The NCAA Goes Op-Ed On Georgia Tech And Unleashes Harsh Commentary
by Winfield Featherston on Jul 15, 2011 10:56 AM EDT
in Georgia Tech Football
Email
PrintEdit 7/192011: BTW, I wrote this one morning after everything went down and the NCAA letter was the only thing out there. As more facts have come to light, it's become insanely clear that the NCAA laid down a huge penalty on an organization that didn't do anything wrong. The NCAA felt slighted and it hurt its pride so they lashed out like the immature individuals they are. Drunk off their own power. Desperate to make others feel it. I can be notoriously calm and "level headed" and I didn't lash out when everyone else did. Now, as the details come out about LSU, and I see LSU is especially "lauded for their compliance" I am insanely PISSED.
On the surface, it looks like Georgia Tech has vacated the ACC Championship all because of $312 worth of clothing. The details of the story however, are much worse. Accusations of the Institute not being cooperative with the investigation and coaching players on how to answer questions turn an uncomfortable situation into an ugly one.
With the news yesterday came the NCAA report titled The Georgia Institute of Technology Public Infractions Report. If you take a few minutes to read through the 26 pages, it's easy to see that the NCAA doesn't hold anything back in their opinion of how Georgia Tech operated and where they were wrong. In fact, one reporter at the press conference mentioned how he had never seen any report published by the NCAA with such harsh language.
Bolded words are for my emphasis.
During a November 11, 2009 telephone conversation, the AGA staff member [NCAA officer] informed the institution's assistant athletics director for compliance (compliance director) that student-athlete 2 may have received impermissible benefits from an individual associated with a sports agency. The compliance director was clearly instructed that the information could only be shared the the institution's president and the director of athletics...On November 18, during an interview with both the NCAA and the institution, student athlete 2 denied that he was given any impermissible benefits. Subsequently, it developed that the institutions, acting contrary to the explicit instructions of the AGA staff, had questioned student athlete 2 on two occasions prior to his interview and had disclosed to him specific information, which was the subject of the interview.
Pretty damning timetable and chain of events. Following the above transcript an interview follows which is also included in the report, should you choose to read it. The NCAA's opinion on this interview follows:
The committee also did not make a finding that student-athlete 2 received clothing, as he consistently denied this although his denials may have been the result of the institution failing to protect the integrity of the NCAA's investigation..
Yesterday, we were all wondering what it meant when the NCAA said that Georgia Tech failed to cooperate. The above quote answers that question. Failing to protect the integrity of the NCAA's investigation.... The nail that sealed our fate was when the investigative committee decided to interview student-athlete 1 a second time where the report notes that the player "changed what he had reported to the enforcement staff and claimed that the clothing items in question had been given to him by his cousin rather than his cousin's roommate." For reference, gifts by family members are allowed, non family member gifts are not allowed. Also, the "cousins roommate" is the individual associated with the agency. Bad news.
Rather than being probative, the interview appeared to be conducted elicit the 'right answer' from the student-athlete and to justify not withholding him from competition
The report continues down this negative path. The document is covered with words similar to "obstructionist approach", "combative attitude", and "confrontational". All in reference to Georgia Tech.
Georgia Tech has been handed a sure blow to its conscience and reputation because of how the NCAA believes the Institute refused to cooperate and attempted to cover up the violations. And just as any parent would, the NCAA punished more for the cover-up, than the actual act itself.
Rules are rules. And whether you agree with them or not, we must follow them. What happened yesterday was a tough pill to swallow and lesson to learn. The fanbase is still befuddled because of how quickly this was suddenly reported and brought to our attention. But our leaders failed in areas where they were required to lead and understand how to follow the rules.
Mark Bradley sums it up best, In plain English, the NCAA believed Tech tried to cover up. And the NCAA hates cover-ups way worse than it hates violations.
38 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
O.K., so I understand what the NCAA is saying but...
I ask you this. Did Tech just get bad legal advice, did they simply act incompetently, did they set out from the beginning to obstruct the investigation, or are we simply left with circumstantial evidence that the NCAA has chosen to interpret in one particular way?
by Atlanta's original team on Jul 15, 2011 11:17 AM EDT reply actions
and by the way, good article from you as always.
by Atlanta's original team on Jul 15, 2011 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions
Bad management and bad assumptions
At the press conference it was mentioned that we had a compliance officer who was inexperienced at working with the NCAA.
