Cal football recruiting violation?

3,067 Views | 25 Replies | Last: 9 days ago by bear2034
Fred Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Don't know if this account is reliable or not, but the screenshots look very NCAA-like


Eastern Oregon Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If I'm understanding it correctly, the Cal Football recruiting staff conducted a zoom call during Covid in a period when coaches weren't allowed to make phone calls to recruits. Cal self reported it and most of the penalties and staff suspensions were served quietly last year. It does mention one year probation but I don't know what the status of that is.
KoreAmBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Eastern Oregon Bear said:

If I'm understanding it correctly, the Cal Football recruiting staff conducted a zoom call during Covid in a period when coaches weren't allowed to make phone calls to recruits. Cal self reported it and most of the penalties and staff suspensions were served quietly last year. It does mention one year probation but I don't know what the status of that is.
Besides the one-year probation, the remaining penalties to be served are:

  • A two week ban on OVs during the upcoming season
  • A 2-year restriction on Kevin Parker's (the rope guy and father of Cal RB Jayden Parker) activities if he remains employed by Cal athletics

I suppose a nothing burger at this point. They got Parker for not cooperating, mostly.
hoop97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Why would Cal self-report that? Sad…

Not a nothing burger. 2 week ban on official visits this upcoming season? That is meaningful. It also shows there is not alignment within the department to support football. There's actually forces against it.

Other schools/states sue the NCAA over limitations on NIL, etc. Meanwhile, Cal self-reports a Zoom call. Awesome.
Shocky1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
97, this is yet another anti football measure taken by the worthless bureaucrat ****tards knowlton & simon-o'neil that reflects their non revenue sports agendas
hoop97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Shocky1 said:

97, this is yet another anti football measure taken by the worthless bureaucrat ****tards knowlton & simon-o'neil that reflects their non revenue sports agendas
I don't doubt that but clearly someone below them on the org chart was willing to report this to them and be complicit in it.
bear2034
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hoop97 said:

Shocky1 said:

97, this is yet another anti football measure taken by the worthless bureaucrat ****tards knowlton & simon-o'neil that reflects their non revenue sports agendas
I don't doubt that but clearly someone below them on the org chart was willing to report this to them and be complicit in it.
It's a conspiracy. They're trying to do the football program dirty.
CAL4LIFE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The self-reporting of a zoom call during that bull**** time frame is an all-timer.

Well played.



CAL4LIFE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bear2034 said:

Did Cal self-report that at least the coaches were all wearing masks on the Zoom calls?
Eastern Oregon Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CAL4LIFE said:

bear2034 said:

Did Cal self-report that at least the coaches were all wearing masks on the Zoom calls?

Bear2034 can't help himself. Everything is snarky politics to him.
59bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
What??? There are still rules to break?
socaltownie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This seems so odd and random and _SO_ typical not to fight this one all the way to the top of NCAA land from the descriptions offered. Does 1 year probation just mean that we are on notice with no actual penalties? And yes, this is just so NCAA stupid - justifying the lawyers in KC who look for this **** rather than hard stuff against schools that stonewall and say "HAH! You have no subpoena powers. Good luck and god speed".
mbBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
socaltownie said:

This seems so odd and random and _SO_ typical not to fight this one all the way to the top of NCAA land from the descriptions offered. Does 1 year probation just mean that we are on notice with no actual penalties? And yes, this is just so NCAA stupid - justifying the lawyers in KC who look for this **** rather than hard stuff against schools that stonewall and say "HAH! You have no subpoena powers. Good luck and god speed".
what's the point of fighting if the "penalty" could easily be taken?
socaltownie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
mbBear said:

socaltownie said:

This seems so odd and random and _SO_ typical not to fight this one all the way to the top of NCAA land from the descriptions offered. Does 1 year probation just mean that we are on notice with no actual penalties? And yes, this is just so NCAA stupid - justifying the lawyers in KC who look for this **** rather than hard stuff against schools that stonewall and say "HAH! You have no subpoena powers. Good luck and god speed".
what's the point of fighting if the "penalty" could easily be taken?
In some cases because the probation adds risk and in other cases it is to show folks that your program won't puy up with BS. Ask big time programs why they often sue and take things to the extreme when NCAA just wants a wrist slap.
wifeisafurd
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm with the major conference commissioners on this: just take the NCAA out of football. Good grief, and freaking Zoom call....
mbBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
socaltownie said:

mbBear said:

socaltownie said:

This seems so odd and random and _SO_ typical not to fight this one all the way to the top of NCAA land from the descriptions offered. Does 1 year probation just mean that we are on notice with no actual penalties? And yes, this is just so NCAA stupid - justifying the lawyers in KC who look for this **** rather than hard stuff against schools that stonewall and say "HAH! You have no subpoena powers. Good luck and god speed".
what's the point of fighting if the "penalty" could easily be taken?
In some cases because the probation adds risk and in other cases it is to show folks that your program won't puy up with BS. Ask big time programs why they often sue and take things to the extreme when NCAA just wants a wrist slap.
that's fair...it just doesn't sound like this is THAT kind of thing...like maybe they did the call, even knowing there would be some minimal punishment...
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Are you ****ing kidding me!

It is totally legal to pay players now and people are worried about a zoom call?

**** these rules because there are no rules, and screw the people that enforce them.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
golden sloth said:

Are you ****ing kidding me!

It is totally legal to pay players now and people are worried about a zoom call?

**** these rules because there are no rules, and screw the people that enforce them.


The NCAA still limits the number of people you can have on staff who can recruit. That part makes sense. The "booster" limits in the current environment make no sense.

bear2034
How long do you want to ignore this user?
59bear said:

What??? There are still rules to break?
Does Cal have to comply with Title IX? I'm sure there are clever ways to get around this.
Rushinbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Lyons to Knowlton: "And, you let them make that zoom call? You're fired!"
cal83dls79
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hoop97 said:

Why would Cal self-report that? Sad…

Not a nothing burger. 2 week ban on official visits this upcoming season? That is meaningful. It also shows there is not alignment within the department to support football. There's actually forces against it.

Other schools/states sue the NCAA over limitations on NIL, etc. Meanwhile, Cal self-reports a Zoom call. Awesome.
an own goal.
Priest of the Patty Hearst Shrine
cal83dls79
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Eastern Oregon Bear said:

CAL4LIFE said:

bear2034 said:

Did Cal self-report that at least the coaches were all wearing masks on the Zoom calls?

Bear2034 can't help himself. Everything is snarky politics to him.
my thoughts exactly. I came over here to get away from that dude and politics on OT and here he is again f'n it up.
Priest of the Patty Hearst Shrine
bear2034
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cal83dls79 said:

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

CAL4LIFE said:

bear2034 said:

Did Cal self-report that at least the coaches were all wearing masks on the Zoom calls?

Bear2034 can't help himself. Everything is snarky politics to him.
my thoughts exactly. I came over here to get away from that dude and politics on OT and here he is again f'n it up.
Don't confuse politics with science. Having the same thoughts as eastern oregon is not a good thing.
DoubtfulBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rushinbear said:

Lyons to Knowlton: "And, you let them make that zoom call? You're fired!"
Lyons to Knowlton: "And, you demonstrated upstanding moral character by self reporting? You're extended!"

Rushinbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DoubtfulBear said:

Rushinbear said:

Lyons to Knowlton: "And, you let them make that zoom call? You're fired!"
Lyons to Knowlton: "And, you demonstrated upstanding moral character by self reporting? You're extended!"


I take it that's facetious. Lyons is not THAT dumb, is he?
bear2034
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Lyons must think Knowlton is doing a good job or maybe he's never fired anyone in his life.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.