PonyFans.comBoard IndexAround the HilltopFootballRecruitingBasketballOther Sports

The Definition of Lack Of Institutional Control

This is the forum for talk about SMU Football

Moderators: PonyPride, SmooPower

Postby smupony94 » Wed Mar 07, 2007 2:04 am

expony18 wrote:
Stallion wrote:I really don't give a damn what point you were making PK because your point is irrelevant, immaterial and hearsay and your speculation wouldn't be admitted as evidence unless you have ANY evidence that the Alabama Board of Trustees, the President of the university or other responsible officer in the administration played any role in the cheating scandal or in failing to investigate or cooperate with the NCAA. So why don't you tell us the evidence on which you make the conclusory statements:____________________________________. Until one of you geniuses can fill in that blank then you have presented what is called "no evidence" and any legal tribunnal would be required to find there was "no evidence" to support any finding of lack of institutional control.
haha i'm really enjoying this... i'm guessing you do a good job in the court room


Stallion spends far too much time on Ponyfans to be in the courtroom and one of these days his clients will rebel against his over billing

From what I have learned he is a glorified paralegal
User avatar
smupony94
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 25665
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 11:34 am
Location: Bee Cave, Texas

Postby EastStang » Wed Mar 07, 2007 9:17 am

There's what the law says and what the jury will do. The NCAA rules are pretty clear that any school that violates competitive standards while on probation is eligible for the death penalty. Just as there are cases where a capital crime is committed but the jury based upon the contrition of the Defendant, the wishes of the deceased's family or for whatever reason chooses not to levy the death penalty. The NCAA infractions committee has basically added a new requirement not found in the NCAA rules, "infected governance". How about the St. Bonaventure case where the President of the University, the coach and AD were all in on the violations? Why wasn't the death penalty issued? Because they were not death penalty eligible. Or the Fresno State case where they hired Tarkanian which was like flipping a big bird at the NCAA. They were DP eligible but cooperated and avoided the axe.

So the word is out, cheat to your heart's content and when you're caught cooperate, cry, shed a tear or two, say you're sorry and wait a few years and go back to cheating. By the way, speaking of the NCAA, there are a ton of Illinois alums that are calling for the head of their president for caving in on getting rid of the Chief. And the William and Mary president committed the double sin of caving to the NCAA and removing a cross from the school chapel and was called to the carpet by the alums (one alum cancelling a $12 Million pledge over the cross issue). Money talks....
EastStang
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 12668
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 4:01 am

Postby Stallion » Wed Mar 07, 2007 10:35 am

how many glorified paralegals have winning briefs in the U. S. Supreme Court, the Texas Supreme Court and the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Stallion
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 44302
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2000 4:01 am
Location: Dallas,Texas,USA

Postby Mountain Mustang » Wed Mar 07, 2007 10:40 am

He's not afraid to pat himself on the back is he folks?
Here's to those that wish us well and all the rest can go to hell!!!
User avatar
Mountain Mustang
Varsity
 
Posts: 446
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 8:40 pm
Location: Sapphire, NC

Postby expony18 » Wed Mar 07, 2007 11:05 am

smupony94 wrote:
expony18 wrote:
Stallion wrote:I really don't give a damn what point you were making PK because your point is irrelevant, immaterial and hearsay and your speculation wouldn't be admitted as evidence unless you have ANY evidence that the Alabama Board of Trustees, the President of the university or other responsible officer in the administration played any role in the cheating scandal or in failing to investigate or cooperate with the NCAA. So why don't you tell us the evidence on which you make the conclusory statements:____________________________________. Until one of you geniuses can fill in that blank then you have presented what is called "no evidence" and any legal tribunnal would be required to find there was "no evidence" to support any finding of lack of institutional control.
haha i'm really enjoying this... i'm guessing you do a good job in the court room


Stallion spends far too much time on Ponyfans to be in the courtroom and one of these days his clients will rebel against his over billing

From what I have learned he is a glorified paralegal
don't you think all of us spend too much time on ponyfans?
WEST DIVISION CHAMPS 2010
expony18
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 9968
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 2:54 pm

Postby peruna81 » Wed Mar 07, 2007 11:11 am

If in fact those are the credentials, that is not patting himself on the back, but evidence of ability...although 'Stallion-baiting/bashing' might entertain a few, the post is about institutional control...

A question I have for the board legal types...Is there any legal recourse from SMU's perspective against the NCAA for not applying the DP to other universities ? In reading the above response re Alabama, the committee seemed to warn how close, how very close they came to dropping the hammer on UA. I am sure that the good folks in Tuscaloosa shuddered and sought to mend their ways with that threat alone :roll: .

