It doesn't even apply to the players, much less the fans. Basically just school employees.
Everything Zen: 2023 Michigan Football
- Thread starter Zososoxfan
- Start date
Because schools don't want to pay for more staff. If it's allowed they need to hire people to advance scout or else look like they aren't keeping up with the Joneses to boosters. They think it's a waste of money, but they can't convince every school to not do it. So just outlaw the things that are expensive (most technology, for example) and you'll never have to worry about spending money on things that is better off in your paycheck.
So if the people Stalions sent tickets to and who recorded video at opponents’ games weren’t school employees the rule wasn’t (technically) broken?
Yes:
LINK
The latest info indicates that a Michigan booster was financing Stalions (people previously believed his family was merely wealthy and Stalions was using personal funds) and Partridge was fired for trying to cover Stalions' transgressions. Once the Michigan Regents learned about the new evidence, they settled with the Conference.
The Conference's statement also states that there's been no connection showing that JH knew about the sign-stealing. And it's worth reiterating that most teams have the same sign information, but it's gleaned from fellow conference coaches, not advanced scouts like Stalions' minions.
Regardless of where you stand on this matter, this has been a fascinating scandal to follow. It'll make for a great movie someday, starring US President Tom Brady of course.
Edit: President Tom Brady
If “fellow college coaches” are stealing signs during the games they’re involved in, then passing those stolen signs to other programs, aren’t they then, in effect, conducting advanced, in-person scouting?
What I mean is what difference does it make if the person doing the scouting and then passing on the info is a random fan (edit: or pal of Stalions) or another team’s coach?
It makes a difference in how much money it costs the university. That's what the rule is put in to prevent.
Considering the reason the rule exists is to prevent schools from spending money on this function, addressing a violation with a fine seems like it would be completely backwards.
@CFB_Rules is correct--the rule was implemented in 1994 ostensibly as a cost-control mechanism. But I think your post reflects why Michigan fans are mostly incredulous of this whole thing--there was little competitive advantage gained by this. So while a coach might gain some additional benefit from video focused directly on the future opponent, getting the same information but compiled and synthesized by an actual football coach is likely more effective from a competitive perspective.
I'm not sure I follow why it's completely backwards, but I was just trying to find and use some precedent.
I get why you were looking for precedent, that part makes sense. My point is: The rule exists for cost-control mechanism. The Michigans of the world are fine funding this operation, but that puts a burden on the Purdues, the Eastern Michigans, etc. to do the same or operate at a disadvantage. So when a school like Michigan violates it, addressing it with a fine misses the whole point. The idea is to prevent Michgan from spending the money on advance scouting. So when they're caught advancing scouting, making them hand over money is what would be backwards. Not sure if I'm doing a good job explaining my point.
Can’t find a link, but I read somewhere that a Baylor assistant coach was suspended for a game for violating the advanced in-person scouting rule.
Not sure how that’d apply in the Michigan case because (AFAIK) no actual Michigan coaches or staffers were conducting advanced scouting.* Stalions was farming that off to non-staff friends or fans. And Stalions’ scheme involved multiple games, not just one.
A commensurate penalty to Baylor’s might be to suspend Stalions for the number of games he arranged for others to record signs. But he’s quit already so that’s not much of a penalty.And of course there the NCAA thing about how coaches are responsibleregardless of complicity, so you could apply that penalty to Harbaugh. It’d set a terrible precedent, though.
*Which again raises the question: was the rule actually broken?
That's such a weak argument I'm honestly surprised you're advancing it. But even still, Stalions is suspected of being at the CMU/Michigan State game, right? Or was that debunked?
Here's an article on the Big 12 suspending a Baylor coach for a half for being on the sidelines during a future opponent's game:
Here's an article on the Big 12 suspending a Baylor coach for a half for being on the sidelines during a future opponent's game:
https://www.dallasnews.com/sports/2015/09/23/baylor-assistant-reprimanded-suspended-for-a-half-against-ou/
Is this directed at me? What argument?
I don’t know. If he was, I think he was working for CMU, helping them decipher MSU signs. (Several CMU coaches used to coach at Michigan). Regardless, if that was Stalions on the sidelines, that’s a clear violation of the rule.
Thanks. I’d read it but couldn’t find it. Anyway, there’s the precedent folks were looking for: 1/2 game per infraction applied to the person who violated the rule. How would that apply to Stalions or Harbaugh? Note that Big Ten says it has no evidence Harbaugh knew about Stalions’s scheme (which may have been legal.) That suggests the NCAA doesn’t have any evidence against Harbaugh either.
Story takes another weird turn.
Michigan booster Tim Smith denies being 'Uncle T,' who allegedly funded Connor Stalions' sign-stealing scheme
https://sports.yahoo.com/michigan-booster-tim-smith-denies-being-uncle-t-who-allegedly-funded-connor-stalions-sign-stealing-scheme-202933063.html
Michigan booster Tim Smith denies being 'Uncle T,' who allegedly funded Connor Stalions' sign-stealing scheme
https://sports.yahoo.com/michigan-booster-tim-smith-denies-being-uncle-t-who-allegedly-funded-connor-stalions-sign-stealing-scheme-202933063.html
If in-person advanced scouting provides minimal competitive advantage, why did Michigan do it?