Peterson: "Perhaps we should’ve done some things differently," Peterson said. "He didn’t have a great deal of experience in issues like this, and I believe if we had to do this all over again we would’ve hired an outside consultant to advise us and serve as legal counsel."
Better to have died a small boy than to drop this football - John HeismanFromTheRumbleSeat
by Winfield Featherston on Jul 15, 2011 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions
That seems to be the intepretation...
"I believe that we could have been more aggressive in our investigation," president G.P. "Bud" Peterson said. "Had we known then what we know now, we might have acted differently. But given the information we had at the time, I believe we took reasonable, and appropriate steps to determine a proper course of action regarding the eligibility of the two student-athletes in question, and most importantly we acted in good faith. At no time prior to or since the 20-month long investigation do I believe anyone at Georgia Tech did anything or took any actions with the deliberate intent to hinder or impede this investigation."
I guess what hurts is that Tech’s ignorance (I know, I know, ignorance of the law is no excuse) seems to be interpreted by the NCAA as deliberate criminal intent.
by Atlanta's original team on Jul 15, 2011 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions
The real question going forward is...
If we got this level of punishment for a, frankly, ham-fisted and amateurish cover-up of a pretty minor incident, what is OSU going to get?
Exactly my thoughts.
If we get this shit, Ohio State should straight up not exist any more.
by LilBroey700 on Jul 16, 2011 12:26 AM EDT up reply actions
My big issue
is with statements like this that litter the report:
The committee also did not make a finding that student-athlete 2 received clothing, as he consistently denied this although his denials may have been the result of the institution failing to protect the integrity of the NCAA’s investigation.
Although they cannot find any evidence, they still threw it in there that their negative findings may have been the result of Tech coaching the student. Well, if that’s the case, then every interview that the NCAA performs from here on out should also include that statement.
I understand that the NCAA explicitly told Tech to tell the AD and president, but this seems the NCAA is just pissed that we didn’t listen to them. It’s like the classic P.O.P. (pissed off police) ticket. He could give you a warning, but you told him to “go eat a doughnut and leave me alone,” so he gave you a ticket (or arrested you if he’s got a short temper) instead.
AMEN
I was just about to make roughly the same comment. The NCAA, in their report, stated that there was no violation of student athlete 2 reciving clothing, a.k.a. inappropriate gifts.
In the end, the committee did not make a finding of benefits from an agent, as student-athlete 1 equivocated when pressed on the question of agency involvement. Further, student-athlete 1 stated that the clothing came from the cousin’s roommate, rather than directly from the agency employee.
The committee also did not make a finding that student-athlete 2 received clothing, as he consistently denied this, although his denials may have been the result of the institution failing to protect the integrity of the NCAA’s investigation, as set forth earlier in this report and in Finding B-2.
Sounds like they’re trying to make an issue out of a non-issue by introducing speculation into a formal report.
Does anyone see anywhere in the NCAA by-laws where the NCAA investigations committee has any authority to deny a member institution the action of speaking to their own student athlete in regards to an accusation such as in this case? That’s tantamount to sending someone to court and putting them on trial with no legal counsel. Seems to me that there needs to be an agency that oversees what the NCAA can and can’t get away with in this sort of situation.
THWG!
So this is now the NCAA is now?
You get punishments for things they can’t even PROVE happened?
They just don’t like the cut of your jib and you get probation and vacation of wins?
by Durdens Wrath on Jul 15, 2011 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Only
If they cannot prove it is punishment handed down. If you are proven to have cheated such as $cam Newton then you can continue to play and for good measure they will throw the heisman and the national championship in for sh*ts and giggles.
Yeah.
Can Tech’s players just claim they didn’t know? It apparently worked for $cam.
I personally can’t believe the NCAA was surprised that nobody “WANTED” to work with them. No kidding. I’d rather have the IRS on campus than the NCAA.
by Durdens Wrath on Jul 19, 2011 12:19 PM EDT up reply actions
Impressed
This is not easy news to take but I’m impressed with the level of professionalism demonstrated in this blog entry. Shows a concern for GT’s integrity overall and avoids too much homerism (which is admittedly hard for all passionate fans- this commenter included). Good job WF.
I think what happened was the team looked at the issue and said Player(s) X may or may not have received a small amount of improper benefits. Let’s talk to the players and ask them. If he/they did, we make them return them the benefits and remind that it’s against the rules. It’s no big deal. Unfortunately, that approach wasn’t 100% in align with the NCAA’s desired approach. Keep in mind that this happened over a year and a half ago and before many of the other recent scandals came to light, so it would not have been perceived as big of an issue by GT as it might be today.
