Freeze Possible Suspension?

[Barnacle 9,064]

2 minutes ago, lionheartkc said:

No offense, but how is it holier than thou stating that a coach who is knowingly presiding over blatant cheating, according to NCAA documents, is treading on bad guy turf? I don't know how the rest of the world was brought up, but I was taught that cheating was bad, no matter how many other people are doing it. 

Because like Ellitor said, if you think that "your guys/school/coach" aren't doing it, you are being naive. So, either there are no good guys in big time college football coaching, or you are being holier than thou. 

[ellitor 33,114]

8 minutes ago, lionheartkc said:

No offense, but how is it holier than thou stating that a coach who is knowingly presiding over blatant cheating, according to NCAA documents, is treading on bad guy turf? I don't know how the rest of the world was brought up, but I was taught that cheating was bad, no matter how many other people are doing it. 

It's a bad choice but does not characterize someone overall as bad. That's very narrow minded & too judgemental, just as barnicle was for reading yours & Keesler's posts as hollier than thou types even though they were more just naive IMO.

[WarDamnEagleWDE 12,737]

All schools are pushing the gray area's. All. 

[ellitor 33,114]

3 minutes ago, Barnacle said:

Because like Ellitor said, if you think that "your guys/school/coach" aren't doing it, you are being naive. So, either there are no good guys in big time college football coaching, or you are being holier than thou. 

See I didn't see it as holier than thou. I saw it as being extremely naive.

[Barnacle 9,064]

Just now, ellitor said:

It's a bad choice but does not characterize someone overall as bad. That's very narrow minded & too judgemental, just as barnicle was for reading yours & Keesler's posts as hollier than thou types even though they weren't.

I never said they were being holier than thou. I said there is a lot of that going on. The second that one school gets caught doing something wrong, people characterize them as being "bad" until your own school gets caught. If that's not being holier than thou, I don't know what is. I think we all recognize that no one does things 100% above board. I just don't believe in using instances like this to characterize coaches as bad people, when we all know that we are likely using similar tactics. Is it to the same extent? Maybe not, or maybe, as others have pointed out Ole Miss didn't do a good job of covering their tracks. That's all. 

Joe Paterno was a bad guy. 

[Barnacle 9,064]

4 minutes ago, ellitor said:

See I didn't see it as holier than thou. I saw it as being extremely naive.

Fair enough.

[ellitor 33,114]

1 minute ago, Barnacle said:

I never said they were being holier than thou. I said there is a lot of that going on. The second that one school gets caught doing something wrong, people characterize them as being "bad" until your own school gets caught. If that's not being holier than thou, I don't know what is. I think we all recognize that no one does things 100% above board. I just don't believe in using instances like this to characterize coaches as bad people, when we all know that we are likely using similar tactics. Is it to the same extent? Maybe not, or maybe, as others have pointed out Ole Miss didn't do a good job of covering their tracks. That's all. 

Joe Paterno was a bad guy. 

Ok. The tone of your OP sounded like you were referring to Lion. That's why Lion took offense. 

[Barnacle 9,064]

Just now, ellitor said:

Ok. The tone of your OP sounded like you were referring to Lion. That's why Lion took offense. 

Honestly, I was referring to Keesler, and yeah I did read his post that way. Maybe he really did think that Freeze as perfect. So, either he was being naive, or condescending. I'm not sure which. 

[DAG 34,017]

Doing it the right way is one of the most overblown mantras in CFB. I hate when fans use that terminology.

[Barnacle 9,064]

And I'm going to clarify, because maybe it's unfair to paint JoPa as a bad guy. I struggle with that. I think he was misguided and naive, and probably bad, but not malicious. That's another debate, but my point was that he hurt people, and it had nothing to do with winning. I genuinely think Freeze is a coach who would do anything for his players. I think he's a guy who loves his family and his players. I think he's the kind of guy that will own up to doing wrong, and use it as a teaching tool. I don't think he's perfect, and I do think he's culpable. He agrees. He'all take responsibility for what's on him. 