Equal application of the 'law' is my beef. SMU got what it deserved in the 80's, but the moveable feast of what 'institutional control' is reminds me of Bill Clinton's parsing of verbs. Legal recourse or none ?


God bless Gene Phillips..
stable-boy for the four horsemen of the apocalypse
peruna81
PonyFans.com Legend
 
Posts: 3785
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2001 4:01 am
Location: central Texas

Postby Stallion » Wed Mar 07, 2007 12:13 pm

SMU forclosed any possible equal protection or other argument by failing to exhaust its administrative, legal and/or appellate remedies within the NCAA and the Courts at the time. SMU never challenged the NCAA findings and in fact accepted the sanctions.
Stallion
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 44302
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2000 4:01 am
Location: Dallas,Texas,USA

Postby EastStang » Wed Mar 07, 2007 12:34 pm

I'm glad Stallion helped write winning briefs in these various appellate courts (not sure he actually argued the cases), but anyway, he is correct, we have no remedy except to complain about it. We can't even start to cheat because we have a basketball probation coming up, I'm certain, from the Burgers and Tide debacle. And if we're on probation, we're death penalty eligible. And we know the NCAA would lower the boom on us again, if it got the chance, the scalawags.
EastStang
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 12668
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 4:01 am

Postby expony18 » Wed Mar 07, 2007 12:52 pm

Stallion wrote:SMU forclosed any possible equal protection or other argument by failing to exhaust its administrative, legal and/or appellate remedies within the NCAA and the Courts at the time. SMU never challenged the NCAA findings and in fact accepted the sanctions.
why didnt we? would it just have been a waste of time and money
WEST DIVISION CHAMPS 2010
expony18
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 9968
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 2:54 pm

Postby jtstang » Wed Mar 07, 2007 1:58 pm

There is one thing that SMU could do in response to the mean ole NCAA that is undisputable: it's a private association, so if we don't want to play by their rules we can just drop out.
User avatar
jtstang
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 11161
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 10:21 am
Location: Dallas, TX

Postby Roach » Wed Mar 07, 2007 2:03 pm

How many years/decades is this going to be re-hashed?

For god's sake, let's figure out how each of us can help SMU get better as we move forward, rather than dredging up the same old saga ... again ... and again ...
User avatar
Roach
Heisman
 
Posts: 1173
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2003 3:01 am
Location: Dallas

Postby expony18 » Wed Mar 07, 2007 2:04 pm

i understand that, but its like a dog who was just beat by its owner after peeing on the carpet... and slowly retreats to its dog house with his tail between his legs.

**Expony18 does not condone animal abuse
WEST DIVISION CHAMPS 2010
expony18
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 9968
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 2:54 pm

Postby EastStang » Wed Mar 07, 2007 2:13 pm

Dogs do lots of things. Some of them we can't do.
EastStang
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 12668
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 4:01 am

Postby PlanoStang » Wed Mar 07, 2007 7:40 pm

Roach wrote:How many years/decades is this going to be re-hashed?

For god's sake, let's figure out how each of us can help SMU get better as we move forward, rather than dredging up the same old saga ... again ... and again ...


That's a NO BRAINER :!:

When a big time BCS money school get's the full year DP for breaking
the rules as the ncaa DP rule states. Then maybe we can start thinking
about it.

If the ncaa carries on, and levies more DPs, then we will become more
confident they are serious about the DP. As it is, and the common
reasoning the the ncaa will never give the DP again is just evidence
that SMU's DP was ALL BIG ANIMAL EXREMENT SCAPEGOATING :!:
User avatar
PlanoStang
PonyFans.com Legend
 
Posts: 3258
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2003 3:01 am
Location: Plano, Texas USA

Postby Glenn Sosbee » Thu Mar 08, 2007 12:18 am

Wow. Your hatred toward Bill Clements overshadows your whole lousy point. Remember, It's Bush you're supposed to hate. Get with the times. Or, do you just hate all Republicans?
While you were probably still in diapers, this "newbie" was in Austin watching SMU kick UT's [deleted] 20-6, back in 83. I'm 41 now, and I promise you, that victory is still SWEET. Everybody was playing by the same rules, so it was finally an even playing field for the ponies, and we kicked [deleted].
Similar rules violations would have been found in every other SWC school at the time, had there been other investigations. But the NCAA didn't go sniffing around places like Austin and College Station. The fact is, SMU was singled out because of a policy of selective enforcement by the NCAA. TCU, another private, also got singled out.
Nowadays, the NCAA is focused on really important things like politically incorrect nicknames, and revenue sharing (men's football money going to ladies volleyball). What a great institution!
Pony P-1
User avatar
Glenn Sosbee
All-American
 
Posts: 529
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 10:21 pm
Location: Dallas

PreviousNext

Return to Football

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], smuaustin1971 and 25 guests