At the time, what GT did probably seemed like a reasonable approach to Bud, Dan, and others who are well paid to deal with more pressing matters. The folks in charge and the legal counsel are smart people and they probably felt that they should be able to read the NCAA regulations and apply them. Unfortunately, it’s not that simple. Rules and regulations of any sort of length or complexity require you to work with them extensively and repeatedly to truly understand them. And I wouldn’t be surprised if the NCAA rules include more than a few contradictory regulations.
It sounds like GT, for whatever reason, does not (or did not) have anyone on staff with sufficient experience in NCAA rules and regulations to be able to properly apply them. They seems odd to me, but I guess there has been enough turnover at the top over the past few years that the institutional experience gained from the previous fiasco was either lost or under-appreciated.
by Dive Keep and Pitch on Jul 15, 2011 2:07 PM EDT reply actions
Coaching
In regards to this statement:
The committee also did not make a finding that student-athlete 2 received clothing, as he consistently denied this although his denials may have been the result of the institution failing to protect the integrity of the NCAA’s investigation.I think Tech’s argument is pretty clear here – if they coached the students before the interviews, why did Bay Bay implicate both himself and a teammate when he talked to the NCAA? If he was hiding anything you certainly wouldn’t know it. It seems like the NCAA is assuming we interfered with the investigation simply because Burnett denied receiving anything – and everyone else involved, other than Bay Bay’s initial testimony – corroborated that.
Because of our miss-treatment at the hands of the NCAA a few years back
when we tried to be up front, self policing, open the kimono, etc – AND WE GOT SCREWED BY THE DOPES FROM KANSAS ANYWAY…
the Institute has publicly said (through Chan Gailey after the fact) that any questions from the BIG SHITS IN MANHATTAN would be directly routed to the rudest lawyer we could find.
So that didn’t work out so well, but with absolute power comes absolute corruption, case in point, NCAA.
I say fight them on every front, cause if they are gonna strip us of a Championship over $312 and protecting our “clients” (players, coaches, administrators), then we are gonna get the ungreased plug no matter how accommodating we are going forward.
Yeah, its like telling a Cop to eat a doughnut, but being nice in the past and fessing up got us the big shaft anyway.
When the charges are unfair, fight the charges
When the charges are fair, fight the law.
Oh, and take it out on our opponents starting in the Fall!
by DressHerInWhiteAndGold on Jul 15, 2011 3:08 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
rec'd for your last sentences
Better to have died a small boy than to drop this football - John HeismanFromTheRumbleSeat
by Winfield Featherston on Jul 15, 2011 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Especially the Jayhawks
since they share a state with the buffoons who were in charge of the “Buckeye 5” Debacle at the Cotton Bowl this year.
by DressHerInWhiteAndGold on Jul 15, 2011 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions
We got burned the last time
After we got burned the last time for self-reporting Frank Roper’s being asleep in the registrar’s office and then getting harsher-than-expected penalties, I can see how we might have been encouraged to be less than completely forthcoming.
And a lawyer telling a client to be quiet? Imagine that!
Winfield, my friend . . .
I am having trouble letting go of this but I trust your judgment on this thing. Tell me again why I should not be more troubled by the NCAA’s actions than I am in Tech’s?
I have finished reading the transcripts, especially the investigator’s interview with Thomas. Here is the way it appears to me:
1. There is only circumstantial proof that the gifts Thomas received were from an agent. There is no proof that he actually knew who was an agent and who was not an agent or that he knew the gifts were from an agent. It appears the investigator kept asking leading questions of Thomas to try to get him to say something incriminating. Whether Thomas was being stupid, pretending to be stupid or simply engaging in behavior in which he had plausible deniability, it seems a very flimsy excuse of the NCAA to come down so hard.
2. There is no proof that Burnett received gits from an agent and more than one witness who will verify this, yet the NCAA implies that in spite of lack of proof he must have done what he is accused of.
3. The media is reporting that Tech prepped the two players prior to their interview with the investigators but that appears to be a rather strict interpretation of the meaning of prep. They talked, yes, but there is no proof of coaching of answers.
4. Both former players deny any wrong doing.
5. Tech’s President and Athletic Director both make strong claims that they did not knowingly try to deceive or impede the work of the NCAA.
