I caught this in a mgoboard post last night, and Brian mentioned it today above the virtual fold.   Apparently President Coleman gave a speech to Boston-area alums and noted that U-M would be reporting self-imposed sanctions to the NCAA later this month.

I sent a note off to media relations to confirm this.  Bruce Madej responded thusly via email:

"As we said during the February 23rd press conference, May 24th is the date we must have the self-imposed infractions to the NCAA.  After the NCAA receives and reads the report, we will release the information the following day."

Emphasis mine of course.  I guess this snuck up on me, but it’s clear in the letter to Coleman from back in February that the NCAA wanted a response by May 24:

msc letter

And apparently that response will indeed include self-imposed infractions.

Take: the sooner the better for this stuff.  Let’s get it out there and move on.  As far as the next steps, the NCAA will review U-M’s recommendations and respond on August 13-14.

4 Comments

  1. Lets hope they don’t go overboard with the self-imposed penalties.

    I suggest loss of scholarship or two for a year, and deduction of practice time.

  2. @Benjamin
    Seems to be the Brandon method to get out in front of this stuff. You may have noticed that the Morgan Trent thing got a quick reply from RichRod and Carr, and the DeFran garbage was crushed the following morning. I like the approach and trust that the self-imposed penalties will be measured twice.

  3. The BIG ELEPHANT snuck out the back door this past winter: the NCAA hasn’t asked Bill Martin to appear at the August hearing. Brandon will go — even though Martin is not “retired” until September, and even though Brandon is in no way a “fact witness” on the central issue – “Was there lack of institutional control?” Brandon can only offer second-hand hearsay. The first logical question any NCAA investigator should ask is: What did you, B. Martin, know then? (And if he claims no knowledge, then what SHOULD he have known, if he was a good AD?) The fact that BMartin is not a scheduled witness suggests that the NCAA is giving Martin and UM a HUGE “pass,” and has looked the other way while UM hurriedly, these past months, “shuffled” the Big Elephant (Martin) out the back door. [Martin’s scheduled “departure” from daily operations as AD was rocketed ahead to get him out of the office.] The conclusion: UM & Martin have something to hide, and will be allowed by the NCAA to hide it.

  4. @Wm Wilson
    Your conclusion lacks logic. Bill Martin announced his retirement last fall, to be effective in early September. From the get go, it was clear that Martin would only serve as AD until a replacement was in place. From an organizational standpoint, it made sense to get the new AD in place ASAP. To compare it to the impending Supreme Court vacancy, Obama didn’t waste any time in nominating a replacement for Stevens. What’s your conspiracy theory on that one?