auburn4ever 1,266 Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 I may be repeating myself, but Bama better hope none of the other rumblings about recruitment incentives are true. Additions to the current filings are what Bama fans need to be worried about. Scarbinsky: It's a textbook case -- Alabama fesses up and opens the NCAA repeat violator window Posted by Kevin Scarbinsky -- Birmingham News March 06, 2009 6:45 AM Categories: Alabama Football News file It appears that Alabama did a thorough job of investigating once a bookstore employee blew the whistle, but a lack of vigilance on the front end is the problem here. But the NCAA five-year window is open again. Put them and their transgressions together, and Alabama football's Textbook Five don't add up to Albert Means. Not by weight or volume. It's important to note what Alabama's latest major NCAA infractions case is not. It's not about recruiting violations. It's not about academic fraud. It's not even about strippers. It is, in essence, about a bunch of student-athletes who played the system like they played Auburn in the last Iron Bowl. In short, they found holes and ran through them unchecked. They got books and supplies for classes they didn't take. They got books and supplies, for classes they did take, that were recommended but not required. They didn't sell those books and supplies for cash. They gave them to other students. This is not the kind of infractions case that shows up on "Outside the Lines" or "60 Minutes." This is the kind of case that excites accountants, not TV producers. So why should the school and its fan base care? It's all about the window. The NCAA repeat violator window. It's open again. Did you just feel a chill? For the next five years, if even one rogue booster runs amok , it's possible that Alabama won't be staring down the barrel of the NCAA's gun but up at 6 feet of dirt. The NCAA likes to throw the book at repeat offenders, as Alabama knows all too well. The school got caught in the window coming and going in this case. Alabama might not have had to appear before the Committee on Infractions for this textbook case - as it did Feb. 20 - if some of the violations hadn't occurred while the five-year window was still open from the Means case. Because Alabama admitted its guilt on the charge of failure to monitor, this case might've been handled through the summary disposition process. With paperwork. Without a hearing before the Infractions Committee. But when your repeat-violator window is open, you can't use the summary disposition process. You're required to go before the committee. And it doesn't matter what you or I or Robert Witt or Tommy Gallion or anyone else thinks the committee is going to do in this case. No one on the outside knows what the committee is going to do in any case. The most serious charge in the textbook case is failure to monitor, and failure to monitor is one of the more serious charges in the NCAA lawbook. If lack of institutional control is the NCAA equivalent of murder, failure to monitor might be considered manslaughter. It appears that Alabama did a thorough job of investigating once a bookstore employee blew the whistle, but a lack of vigilance on the front end is the problem here. This case involves multiple student-athletes in multiple sports manipulating the textbook distribution system over a period of multiple semesters. I wish I could give you exact numbers, but Alabama blacked out those numbers in the reports it made public Thursday. Alabama did not, however, redact the names of two school officials who were given reprimands and salary freezes: Jon Dever and Teresa Shreve. Interesting that Alabama would "out" them when it protected the names of school officials charged with violations in the Means case. In the documents it released then, Alabama followed the NCAA's lead and referred to the principals as Coach A, Coach B, etc. Here's the bottom line: It's not likely that Alabama will lose 21 scholarships over three years and two years of postseason play. In this case. But the window is open again. Heaven may not be able to help the Tide on the next case. Print This Page | Send To A Friend | Permalink (Learn More) Share: Reddit | Digg | del.icio.us | Google | Yahoo | Facebook | What is this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AgentOrange 36 Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Does anyone know what penalties may come of this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigzilla 0 Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 I'm not trying to be ugly but is this really the place for this information? I think it would be better served in the college football section. I dislike the bammers as much as the next person but the Auburn Recruiting section should not be trashed up with crap like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AgentOrange 36 Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 I agree tigzilla. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackson-Sullivan 0 Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 I guarantee they are looking into other violations as well. The only problem is obtaining the proof necessary to convict them. Here's to hoping they will come down on them hard with the repeat offender deal if they don't find proof of the other wrongdoing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackson-Sullivan 0 Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 You are right. This thread should be in the college football section but it really isn't that big a deal that it's not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.