First, “minimal competitive advantage” isn’t my analysis. It’s the NCAA’s.
Second, it’s not clear that Michigan did it. Right now it appears to have been a scheme carried out by a low-level recruiting analyst, perhaps with financing from a booster. But it’s a good question. Every team steals signs, or tries to, but maybe it’s easier to steal signs using fans in the stands than watching film.So maybe it provides a slight competitive advantage.
Why did Rutgers and Ohio provide in-person advanced scouting sign-stealing info to Purdue ahead of last year’s B10 championship game?
See, this is important.
1) There is footage of Stalions literally being on the sidelines on multiple instances next to the coordinators and the head coach holding laminated sheets. So you called him a "low level recruiting analyst." To show how out of touch with reality you are, find one person standing next to a coordinator during a game who would fit the description of a "low level recruiting analyst." Let me help you - you won't. Ever.
2) The Rutgers and Ohio State info: a) Came from Michigan, submitted to the Big10. b) Used anonymous sources c) Were not taken seriously by the conference as Michigan has worn clown pants throughout this process
You are losing your grip. Get your grip back, this thing has made one mediocre poster go bananas, don't have it take down two.
A longer suspension from the NCAA for Harbaugh may be coming:
https://x.com/bnkonfox/status/1725909668520771719?s=46&t=uVK8VoVnjxH0J6ZFRVJ_4Q
"It would not be surprising if Jim Harbaugh could be suspended for the bulk of the 2024 season, I'm told."
@BruceFeldmanCFB breaks down the Harbaugh suspension and his future at Michigan
https://x.com/bnkonfox/status/1725909668520771719?s=46&t=uVK8VoVnjxH0J6ZFRVJ_4Q
"It would not be surprising if Jim Harbaugh could be suspended for the bulk of the 2024 season, I'm told."
@BruceFeldmanCFB breaks down the Harbaugh suspension and his future at Michigan
Are you suggesting that whatever intel Stalions gleaned was not passed on to the Michigan coaching staff, and that he acted independently and for no apparent gain for Michigan football? The ineffectual rogue wolf theory isn’t very compelling.
Is it possible that Stalions and whoever else knew about his sign-stealing scheme thought it was legal, i.e. that it exploited loopholes in the NCAA rules instead of violating them? That might explain why the scheme was so brazen, with no attempt to hide it.
NCAA Rule 1-11-h prohibits recording an opposing team’s signals using any audio or video means. However, the rule explicitly applies to people in the "team area" — coaches, players, etc. — during a game. It doesn’t apply to people on the stands.
NCAA Bylaw 11.6.1 prohibits off-campus, in-person scouting of future opponents within the same season (with some exceptions.) But the context of the rule strongly suggests it applies to “institutional staff members,” not to spectators or fans.
Furthermore, in 2013, the NCAA removed a ban on paying for third-party scouting services. Isn’t that, in effect, what Stalions was doing? Paying third-party fans with tickets and travel expenses (probably bought with with booster money) to scout opponents?
Stealing signs is legal. Recording signs is legal as long as you don’t do it from a restricted area (the sidelines.) Paying third parties for scouting services is legal.
All that said, if Stalions himself went to opponents’ games to conduct in-person scouting, as it appears he did at least once, the CMU-MSU game, that’s a clear violation of NCAA Bylaw 11.6.1.
NCAA Rule 1-11-h prohibits recording an opposing team’s signals using any audio or video means. However, the rule explicitly applies to people in the "team area" — coaches, players, etc. — during a game. It doesn’t apply to people on the stands.
NCAA Bylaw 11.6.1 prohibits off-campus, in-person scouting of future opponents within the same season (with some exceptions.) But the context of the rule strongly suggests it applies to “institutional staff members,” not to spectators or fans.
Furthermore, in 2013, the NCAA removed a ban on paying for third-party scouting services. Isn’t that, in effect, what Stalions was doing? Paying third-party fans with tickets and travel expenses (probably bought with with booster money) to scout opponents?
Stealing signs is legal. Recording signs is legal as long as you don’t do it from a restricted area (the sidelines.) Paying third parties for scouting services is legal.
All that said, if Stalions himself went to opponents’ games to conduct in-person scouting, as it appears he did at least once, the CMU-MSU game, that’s a clear violation of NCAA Bylaw 11.6.1.
I don't think either of the bolded statements is correct. (See my post back on page 2 of this thread.)
Maybe, but I’m less interested in whether Stalions actually broke the rules than I am in whether he and others believed they were violating the rules or exploiting loopholes. I think if they were knowingly breaking the rules they’d have made an effort to hide it. It’s relevant with regard to penalties.