And, @keesler I need to be fair to you. You didn't call him a bad guy. Just not as good as you thought. I can accept that. Sorry if I put words in your mouth. 

[Barnacle 9,064]

I'm thinking I need to change my sig to "Ole Miss apologist." I'm definitely that. I try to be fair, but even I'm capable of being blind or naive when talking about my alma mater. I can admit that.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

35 minutes ago, ellitor said:

See I didn't see it as holier than thou. I saw it as being extremely naive.

I have to disagree with that, too. Whether all schools are, as WDE says, "pushing the gray areas" or not, it's documented that Ole Miss has gone beyond pushing the gray areas into flat out disregarding the rules in order to give themselves an unfair advantage.  If you want to compare programs, all you have to do is look at the 18 month colonoscopy that Auburn went through and came out clean, and then look at the list of infractions that Ole Miss got hit with when they went under the NCAA microscope.  So, either Auburn runs a cleaner program, or they are A LOT better at covering up their indiscretions.  I hope it's the first, as it would hurt my heart to think that Auburn is a master of cheating and lying.

I also stand behind my statement that even if everyone is doing it, it's still wrong and by participating, it damages ones character.  Sure, you can develop levels of bad, sighting personal injury, etc, but the truth is, cheating at any level is bad, and allowing a culture of cheating to grow and fester does nothing but cause those with the lowest level of character to ramp up their efforts. If Freeze was the good guy I thought he was, he would have put honor before winning. If your stance is that no coach would do that, then my response is that the coaching profession is severely lacking in character and there are no real good guys in coaching.  

I refuse to live in the gray area where there is no right and wrong. If watching the nightly news doesn't give you pause about the dangers of allowing a culture of lying and cheating to take root, I don't know what will. If trying to be a good person and expecting the same of others somehow makes me a bad person, than so be it.

[AU64 10,122]

1 hour ago, WarDamnEagleWDE said:

No problem keesler. And I don't think Freeze is a bad man. Just sucks at cheating. They all do it one way or another. Just part of the game. 

 

 

Agree....this is the problem....And Freeze just doesn't have the power to control the process IMO....he was just a lamb among the Ole Miss booster wolves.......the problem of being an inexperienced coach arriving at a school that was desperate for winning.

And those boosters must be stupid to think they could actually get away with such blatant violations though perhaps they were influenced by the fact that bama seems to get away with similar things.

But....Freeze is getting the big money and should be held accountable for what happened with the program....and for not keeping his coaches and boosters under some semblance of control......though some of this should land on the desk of the school's Chancellor too. 

[ellitor 33,114]

25 minutes ago, lionheartkc said:

I have to disagree with that, too. Whether all schools are, as WDE says, "pushing the gray areas" or not, it's documented that Ole Miss has gone beyond pushing the gray areas into flat out disregarding the rules in order to give themselves an unfair advantage.

Not what I was talking about in my naive statement. What I was referring to is not realizing based off NCAA's archaic rules every team cheats in recruiting one way or the other. Whether directly or indirectly though other channels, it happens. WDE used pushing the gray. I never said nor implied that.

[ellitor 33,114]

1 hour ago, DAG said:

Doing it the right way is one of the most overblown mantras in CFB. I hate when fans use that terminology.

A-FLIPPIN-MEN!

[ausburn 159]

[Barnacle 9,064]

I'm curious how many people have read the Ole Miss allegations. The vast majority of what we are talking about is transportation, lodging and meals for recruits and their families. Let's just be clear about that. Players and their families want to visit, and Ole Miss foots the bill. That's most of the allegations. Against the rules? In the instances that have been reported, clearly. Clearly. But if these are the allegations by which we measure the "good guys" in college football, then there are NO good guys. NONE. 

The most blatant allegations are the loaner vehicles, and the ACT testing. The ACT allegations specifically, are in my opinion reprehensible and constitute severe cheating. However, those allegations occurred before Freeze, except in one instance, when a booster paid for a player's ACT tutoring. We'll see what happens in the next stage of the investigation. There could be much more damning evidence that comes out. I don't know. I suspect that Ole Miss will receive more severe penalties. 