I acknowledge that I may have a bias in my view but I see far more proof that Casey Anthony killed her own child than in the verdict that Tech coached witnesses, lied, covered up and generally tried to impede the NCAA. Help me with this.
by Atlanta's original team on Jul 16, 2011 10:50 AM EDT reply actions
The big difference is that Casey Anthony was in a court with evidence rules, while the NCAA can essentially infer whatever it wants to.
This is the NCAA trying to protect their turf and force absolute cooperation from schools, plain and simple. More than anything this ruling is a statement from the NCAA saying that if you even look like you are hiding anything we will assume you did. And since the NCAA isn’t part of the government and is just a voluntary institution, they can be as arbitrary as they want (up until the point that schools start to leave).
by iamafirehazard on Jul 18, 2011 12:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes, and whereas Anthony was found innocent because the evidence was circumstantial, the NCAA can apparently put together a case that doesn’t even rise to the level of circumstantial, a case that exists in the ether of someone’s imagination.
O.K., that was a little strong.
To me it seems reasonable to assume that following. One or two players flirted with a violation. The actual circumstances of that violation could not be determined conclusively. Tech gave the players the benefit of the doubt based on what they said. The NCAA decided that giving the benefit of the doubt meant Tech had entered into a giant conspiracy to defraud the system.
What stinks to me about that is that it implies that all college administrators are little more than petty crooks or that the NCAA will always be more than a little paranoid when it comes to judging people under their governance.
by Atlanta's original team on Jul 19, 2011 8:20 AM EDT up reply actions
The underlying theme here
is that the NCAA is WANTING to find something to unleash their Arbitrary Punishment Generator upon, rather than concerning themselves with justice.
THWG!
We'll find out around 3pm
When the NCAA discusses LSU today
Better to have died a small boy than to drop this football - John HeismanFromTheRumbleSeat
by Winfield Featherston on Jul 19, 2011 11:38 AM EDT up reply actions
What concerns me.....
is both DRad and Bud were pissed that the NCAA called out their integrity. If you screwed up, how pissed would you be when they questioned your integrity because of it? The thing with most Tech fans, IMO, is not that our championship was vacated or the $100,000 fine. I think that its the fact that we were punished with an extreme lack of tangible proof.
Yes, this is what bothers me...
It is the fact that people who know I am a Tech fan will ask me about this assuming that I will now disown the team. I will then be left in the untenable position of trying to explain that it’s more complicated than that to which I will get a polite response but in which they will really be thinking something to the effect of, “He’s just a biased homer who makes excuses for Tech when if he really had any integrity he would denounce them and never cheer for them again.” It is not what they think about me that bothers me, it is the fact that rather than understanding that Tech is a great institution they will instead think that Tech is at best no better than the big football factories and at worst that it is some kind of Southern mafia.
I too could can stand the punishment meted out to Tech but the overall character assassination will mean either having to be silent in the face of critics or having to explain over and over again that, as I said, it is more complicated than that. For four years.
by Atlanta's original team on Jul 16, 2011 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions
When Tom Foley was Speaker of the House
he decided to conduct an investigation of some sort, in order to find out if anyone did anything wrong. He wanted to “dig around” to see if there was anything prosecutable.
You do an investigation when you have a SUSPICION of WRONGDOING.
Anything else is a WITCH HUNT.
So who turned us in? Calvin Booker? Another program? Cam Newton’s Father? Jim Tressel? Pumpkin’ Head at UT?
by DressHerInWhiteAndGold on Jul 16, 2011 1:57 PM EDT reply actions
Sweet.
I’d love someone else to join in some Phil Fulmer hate.
by Durdens Wrath on Jul 19, 2011 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions
NCAA Over-reacted
And college athletics are in serious trouble in my eyes. Mostly these types of stories just bore me to tears. I follow sports because I enjoy the games and the competition. Sure, some very well paid folks at Tech made some mistakes. But the bottom line is the NCAA spent almost 2 years and who knows how much money to punish the Tech players and fans after the fact.
How can they just say 2009 didn’t happen? I saw it and the guys on the team lived it. And more importantly, how can you be emotionally invested going forward when you know pretty much any accomplishment can be retroactively taken away by the actions of administrators and lawyers who have a very narrow view of right and wrong? I’m still going to pull for Tech but the I don’t think I can get really excited about any college sports until the system is fixed.
