Iowa State - NCAA Violations

[VeloClone]

Not sure what your deal is. There are multiple death penalty posts (that are joking) and even a "6 year bowl ban" post. I'm just letting him know that the 2 year probation isn't the "final" punishment we face, as the NCAA can still give out their punishment.

My deal is that I think in a thread where we already have people freaking out over this - including spilling over into recruiting threads - we have posters (not the joking ones) that are trying to stir the pot by talking about ridiculous outcomes like two year bowl bans along with losing 5 scholarships a year. That is not going to happen so quit talking about it even if it is "technically possible". There would have to be a hell of a lot more to this than we have any sort of indication of to even get anywhere near that realm.

 

[ISUCubswin]

My deal is that I think in a thread where we already have people freaking out over this - including spilling over into recruiting threads - we have posters (not the joking ones) that are trying to stir the pot by talking about ridiculous outcomes like two year bowl bans along with losing 5 scholarships a year. That is not going to happen so quit talking about it even if it is "technically possible". There would have to be a hell of a lot more to this than we have any sort of indication of to even get anywhere near that realm.

I see where your coming from and you make a valid point. Just thought I'd make it clear to the poster that more can happen than what we placed on ourselves, it's just unknown what exactly can happen. Thanks for making it clear, I understand what you mean now.

 

[VeloClone]

I see where your coming from and you make a valid point. Just thought I'd make it clear to the poster that more can happen than what we placed on ourselves, it's just unknown what exactly can happen. Thanks for making it clear, I understand what you mean now.

Cool. I'll highjack the thread no more. :smile:

 

[zwclones51]

I see where your coming from and you make a valid point. Just thought I'd make it clear to the poster that more can happen than what we placed on ourselves, it's just unknown what exactly can happen. Thanks for making it clear, I understand what you mean now.

Is it 75/25 that all ISU gets is their self imposed two year probation?

 

[cyclonestate]

Very disappointed that our Athletic Department kept this hidden from the Board of Regents and from university oversight committees. That's the sort of thing that would only happen in Iowa City.

 

[Trice]

Very disappointed that our Athletic Department kept this hidden from the Board of Regents and from university oversight committees. That's the sort of thing that would only happen in Iowa City.

I've only read about this through the news, I haven't followed the discussion here on CF, so forgive me if I've missed something. But I agree pretty strongly with this point. We seem to be handling this in a very "University of Iowa" kind of way - secrecy, silence, and stonewalling. The worst part is, even if it does end up being classified as "major" it seems so far to be fairly minor, but the way we're handling this makes it look as if we have something to hide.

 

[Trice]

Is there evidence that this was hidden from the Board of Regents? Our is this speculation?

This story was published at the DSM Register site earlier tonight. This isn't evidence that it was "hidden" because obviously if we self-reported it was going to come to light at some point anyway. But it seems pretty clear that we were in violation of Regents policy that they be notified right away.

 

[theshadow]

But it seems pretty clear that we were in violation of Regents policy that they be notified right away.

"The regents’ athletics policy states, “If the institution is self-reporting an alleged violation to the NCAA, a copy of the letter shall be forwarded to the board." The policy doesn’t state a specific time frame for reporting NCAA violations..."

 

[Mowilly]

Your disappointment should be on you then because they didn't. Upon discovery of the errors- ISU self reported several years ago. One of the outcomes from that was to "dig deeper" to see just how much of this took place. The information was out there- I knew about it-many people knew about it. It was such a boring bit of info that not a single news outlet even bothered to pick it up. What makes it interesting is that ISU did find more errors and then decided to take actions in addition to its recommended NCAA probationary period. The word probation is why it is news now and rightfully so. Nobody has tried to hide anything up to this point. It was out there. Now, all of this said, why the breakdown of where this took place is not being released is somewhat interesting. I think we should get that info out there. I do feel very good about how people will feel once this info is public. Everyone who is in a need to know position at ISU is aware of this and briefed. If someone did not know about it- that is on them for not paying attention or they simply are not important to the process. Your post is too over the top.

Very disappointed that our Athletic Department kept this hidden from the Board of Regents and from university oversight committees. That's the sort of thing that would only happen in Iowa City.

 

[Trice]

Your disappointment should be on you then because they didn't. Upon discovery of the errors- ISU self reported several years ago. One of the outcomes from that was to "dig deeper" to see just how much of this took place. The information was out there- I knew about it-many people knew about it. It was such a boring bit of info that not a single news outlet even bothered to pick it up. What makes it interesting is that ISU did find more errors and then decided to take actions in addition to its recommended NCAA probationary period. The word probation is why it is news now and rightfully so. Nobody has tried to hide anything up to this point. It was out there. Now, all of this said, why the breakdown of where this took place is not being released is somewhat interesting. I think we should get that info out there. I do feel very good about how people will feel once this info is public. Everyone who is in a need to know position at ISU is aware of this and briefed. If someone did not know about it- that is on them for not paying attention or they simply are not important to the process. Your post is too over the top.

This is a little disingenuous. I'm not sure the news was ever really "out there." Gossip, casual conversation, telephone calls, etc. don't count as being "out there." I subscribe to every athletic department press release and I don't recall ever reading anything about this. That would be putting the news "out there."

 

[theshadow]

I subscribe to every athletic department press release and I don't recall ever reading anything about this.

There are press releases that go to the media without being posted on cyclones.com. This is one of those.