I mention all of this, because I think most people assume that the allegations involve Ole Miss literally handing their players and families cash, that its just a free-for-all. Even if that is the case, it hasn't been alleged. I'm sure there is cash, and maybe more. I'm also confident that you won't see Ole Miss get hammered on those grounds. Schools are savvy enough to not get caught doing those sorts of things. In the meantime, what you might see are things like cell phone bills, utility bills, rent being paid for, etc. I also think that in many instances they are well intentioned, albeit blatant and against the rules (see Laremy Tunsil). If we start seeing things like test-tampering, or grades fixing, or flat-out buying players or their families, then Ole Miss and Freeze deserve to get hammered big time. 

Lion, I respect your position. In this world, we should be teaching our young people; coaches should be teaching their players that there is right and there is wrong. Hugh Freeze should be on the right side of that line. However, in this environment you have to fly close to the sun and hope you don't get too close. You have to live in the gray areas of the rules. I think coaches try to stay in the right as much as they can control, and hope they don't step over the line. We all know that its happening, and that its happening everywhere. Maybe that paints a sad picture of College Football, but that picture was painted a long, long time ago.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

22 minutes ago, Barnacle said:

I mention all of this, because I think most people assume that the allegations involve Ole Miss literally handing their players and families cash, that its just a free-for-all. Even if that is the case, it hasn't been alleged. I'm sure there is cash, and maybe more. I'm also confident that you won't see Ole Miss get hammered on those grounds. Schools are savvy enough to not get caught doing those sorts of things. In the meantime, what you might see are things like cell phone bills, utility bills, rent being paid for, etc. I also think that in many instances they are well intentioned, albeit blatant and against the rules (see Laremy Tunsil). If we start seeing things like test-tampering, or grades fixing, or flat-out buying players or their families, then Ole Miss and Freeze deserve to get hammered big time. 

You have 2 things in this situation that I think stand out. One is the Tunsil situation where you have both the leaked emails that show he was getting money handed to him to pay bills for his family (i.e. literally handing a player and his family cash), which he admitted are real, and the situation with cars loans where he got busted once and then kept doing it. While it probably can't be proven, it's more likely than not that "we'll take care of your family" was part of his recruitment. To me, that's tantamount to flat-out buying a player and his family.  A family on hard times is going to be hard pressed to send their kid to another school, when one school is offering to take away their financial burdens (I guess Ole Miss doesn't have any houses that need sitting).

The second is the reports from athletes (and one of the violations) that they received compensation in one form or another for going on recruiting trips to Ole Miss.  That's not buying players, but that is stacking the deck, and leads you to believe that, once they are there, there is more to come. I can't imagine players have to be incentivized to visit, but once they are there the school sells itself.

I'm all about a school "flying close to the sun" when it comes to communicating with prospects, making them feel important, showing them what it would be like to play there, etc, but as soon as it becomes about money, gifts, grades, protection from the law, etc., that's crap and any team that is caught should be hammered within an inch of their lives.

You are right, though. The picture was painted long ago and there are some teams who are going to be able to do whatever they want, whenever they want, because it's all a huge business and those at the top are not going to sacrifice their cash cows for the betterment of the sport. If a school really wants to run with the likes of bama, they have little choice but to play their game. That's why I'd rather Auburn be good and honest vs great and wallowing in the crimson mud. 

[Barnacle 9,064]

I mean, I guess you can call helping a player with rent "paying for play." A player begging someone associated with the athletics program for help, essentially nickel and diming for utilities, is a lot different then what seems to be the perception of Ole Miss just shelling out whatever they can. Remember, we're talking about Laremy Tunsil, too. Prized and controversial recruit. You'd think if Ole Miss had taken care of him the way people want to believe, he wouldn't have to be pleading for help with his mom's water bill. I get your point, but it doesn't fall in line with many people's wild west narrative. Still, it doesn't make it right. 

