UCF AD...Gone
- Thread starter RedMyMind
- Start date
UCF fans actually believed Danny White when he said he was committed to UCF for the long-term.
The reality is that unless UCF can join a major conference, they will never be a destination job. UCF gave White a big contract over $1 million/year just 9 months ago and he already bailed. If Heupel can get them back to where they were a couple years ago, he'll leave too.
The reality is that unless UCF can join a major conference, they will never be a destination job. UCF gave White a big contract over $1 million/year just 9 months ago and he already bailed. If Heupel can get them back to where they were a couple years ago, he'll leave too.
If it was me I would keep Stelle and be happy that we have a quality head coach not knowing how hard the NCAA will lay the wood to the program...
Are those realistic candidates for them, considering the sanctions they could be facing?
Actually the new coach will have some cover for a while until the sanctions go away. A built in excuse for a year or two. I guess I would see it as a good opportunity where your neck isn't on the line to win big right away. You also know you are going to have the AD watching and supporting so this doesn't happen again.
Ha, that's the one thing we DON'T have to worry about. Nobody is going to hire Frost away for a higher salary. He's damaged goods now and would have to take a big pay cut to be hired somewhere else.
From the articles I have read, it sounds like the NCAA has not yet issued a Notice of Allegations, rather, this is all self-discovered and reported. If that's the case, the enforcement staff will now begin it's own inquiry. How long that takes depends on how many interviews it feels must be conducted and how much information still needs to be gathered. Only when this is complete is the notice issued. The institution then has at least 90 days to respond, and then the matter has to be set for a hearing in front of the infractions committee. Once a hearing is held, a report has to be generated setting forth the facts, violations and penalties. Those are running behind these days as the Office of the Committees on Infractions has been hit hard by furloughs, resignations and buyouts. My point to all this is that this case could drag on for a long time, perhaps this whole calendar year. With all that uncertainty, and if the violations are as severe as some have stated, it will be very tough to land a top-notch coach and recruits (although there is some merit to the point that a new coach will have a longer grace period).
Another potential scenario, one that would move the case along much quicker, is if the enforcement staff and school can agree on all facts and violations and can further agree on proposed penalties. Then they can take advantage of what's called Summary Disposition and can submit the case to the committee without a hearing. The committee may insist on further, tougher penalties, but if the case is handled this way it will move much faster. From what I read, this could be a good case for Summary Disposition, as the school seems to be agreement that violations occurred. Not yet known is if the coaches who committed the violations will agree. If they don't agree, Summary Disposition could be off the table.
A final possibility, if ALL parties agree to facts, violations AND penalties, would be the new process of Negotiated Resolution. If the parties agree to this, it would sail through, although it sounds like Pruitt is gonna go down swinging. If one party does not agree, the bylaws still allow for the other parties to use this process, but the committee frowns on such situations and probably wouldn't allow it. Also, if the committee sees this case as just too significant, it can insist on the parties appearing for a hearing.
I won't go into the new Independent Resolution process, as my guess is that this case will stay with the peer-review Committee on Infractions.
Stay tuned -- this mess is just getting started
Another potential scenario, one that would move the case along much quicker, is if the enforcement staff and school can agree on all facts and violations and can further agree on proposed penalties. Then they can take advantage of what's called Summary Disposition and can submit the case to the committee without a hearing. The committee may insist on further, tougher penalties, but if the case is handled this way it will move much faster. From what I read, this could be a good case for Summary Disposition, as the school seems to be agreement that violations occurred. Not yet known is if the coaches who committed the violations will agree. If they don't agree, Summary Disposition could be off the table.
A final possibility, if ALL parties agree to facts, violations AND penalties, would be the new process of Negotiated Resolution. If the parties agree to this, it would sail through, although it sounds like Pruitt is gonna go down swinging. If one party does not agree, the bylaws still allow for the other parties to use this process, but the committee frowns on such situations and probably wouldn't allow it. Also, if the committee sees this case as just too significant, it can insist on the parties appearing for a hearing.
I won't go into the new Independent Resolution process, as my guess is that this case will stay with the peer-review Committee on Infractions.
Stay tuned -- this mess is just getting started
What team in their right mind would ever hire a Head Coach from UCF? That is, unless there is a fantasy of a coach having a couple of good years there being a qualified P5 coach. Maybe Nebraska should consider “chipping in” so that Frosty can go to Tennessee. It could be a win-win-win.
Sounds like Heupel may leave with him.
My god, can we please pay UCF to take Frost off our hands?
My god, can we please pay UCF to take Frost off our hands?