

Big mistake. Had we gone into it with "your rule sucks, we don't think we deserve these penalties," we'd have been hit harder.

Quite honestly their rule does suck. And correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the NCAA committee have to get a group together to explain this eligibility rule to them? If so this should have been taken into consideration at some point right?

[BirdofParadise]

_ Quite honestly their rule does suck. And correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the NCAA committee have to get a group together to explain this eligibility rule to them? If so this should have been taken into consideration at some point right? _

The committee was formed to discern the difference between a distance learning course and a correspondence course.

Although the difference is ambiguous, the bottom line is our former compliance director should have made a phone call. She didn't.

Had she made the phone call and not gotten a definitive answer, then the ambiguity of the rule(s) really comes into play.

Bottom line isyou CAN'T win with the NCAA infractions committee. That's why it's best to play along with them. If they think you're screwing with them, they screw you worse and there's nothing you can do about it.

[Cajunsmike]

_ Your memory is pretty good.
The sanctions we've been hit with is normal for the use of an ineligible player. Some are saying we hit ourselves too hard. Wrong. We were going to get all that anyway, and we knew it. We were really hoping to get away with not losing a scholarship, but weren't surprised that they included it. _

Basketball scholarship timing issue point- I don't believe it has to be 08 and 09. That is what all the conventional media has said. However, I think we can do it in 2009 and 2010. Maybe I am confused on that. Perhaps no impact in 2008 means we will take the loss of two in 2009.

[AstroCajun]

It is hard to forget about when the next time the Cajuns are in the NCAAs they media will not include those two appearances in talking about Cajuns' basketball. It is also difficult to think that the banners will be coming down.

Clearly, the NCAA wanted to set an example re this minor inadvertant infraction, as long as it was not a major BCS program.

Stop there. Using an ineligible player is hardly a minor infraction.

T-shirts minor, you bet.

Ineligible player - nope.

What gets me was how was OG cleared to play in the first place? IF the course was not valid, how did the NCAA give us its imprimatur?

[OLF82]

_ The committee was formed to discern the difference between a distance learning course and a correspondence course.

Although the difference is ambiguous, the bottom line is our former compliance director should have made a phone call. She didn't.

Had she made the phone call and not gotten a definitive answer, then the ambiguity of the rule(s) really comes into play.

Bottom line isyou CAN'T win with the NCAA infractions committee. That's why it's best to play along with them. If they think you're screwing with them, they screw you worse and there's nothing you can do about it. _

There is no due process with the NCAA. Jerry Tarkanian learned that years ago (though I think he may have eventually won a lawsuit against them after years of court battles). If you want to play college basketball, it's through the NCAA or really no way else. Having said that, I have to say, if true, that the penalty doesn't seem too excessive to me. As you said, you can't assume you're complying with a rule. Ignorance of the rule is no excuse. Having said this, of course it's true you'll never see this happening to a major school. This is analagous to a minor league baseball player being hit with a 50 day steroid usage ban. It won't happen to Barry Bonds. Top flight schools are major revenue sources who will always be protected. Big time sports, as life, isn't fair.

[CajunGuru]

_ There is no due process with the NCAA. Jerry Tarkanian learned that years ago (though I think he may have eventually won a lawsuit against them after years of court battles). If you want to play college basketball, it's through the NCAA or really no way else. Having said that, I have to say, if true, that the penalty doesn't seem too excessive to me. As you said, you can't assume you're complying with a rule. Ignorance of the rule is no excuse. Having said this, of course it's true you'll never see this happening to a major school. This is analagous to a minor league baseball player being hit with a 50 day steroid usage ban. It won't happen to Barry Bonds. Top flight schools are major revenue sources who will always be protected. Big time sports, as life, isn't fair. _

If the NCAA cannot give a correct interpretation of it's own by-laws, then how can it hold institutions accountable? There is no question that the university compliance officer had a responsibility to learn or know the rules in regards to credit courses. But when questioned, the NCAA could not give a correct interpretation of it's own by-laws. It's not unitl an infractions committee recieves the list of official findings that a ruling is made in regards to compliance of the course credits. This is unacceptable from a group of so called educated people.

[AstroCajun]

you can't assume you're complying with a rule.

Someone ought to make a sign and post that on Reinhardt Drive.

Regardless of whether we should have been punished severely or not

This should NEVER happen again.