I didn’t really follow the cases with Ohio State, Oregon, USC and Auburn very closely (boring) but Tech quietly got burned for things that I would assume happen all the time. The administrators made a simple mistake with far heavier consequences than they could have foreseen and I don’t fault the student-athletes one bit. The NCAA is trying to police the up-policeable.
by zooker on Jul 17, 2011 1:47 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
^ This ^
And more importantly, how can you be emotionally invested going forward when you know pretty much any accomplishment can be retroactively taken away by the actions of administrators and lawyers who have a very narrow view of right and wrong? I’m still going to pull for Tech but the I don’t think I can get really excited about any college sports until the system is fixed.
Very well worded, sir. A rec for putting my thoughts into print better than I could do, myself.
THWG!
Out of curiosity
… what would our punishment have been if we hadn’t won the ACC Championship? We would have no wins to vacate in that time period. So would the NCAA would come up with some other subjective penalty? That’s pretty interesting, isn’t it?
THWG!
"Vacate" ANY wins where BeBe and Morgan wre involved
retroactively?
Such is the uselessness of punishing all when the Perps are already in the NO FUN LEAGUE with big signing bonuses.
How about cutting off the right hands of agents and runners???
by DressHerInWhiteAndGold on Jul 18, 2011 9:31 AM EDT up reply actions
Interesting
It brings another question to mind. As Tech fans, would you rather win less, be left alone, and get to keep whatever minor wins we do gain OR win, become more scrutinized, and let the NCAA decide our record.
by Yellow Jackette on Jul 18, 2011 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions
Win and become heavily scrutinized
because the anti-NCAA sentiment seems to quickly be picking up steam. There are several folks from over there in Athens voicing support for GT in this respect on various forums. Considering the gravity of COFH, that means something (at least in this jacket’s mind). I’m beginning to ponder how many headliner DIV-I universities will have to be ganked by the unbridled NCAA Arbitrary Penalty Generator before the notion of member institutions withdrawing from the NCAA becomes more than just a laughable, dismissable rumor.
Besides, a few hundred years ago, very few people believed that a handful of colonies would rebel against the British… much less be successful.
THWG!
Win and be scrutinzed
Ultimately, if you want your team to have respect and recognition, you have to have the wins. As GT’s recent history (i.e. the last 10-20 years) has shown, six to nine wins a seasons won’t get you there. You 10+ wins every year.
by Dive Keep and Pitch on Jul 18, 2011 7:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Talkin' College Football
Missed the whole of the original Sunday show, but one commentator pointed out that ALL CFB programs should be shakin’ in their boots because EVERY program has $312 worth of T Shirts and Watches in the hands of players at any time….
by DressHerInWhiteAndGold on Jul 18, 2011 9:27 AM EDT reply actions
Yes, but...
It is the illusion of following the rules that the NCAA seems to be more interested in, not the reality.
O.K., now that I have that rant off of my chest here is another way of looking at it that floats around in the back of my mind. Let’s say the system is what the system is -imperfect. Given that, it behooves every program to toe the straight and narrow even when it appears unfair. Since I still do not believe that Tech’s administration and leadership is corrupt from top to the bottom I am left with one alternative. BeBe and Morgan knew better and broke the rules anyway. They then lied to coaches, administrators and investigators. Then they left the program early to avoid any future repercussions. I am not saying that is what I believe I am just saying that this is an alternative interpretation given the scarce facts in the case. If this is what happened then BeBe and Morgan owe the school and players a big apology along with a percentage of their starting salaries in the NFL for the next few years.
by Atlanta's original team on Jul 18, 2011 10:02 AM EDT up reply actions
if only it were that simple
Better to have died a small boy than to drop this football - John HeismanFromTheRumbleSeat
by Winfield Featherston on Jul 18, 2011 10:30 AM EDT up reply actions
I do not share the same opinion as WF
After reading the report, I can find no evidence that even suggests that anyone at Tech did anything wrong. There’s no evidence of improper gifts, there’s no evidence of coaching, and there’s no evidence of blatantly attempting to hinder an investigation. All that exists is a belief of wrongdoing and a twisting of anything remotely circumstantial into support of that belief. This is absurd, regardless of where your rooting interest may lie.
"You could spend the next fifteen seconds of your life watching a man and a tiger scream together, or you could be an idiot."
Fact.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanShots on From The Rumble Seat
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
SHOP THE FROM THE RUMBLE SEAT STORE