Michigan squeaked one out on the road @Maryland this weekend. Mikey Sainristil (of Milton, MA!) had 2 more picks this game--he's been tremendous all season. Michigan's DL continues to be absolute monsters all the way thru the 2-deep, but the LBs and the CBs are showing cracks. The hope is that Michigan was playing their OSU D regardless of how Maryland lined up, and Michigan otherwise kept their fun stuff in the barn for next week.
On O, the biggest issue is OT health, as Henderson (LT) didn't travel with the team, and Hinton who replaced him came out of the game with an injury. They shifted Barnhardt over to LT and inserted Trente Jones at RT. Both OTs are excellent run blockers but not as adept against the pass. The OGs are OGs, and Drake Nugent at C has been solid. Roman Wilson came out injured early in the game but that was hopefully precautionary as he's easily Michigan's best deep threat. The TEs made some plays, not as many as usual, and CJ played alright (missing the big play action shot though). Semaj Morgan and Tyler Morris are both really fun pieces (Morgan's TD was awesome) but also still a year away. Blake Corum led the O with 94 yards and 2 TDs. JJM had a below par game, only going 12/23 for 141 yards and an INT. He needs to play much much better against OSU. But he should be able to do that if they activate him running, which was very clearly a no-go against MD.
OHHOWIHATE!!
On O, the biggest issue is OT health, as Henderson (LT) didn't travel with the team, and Hinton who replaced him came out of the game with an injury. They shifted Barnhardt over to LT and inserted Trente Jones at RT. Both OTs are excellent run blockers but not as adept against the pass. The OGs are OGs, and Drake Nugent at C has been solid. Roman Wilson came out injured early in the game but that was hopefully precautionary as he's easily Michigan's best deep threat. The TEs made some plays, not as many as usual, and CJ played alright (missing the big play action shot though). Semaj Morgan and Tyler Morris are both really fun pieces (Morgan's TD was awesome) but also still a year away. Blake Corum led the O with 94 yards and 2 TDs. JJM had a below par game, only going 12/23 for 141 yards and an INT. He needs to play much much better against OSU. But he should be able to do that if they activate him running, which was very clearly a no-go against MD.
OHHOWIHATE!!
But will there, be?
I read an article this weekend that OSU should probably hang onto him for one more year considering the playoff expansion, and the fact that OSU has lost 4 games over the last 3 seasons, with one of those losses to UGA in the semis. I generally agree, but with the caveat that he's on the shortest of leashes next season. But the real question for OSU (in my mind) is whether Day can take this obviously top 10 program, and make them into a top 2-3 TEAM.
What I mean by that is that OSU's recruiting, facilities, following, etc. are clearly top 10. You could probably even make the argument it's top 5. But is that enough? We haven't seen the 2 previous Michigan losses affect OSU recruiting at all (OSU is consistently top 5, and would be the envy of every team not named UGA and Bama, including Michigan), and it's very relevant that Michigan is usually in the 10-20 range. IOW, Michigan is beating OSU on the field, while OSU is beating Michigan is the usual metrics we look at to predict on-field success. And while this year's game was closer, the previous 2 contests were not terribly competitive (relatively speaking). And this year we should take into account that Michigan was missing their HC and didn't have the VAUNTED SIGN STEALING ADVANTAGE.
But OSU's success or failure against Michigan (and vice versa) is about to become a whole lot less important. Michigan has really made hay these last 3 seasons by building outstanding teams (and reinforcing the program's ethos) but also by spending the majority of the season preparing for OSU. MGoBlog, a very astute Xs and Os blog, frequently talks about the meta-game of The Game. i.e., the teambuilding strategy vis-a-vis the rival. JH brought in Don Brown ahead of the '16 season and in his 4 years against OSU, Michigan entered The Game with a top 10 ranking and top 10 statistic defense in 3/4 years. Yet, only one of those games was competitive (2016) and after the 2016 game, OSU seemed to figure out Brown's more college-y defensive approach by going to a pro offense. Well, JH went to his brother over in Baltimore and set about building a pro-style defense. First with Mike Macdonald, and now with Jesse Minter. That approach (paired with a possession-dominating efficiency monster offense) really stifled OSU in '21 and '22. Michigan was better than OSU this year, but if OSU was qualifying for the CFB playoffs, I think it's fair to say they'd care a lot less.
All of this is to say that I think Michigan and OSU are about to start caring about each other a whole lot less. Coaches and programs will still care about conference titles, but in the same way bball teams do. But making a Final 4 run and winning it all, will become the new benchmarks. And when your regular season opponents become less of a can't-miss obstacle, I think coaches will become more concerned with how their game travels, especially against top 5-10 teams, than about one specific team--like Michigan and OSU do now.
I will write out my full thoughts about The Game (2023 Edition) soon, but for now, I'll just say IT'S GREAT, TO BE, A MICHIGAN WOLVERINE!
Not true, that 2017 game was very competitive. OSU didn't get a lead until late in the 3rd quarter and Michigan had opportunities in the 4th quarter, but O'Korn's inability to throw an accurate pass to wide open receivers doomed them. Michigan did have issues with OSU's running game and the passing game once Haskins came in, but they still held OSU to 350 yards and 31 points.
But other than that, great post.