Appeal looks less likely

[Stallion]

If you gave that much money and didn't ask the questions you'd be a fool. Now if you asked the questions and got a certain 'assurance,' well...

But grant is correct, you bought seats to home games, not post season tournaments.

They bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into. I say, let 'em crash.

Jane you ignorant slut!

(these kids probably have no idea what we are talking about)

[Bergermeister]

Jane, you ignorant slut!

[smupony94]

Stallion you have been incredibly patient recently

[Stallion]

NCAA bylaws provide for the due process protection of an appeal to determine if penalties were excessive-that was the bargained for due process the NCAA, a private association, and all universities agreed to. The parties did not bargain for the right to sue in Court. And no Court is going to second guess the the due process provided by a private association of universities unless they didn't follow their own rules and procedures.

[RGV Pony]

First, I am not sure anyone has sued the NCAA for breach of its own constitution, using an arbitrary and capricious methodology. By agreeing that sanctions would be "reasonable", to me that means proportionally reasonable. Thus, when you have a Maurice Clarett situation or "U" shoe store party and they get little punishment (despite multiple violations), and then for what amounts to one violation, that was self-reported, and the wrong-doers punished, it seems to be that the punishment was arbitrary and capricious and that the entire system of punishments is arbitrary and capricious. Why do you think the Federal Courts and many states came up with sentencing guidelines? Because judges varied in meting out punishments for like offenses. (From probation to suspended sentences to hard time). Those types of examples could be used to bolster an arbitrary and capricious argument. Why not have set guidelines for each school for each type of violation? And thus the lack of them is evidence of arbitrariness.

The NCAA has gone to a violation structure as suggested and this penalty falls in line with that structure unfortunately. I posted a link to guidelines in another thread.

According to their Constitution, penalties must be reasonable. If we are penalized to this degree while UNC or Louisville gets a hand slap or even the same penalty, that if the definition of arbitrary and capricious.

Seems UNC should automatically be level 1 because of the academic fraud.

All of Louisvilles horses and all its men.. And everyone on Twitter, it seems, saw what Larry got and are doing their level best to convince all that Pitino didn't know nor was it under his control. Otherwise they are level 1.

Sucks to be the first "pickle out of the jar," to borrow a phrase.

[Blunt Pony]

If you gave that much money and didn't ask the questions you'd be a fool. Now if you asked the questions and got a certain 'assurance,' well...

But grant is correct, you bought seats to home games, not post season tournaments.

They bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into. I say, let 'em crash.

Jane you ignorant slut!

(these kids probably have no idea what we are talking about)

Shirley you must be kidding?

[2ndandlong]

First, I am not sure anyone has sued the NCAA for breach of its own constitution, using an arbitrary and capricious methodology. By agreeing that sanctions would be "reasonable", to me that means proportionally reasonable. Thus, when you have a Maurice Clarett situation or "U" shoe store party and they get little punishment (despite multiple violations), and then for what amounts to one violation, that was self-reported, and the wrong-doers punished, it seems to be that the punishment was arbitrary and capricious and that the entire system of punishments is arbitrary and capricious. Why do you think the Federal Courts and many states came up with sentencing guidelines? Because judges varied in meting out punishments for like offenses. (From probation to suspended sentences to hard time). Those types of examples could be used to bolster an arbitrary and capricious argument. Why not have set guidelines for each school for each type of violation? And thus the lack of them is evidence of arbitrariness.

The NCAA has gone to a violation structure as suggested and this penalty falls in line with that structure unfortunately. I posted a link to guidelines in another thread.

According to their Constitution, penalties must be reasonable. If we are penalized to this degree while UNC or Louisville gets a hand slap or even the same penalty, that if the definition of arbitrary and capricious.

They developed the new infractions rules to try to address reasonableness by setting up a uniform penalty structure. We got a level I which is the highest penalty level. I just don't expect those schools to get a whole lot more than us because we got a level I; however, knowing what I do about each of these, I certainly feel those schools committed far more egregious penalties. I just don't know how they would fit into the new level structure.

[Mestengo]

If people are so concerned about spending $500 on basketball tickets (or gasp, even $2,000) and desperately need a refund, they probably can't afford to sue. Just stop complaining. The school doesn't owe you a refund and you aren't going to sue.

Lol - exactly

[Bergermeister]

Don't call me Shirley.

[EastStang]

So, if I commit 3100 level one infractions do I get penalized 3100 times or do they all get rolled up into one Level 1 infraction. Its pretty simple, if a self-reported, academic fraud for one student versus a discovered by twitter reported academic fraud situation involving 3100 students are treated the same, than that system is in my view is arbitrary and capricious. But we all know that UNC and Louisville will likely be punished the same as SMU despite more violations.

[redpony]

Don't call me Shirley.

Shirley you jest.

[whitwiki]

So, if I commit 3100 level one infractions do I get penalized 3100 times or do they all get rolled up into one Level 1 infraction. Its pretty simple, if a self-reported, academic fraud for one student versus a discovered by twitter reported academic fraud situation involving 3100 students are treated the same, than that system is in my view is arbitrary and capricious. But we all know that UNC and Louisville will likely be punished the same as SMU despite more violations.

That would incentivize me to cheat more

[2ndandlong]

So, if I commit 3100 level one infractions do I get penalized 3100 times or do they all get rolled up into one Level 1 infraction. Its pretty simple, if a self-reported, academic fraud for one student versus a discovered by twitter reported academic fraud situation involving 3100 students are treated the same, than that system is in my view is arbitrary and capricious. But we all know that UNC and Louisville will likely be punished the same as SMU despite more violations.

That's a good question and I don't know the answer to that from reading the infractions committee information.

There are obvious pros and cons from having a bright-line rule based system or a purely interpretation based system. We seem to be flushing out the cons very early in the new system. Hopefully, UNC will get 3,100 post-season bans, but I won't hold my breath.

[redpony]

UNC and L'ville violations will be considered to be level 5. Level 5 is- a school shall be exempt from violation penalties because they send us lots of money, or in the case of extreme violations they will be given a mild wrist-slap.

[ponyboy]

Its pretty simple, if a self-reported, academic fraud for one student versus a discovered-by-twitter academic-fraud situation involving 3100 students are treated the same, than that system is in my view is arbitrary and capricious.

Um, yep.