NCAA punishes OU

[PK]

Luckily, his wife followed.

Lucky for you guys maybe, but now the rest of us have to deal with her too.

[jtstang]

Luckily, his wife followed.

Lucky for you guys maybe, but now the rest of us have to deal with her too.

Come on, you can say it, PK, "Madame President".

[PK]

Luckily, his wife followed.

Lucky for you guys maybe, but now the rest of us have to deal with her too.

Come on, you can say it, PK, "Madame President".

That is not funny....scary, but not funny.

[George S. Patton]

Luckily, his wife followed.

Lucky for you guys maybe, but now the rest of us have to deal with her too.

Come on, you can say it, PK, "Madame President".

She won't win her party's nomination. Too much of a lightning rod. That party needs someone to galvanize the nation not divide even further than it supposedly is.

[mrydel]

Honest poll although I may be slightly off on the numbers. When Bill decided to run for President after promising to complete his term as Gov and not run, over 80% of those polled said they would forgive him and wanted him to run for Pres. Out of the 80% that said that, 75% said the reason they wanted him to run for Presdient was so he would resign as Governor. It was you outsiders that went ahead and elected him. We just wanted him out of here.

(How is this for a wandering thread?)

[PK]

(How is this for a wandering thread?)

Good job mrydel.

[MrMustang1965]

UPDATE:

NORMAN, Okla. (AP) -- The University of Oklahoma has taken the first step to appealing a ruling by the NCAA that stripped the football team of its 2005 wins and found the university guilty of "failure to monitor" the employment of its athletes.

OU President David Boren sent a notice of appeal of those two findings to NCAA President Myles Brand.

Boren noted the appeal was limited only to the "failure to monitor" finding and the NCAA's penalty that forced the Sooners to erase all of the wins from its 2005 season, when OU went 8-4 and won the Holiday Bowl.

"We have accepted a large majority of the NCAA's findings and penalties because we agree that the highest possible standards of conduct and ethics should be maintained and that when mistakes are made, even if they are unintentional, institutions must be held accountable," Boren said in a statement Friday.

The penalties stem from a case involving players, including starting quarterback Rhett Bomar and offensive lineman J.D. Quinn, who were kicked off the team last August for being paid for work they had not performed at a Norman car dealership, Big Red Sports and Imports.

On its notice of appeal form, Oklahoma indicated it would appeal all five of the findings on which the "failure to monitor" violation was based. Those include the school failing to follow established procedures to track employment by collecting gross earnings statements for 12 athletes who worked at the car dealership and failing to detect that athletes were working at the dealership in the spring and fall of the 2004-05 and 2005-06 seasons.

Oklahoma also indicated it would use all of its possible grounds for appeal -- that the evidence is contrary to the violation finding, that the facts do not constitute a violation, and that a procedural error affected the reliability of information supporting the infractions committee's finding. It also claims the removal of the Sooners' eight wins in 2005 was excessive.

The school requested the appeal be based on written record of its appearance before the infractions committee in April instead of being heard in person before the appellate panel.

[ponyte]

Give OU a big thumbs up for testicles. They have the brazen audacity to appeal this wrist slap. I-God I wish we had half the testosterone of OU.

[ponyte]

UPDATE:

NORMAN, Okla. (AP) -- The University of Oklahoma has taken the first step to appealing a ruling by the NCAA that stripped the football team of its 2005 wins and found the university guilty of "failure to monitor" the employment of its athletes.

OU President David Boren sent a notice of appeal of those two findings to NCAA President Myles Brand.

Boren noted the appeal was limited only to the "failure to monitor" finding and the NCAA's penalty that forced the Sooners to erase all of the wins from its 2005 season, when OU went 8-4 and won the Holiday Bowl.

"We have accepted a large majority of the NCAA's findings and penalties because we agree that the highest possible standards of conduct and ethics should be maintained and that when mistakes are made, even if they are unintentional, institutions must be held accountable," Boren said in a statement Friday.

The penalties stem from a case involving players, including starting quarterback Rhett Bomar and offensive lineman J.D. Quinn, who were kicked off the team last August for being paid for work they had not performed at a Norman car dealership, Big Red Sports and Imports.

On its notice of appeal form, Oklahoma indicated it would appeal all five of the findings on which the "failure to monitor" violation was based. Those include the school failing to follow established procedures to track employment by collecting gross earnings statements for 12 athletes who worked at the car dealership and failing to detect that athletes were working at the dealership in the spring and fall of the 2004-05 and 2005-06 seasons.

Oklahoma also indicated it would use all of its possible grounds for appeal -- that the evidence is contrary to the violation finding, that the facts do not constitute a violation, and that a procedural error affected the reliability of information supporting the infractions committee's finding. It also claims the removal of the Sooners' eight wins in 2005 was excessive.

The school requested the appeal be based on written record of its appearance before the infractions committee in April instead of being heard in person before the appellate panel.

Oh, by the by. Even though we have had a limited acquaintance as we have only met once in person but have had years of a cyber acquaintance, I am so glad to see you back and participating on this board. I for one have missed your insight on this board. I am glad to see you engaged once again and hope we can share a Jethro's Nanobrewery special this fall.

[MrMustang1965]

Thanks, ponyte. I appreciate that. First round of Jethro's is on me!

[mr. pony]

I've always said a big state school would never get the DP because the NCAA rep announcing the decision would be tackled by 300 lawyers before he got the words out of his mouth.

[Stallion]

SMU and its team of lawyers challenged the NCAA on the circa 1984 probation-at the same time they continued to blantently cheat and even decided to take it up a notch-that really worked out great for SMU. SMU's attitude resulted in the Death Penalty and that had every SMU fan crying about "how unfair the NCAA was" while Bill Clements and his bagmen were passing out bills. Boo Hoo-poor SMU! What a load of crap. SMU is the poster boy for a school with the Balls. SMU shot the shaft at the NCAA. And the NCAA rightfully cut them off.

[jtstang]

I've always said a big state school would never get the DP because the NCAA rep announcing the decision would be tackled by 300 lawyers before he got the words out of his mouth.

Maybe, but they would not win.

[smu diamond m]

The nutless NCAA will probably just bend over and lighten up the penalty on OU. I hate those folk.

[EastStang]

I think and I could be wrong on this but on the appeal to the NCAA could decide to issue even worse penalties against OU than the first enforcement committee did. I would love for OU to appeal and get handed a stiffer sentence on appeal. Won't happen, but if it did, I would be LMAO.