Again, I don't think you are going to find any allegations of Ole Miss boosters/coaches/associates handing out literal cash on visits. I think we all know this happens, but you can't prove it. Read your PM. I'd like to think Auburn is good and honest in everything they do, too. 

Creating an unfair advantage is what it is. I'm not trying to defend unethical practices. I really just commented to say that I don't think Freeze should be characterized as a bad guy. 

[lionheartkc 6,150]

2 minutes ago, Barnacle said:

You'd think if Ole Miss had taken care of him the way people want to believe, he wouldn't have to be pleading for help with his mom's water bill.

The way I read the email, it was an on going thing with him and the coach.  More of a "I need more money for my families bills" than a "help my mom's power's about to go out", kind of thing.

[Barnacle 9,064]

Just now, lionheartkc said:

The way I read the email, it was an on going thing with him and the coach.  More of a "I need more money for my families bills" than a "help my mom's power's about to go out", kind of thing.

That's up to how you want to interpret it. It did appear there was a set amount for his mom's rent and utilities and that the number was moving. 

[WarDamnEagleWDE 12,737]

2 hours ago, AU64 said:

 

 

Agree....this is the problem....And Freeze just doesn't have the power to control the process IMO....he was just a lamb among the Ole Miss booster wolves.......the problem of being an inexperienced coach arriving at a school that was desperate for winning.

And those boosters must be stupid to think they could actually get away with such blatant violations though perhaps they were influenced by the fact that bama seems to get away with similar things.

But....Freeze is getting the big money and should be held accountable for what happened with the program....and for not keeping his coaches and boosters under some semblance of control......though some of this should land on the desk of the school's Chancellor too. 

Freeze wasn't inexperienced when he got to Oxford. Freeze's problem is he knew what was going on but turned his head the other way. Freeze should have stepped in and got the boosters to turn it down. Freeze didn't and it's going to cost him.

 

 

[Barnacle 9,064]

1 minute ago, WarDamnEagleWDE said:

Freeze wasn't inexperienced when he got to Oxford. Freeze's problem is he knew what was going on but turned his head the other way. Freeze should have stepped in and got the boosters to turn it down. Freeze didn't and it's going to cost him.

 

 

If that's true, then it should cost him. Still, how much does control does a head coach have over boosters? For instance, you hear about $100 handshakes in the grove after games all the time. How on Earth do you control that? A lot of these boosters aren't giving kids money because they are told to. They are doing it because it makes them feel close to the program, like they are doing something good, and because they think it makes them look important among other alumni. 

[WarDamnEagleWDE 12,737]

3 minutes ago, Barnacle said:

If that's true, then it should cost him. Still, how much does control does a head coach have over boosters? For instance, you hear about $100 handshakes in the grove after games all the time. How on Earth do you control that? A lot of these boosters aren't giving kids money because they are told to. They are doing it because it makes them feel close to the program, like they are doing something good, and because they think it makes them look important among other alumni. 

The head coach can't stop the $100 handshakes in the grove. But if the AU coaches knew that Ole Miss was giving recruits $500 or more per visit then Freeze knew. 

 

Freeze and Ole Miss gambled and lost the bet. They did sign a ton of good players so it still may be worth it. 

 

The good head coaches pretty much know what is going down with the their program. When a big situation happens the head coach will step in. On the little stuff the head coach will just turn his head. The little stuff is the secondary violations. 

 

 

[DAG 34,017]

I believe many coaches know what goes down with boosters, especially in these big programs. The issue is letting it get out of hand. A lot of these players come from poor economic backgrounds. Am I to believe that these kids do not get some sort of financial help if need be? Just my opinion, but I am sure Freeze had to be introduced to some influential (Wink,wink) individuals among the program. The issue is straddling that line. On one hand, these folks do pay a lot of money to the universities and money speaks volume for influence. On the other hand, You do have to keep them at bay. $100 dollar handshakes, paying rent, etc is one thing. Paying for visits, buying incredible vehicles, etc is another. Either way, both directly violates NCAA rules and if you are involved directly or indirectly, you are still culpable.