NOA Question

[Brad Stevens.sixpack]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Ole Miss only released what they wanted regarding the new NOA, correct? So, when will the new NOA be made public regarding specific violations?

I am sure this has been addressed at some point in the last 4-5 days, but there have been so many threads, that I can't seem to find the answer.

 

[The Maroon Pug]

I believe that is correct. But honestly I think there is more to that NOA than they led on with, specifially from the academic/Financial standpoint.

 

[mount lefroy]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Ole Miss only released what they wanted regarding the new NOA, correct? So, when will the new NOA be made public regarding specific violations?

I am sure this has been addressed at some point in the last 4-5 days, but there have been so many threads, that I can't seem to find the answer.

One side of me says there is more and they decided not to release it.

The pragmatist in me says that they are not dumb enough to invite the question "Why did you hold a press conference KNOWING the rest of this would come out?" and the additional harm that would cause.

UNLESS they can answer that the unmentioned allegations are protected under some attorney client privilege issue due to a pending lawsuit or criminal charge. (misappropriation etc)

 

[bulldognation]

They came out with LOIC. That's the dagger.

How much more do you want?

 

[Faustdog]

As in the original NOA, there are often many violations under each allegation. For example, in the original NOA it alleges that the booster provided free lodging twelve times, but that only constitutes one allegation. I would bet there are many damaging details like that that we are unaware of.

They only released what they wanted us to know and in a way that was most beneficial to them.

And then they leaked the names of college students who they feel wronged by but not the boosters who actually got them in trouble. That should show anyone and the NCAA their true level of contrition.

 

[Brad Stevens.sixpack]

I'm not saying I want *more* - I am just curious as to the specifics of what was found that constituted the LOIC ruling. I wasn't sure if we knew a timeframe when that would be made public.

 

[patdog]

As in the original NOA, there are often many violations under each allegation. For example, in the original NOA it alleges that the booster provided free lodging twelve times, but that only constitutes one allegation. I would bet there are many damaging details like that that we are unaware of.

You make this point much better than I did earlier. They're not dumb enough to leave out an allegation, knowing that if they did, they'd be exposed as obvious liars soon enough. But what they said about each allegation was spun to the make them look as good as possible (or in this case as little bad as possible). As bad as their announcement was, the actual letter is probably a little worse.

 

[tatedog]

I would wager a large amount that there is significant/interesting information in the NOA yet to be released. I would wager an even larger amount that the investigation is continuing.