So Michigan. WTF?!?
It has become like an espionage novel. But I have wasted a lot of time looking into all of it.
What is allowed by NCAA:
-- Deciphering opponents' signals.
-- Getting video from 3rd parties.
What is not allowed:
-- "In-person scouting." Article 11.6.1 of NCAA Division I 2023-24 Manual.
What is true:
-- Michigan had a staffer whose job was deciphering opponents' signals. (This is not a violation of rules.)
What is alleged that most people believe is true, including lots of Michigan fans:
-- The staffer paid for 3rd parties to get videos of opponents' games that he (the staffer) didn't attend.
Some feel this does not violate 11.6.1, and does not even violate the spirit of the rule. Because there is no language to the effect of "in-person scouting, and scouting by agents or assigns, is prohibited". And because there are discussions of amendments in the rules that imply it really is specifically "scouting" and "in-person" that matter in a way that wouldn't preclude 3rd party video taking. Also, teams use 3rd-party video as a matter of course, and that video does also have teams' signs in it.
Some feel it doesn't violate 11.6.1 technically, but does violate the spirit of the rule. Many think Michigan itself will take this point of view.
Some feel it does violate the wording of 11.6.1. I feel this is the opinion of people who don't know much about interpretation of laws and regulations.
What is alleged that is still more unknown:
-- The Michigan staffer was on the sidelines of a CMU/Michigan State game. (This would clearly be a violation of 11.6.1.)
-- That Michigan coaches knew about these activities of the staffer.
The process is supposed to be like this:
1. Some party notifies NCAA of alleged violations.
2. NCAA investigates and tells the school it is doing so, and gathers information. The school is not allowed to speak about the investigation.
3. If NCAA thinks rules violations occurred, they notify the school of findings and ask for response.
4. School gives a response within 90 days.
5. NCAA determines if there should be punishment and what it should be.
The process is like that, except that it includes that all information was leaked incrementally to particular journalists/bloggers, who then put their spin on it and posted on social media, especially Twitter. Creating a media frenzy.
The process is currently in step 2.
How big a deal is this?
Despite the opinions of various fans, media blowhards, anonymous sources, etc. -- no one knows yet.
There was in the past a violation of in-person scouting, and the NCAA penalty was that the staffer was suspended for half a game.