 

[Mowilly]

Not sure how to reply to this. The info was out there- it just was not juicy enough for anyone to care about, remember or even gossip about it. My response was to the false accusation that this info was hidden from University personnel, it simply was not. As for your personal "need to know", that really is not anyone's problem but your own (no disrespect intended). The info was out there- just because you did not get a PR to satisfy your appetite does not change that fact.

This is a little disingenuous. I'm not sure the news was ever really "out there." Gossip, casual conversation, telephone calls, etc. don't count as being "out there." I subscribe to every athletic department press release and I don't recall ever reading anything about this. That would be putting the news "out there."

 

[cyclonestate]

Your disappointment should be on you then because they didn't. Upon discovery of the errors- ISU self reported several years ago. One of the outcomes from that was to "dig deeper" to see just how much of this took place. The information was out there- I knew about it-many people knew about it. It was such a boring bit of info that not a single news outlet even bothered to pick it up. What makes it interesting is that ISU did find more errors and then decided to take actions in addition to its recommended NCAA probationary period. The word probation is why it is news now and rightfully so. Nobody has tried to hide anything up to this point. It was out there. Now, all of this said, why the breakdown of where this took place is not being released is somewhat interesting. I think we should get that info out there. I do feel very good about how people will feel once this info is public. Everyone who is in a need to know position at ISU is aware of this and briefed. If someone did not know about it- that is on them for not paying attention or they simply are not important to the process. Your post is too over the top.

You are incorrect. There are a few university committees who should have been informed, just as the Board of Regents should have been informed. Given the relatively harmless nature of these violations, it's puzzling why the Athletic Department chose to keep it hidden. It's also disappointing.

 

[Mowilly]

who is saying that they did not? Additionally, this is not the Ath Dept. making this choice. GG and Pres. Leath have ALWAYS been in the loop and along w/ university counsel provided the course of action. The department has not been working in seclusion on this. Based on the strength of your assertion, should I conclude you are on this committee? Otherwise, how do you know this?

 

[swarthmoreCY]

You are incorrect. There are a few university committees who should have been informed, just as the Board of Regents should have been informed. Given the relatively harmless nature of these violations, it's puzzling why the Athletic Department chose to keep it hidden. It's also disappointing.

You and Trice need to put your agendas aside long enough to stop with the libel or STFU.

 

[Trice]

Not sure how to reply to this. The info was out there- it just was not juicy enough for anyone to care about, remember or even gossip about it. My response was to the false accusation that this info was hidden from University personnel, it simply was not. As for your personal "need to know", that really is not anyone's problem but your own (no disrespect intended). The info was out there- just because you did not get a PR to satisfy your appetite does not change that fact.

No, the information wasn't "out there." Again - gossip, insider conversations, or what university administrators know among themselves don't count as it being "out there." I follow Cyclone athletics as closely as anyone can who has no connection to the athletic department and this was the first I'd heard of it.

Which isn't to suggest it was being "hidden." But it was most definitely not something that was publicly well known.

 

[Trice]

You and Trice need to put your agendas aside long enough to stop with the libel or STFU.

Internet tough guy alert.

I haven't said anything that's untrue. Hell, all I've said is what was in the Register story, and challenged the idea that this was somehow public knowledge. I'm not arguing the significance of the charges, it does seem relatively minor. But the way this appears to have been handled gives the impression there's something more to the story.

And that's probably all it is...appearances. Which is fine and probably no harm done. I just hate seeing our name dragged through the mud unnecessarily.

 

[theshadow]

No, the information wasn't "out there." Again - gossip, insider conversations, or what university administrators know among themselves don't count as it being "out there." I follow Cyclone athletics as closely as anyone can who has no connection to the athletic department and this was the first I'd heard of it.

Which isn't to suggest it was being "hidden." But it was most definitely not something that was publicly well known.

Well, the AP knew about it:

"The university last year released records to The Associated Press showing it self-reported 10 secondary, or minor, NCAA violations involving recruiting in the football program between September 2011 and January 2012. It's unclear whether those violations were part of the broader inquiry. The violations included coaches calling a recruit on accident twice in the same day, different coaches calling the same recruit in the same week and coaches sending several text messages to recruits that were not permissible."

 

[Trice]

Well, the AP knew about it:

"The university last year released records to The Associated Press showing it self-reported 10 secondary, or minor, NCAA violations involving recruiting in the football program between September 2011 and January 2012. It's unclear whether those violations were part of the broader inquiry. The violations included coaches calling a recruit on accident twice in the same day, different coaches calling the same recruit in the same week and coaches sending several text messages to recruits that were not permissible."

The AP knew about that...but not about this. These are two different things, or the initial violations have given way to more than originally thought. Am I understanding that correctly?

What it comes down to for me is this. The violations aren't serious but they're still violations. Minor black mark but life goes on. But when you start talking about things like Regents not being notified as they should - which may violate a policy, and even if it doesn't explicitly do so, I can't imagine they'd be happy not learning about something potentially embarrassing for 18 months - and university committees not being notified, then a bunch of "no comments"...it just looks bad.

I just don't like seeing our name dragged through the mud...whether it's because we did something wrong and we deserve it or because we didn't do much of anything wrong but mishandled it. That's all.

 

[Let's Go State]

The Rag also publishes maps of schools that don't have armed security guards. It's a newspaper that doesn't do much research nor think through situations well. Terrible integrity rating.

They want to make this bigger than it is to create more stories to draw more drama that will entice people to read their garbage.

This is not an issue.