GS,
Reasonable minds would think they'd be more severe than what USC received. However, I bet they get a slap on the wrist. Probably a year of no bowl and loss of 5-10 scholarships. It's the Big10 and I am sure they don't want to hurt OSU's feelings too much. I guess there are 4 schools that we are waiting on sanctions to come down.
- Ohio St
- North Carolina
- South Carolina
- Tennessee
NCAA probably wont punish them harshly. I think what happened at Ohio St was worse that USC and UNC because it was the head coach, not an assistant (UNC) or a parent (USC) that misled and lied to the NCAA.
Somehow I think it would be appropriate to have a Michigan or Mich St person on the NCAA investigation and punishment panel for the Ohio St. In doing some research, I found out that 1 of the key folks responsible for the handing out the penalties and then the appeals process for USC were from Notre Dame (Only USC's 2nd biggest rival). That would be akin to Oklahoma facing penalties and on the panel were 2 folks from the Univ of Texas. Not sure how fare a deal you would get, but that's life.
WinOne!!
Reasonable minds would think they'd be more severe than what USC received. However, I bet they get a slap on the wrist. Probably a year of no bowl and loss of 5-10 scholarships. It's the Big10 and I am sure they don't want to hurt OSU's feelings too much. I guess there are 4 schools that we are waiting on sanctions to come down.
- Ohio St
- North Carolina
- South Carolina
- Tennessee
NCAA probably wont punish them harshly. I think what happened at Ohio St was worse that USC and UNC because it was the head coach, not an assistant (UNC) or a parent (USC) that misled and lied to the NCAA.
Somehow I think it would be appropriate to have a Michigan or Mich St person on the NCAA investigation and punishment panel for the Ohio St. In doing some research, I found out that 1 of the key folks responsible for the handing out the penalties and then the appeals process for USC were from Notre Dame (Only USC's 2nd biggest rival). That would be akin to Oklahoma facing penalties and on the panel were 2 folks from the Univ of Texas. Not sure how fare a deal you would get, but that's life.
WinOne!!
Looking back you have to give PC credit for knowing when to fold 'em. Everyone in southern california knew about the Bush thing etc and the same thing applies to Ohio St. Tressel gets the dumb ass award in the end and it just gets worse and worse. To tell you the truth GS I am thinking death penalty because it just runs too deep. It also includes lying by the head coach to the NCAA (look what that cost Dez Bryant). This is not borderline or fringe this is the real deal, SMU-like from top to bottom. They have not even looked into summer jobs etc. yet. This deserves the death penalty if anything ever has. Auburn is liking it though as they are getting a pass right now but I see their day coming sooner than later.
I may be wrong, but I don't think the NCAA will ever hand out the Death Penalty again after what happened with SMU. But from what I've been reading, the connected OSU alums think this is really bad and expect even worse than I've already stated. Many are comparing this to USC. But a lot of people stated their opinions after the NCAA handed out sanctions that the punishment wasn't enough for USC. The NCAA could make this penalty stiffer just to show they still have the muscle to bring down a big program. Colin Coward was saying the other day that he thinks OSU will receive just a one year bowl ban and no schollies taken away. But if this happens, the NCAA will be considered a big FAIL. We all know they are a failure. But the NCAA may make an example out of OSU just to help gain back favor with the public. We'll see....
not expecting it to be too bad since JT resgined. thats the whole reason he did step down, took one for the team . same reason Pearl did at UT. guys that the program tried for months to keep but the NCAA wouldnt allow. USC meanwhile hired the poster boy for nonsense and the NCAA bit them a lil bit even though they didnt want to.
the NCAA isnt concerned about justice, they just want to feel like they are in charge
the NCAA isnt concerned about justice, they just want to feel like they are in charge
I agree, I really doubt anyone will get the death penalty again. A former player was offered a car in 2009? http://m.naplesnews.com/news/2011/jun/02/football-former-immokalee-star-rolle-says-he-was-o/
BTW, Ohio State is getting new helmet stickers...
BTW, Ohio State is getting new helmet stickers...
As I said, it'll be a slap on the wrist. Even had Tressel stayed. OSU is a media darling. They are what is wholesome and good about CFB. Heck Columbus is a short drive from the NCAA offices in Indianapolis. They are Midwestern.
Not like that "outlaw" program USC with all the glitz and glamour. That dreaded Snoop Dog, Ice Cube and Will Farrell roaming the sidelines. Those scantily clad cheerleaders dancing around. Bunch of liberal hippies!!
WinOne..(tongue firmly in cheek guys)
Not like that "outlaw" program USC with all the glitz and glamour. That dreaded Snoop Dog, Ice Cube and Will Farrell roaming the sidelines. Those scantily clad cheerleaders dancing around. Bunch of liberal hippies!!
WinOne..(tongue firmly in cheek guys)
If it is a slap on the wrist (relative term at best) that means 2 years no bowls and loss of 20 or so scholarships. In the mean time they have an interim coach and that means they will have to bring in a big name guy for sure. The more I think about it though I am struck with the fact that Ohio St may lose 5 or so games in 2011. Nebraska is the new kid on the block and that is one more school that can siphon some talent that might have otherwise gone to the Buckeyes. My only wish would be that in light of all this that they would stop referring to themselves as "THE Ohio St" and simply omit the THE. That should be part of the penalty. lol.
What's not innocuous SDF? It was originally about swapping their old jerseys for tatoos. Tressel was lying to protect his men from being suspended for the season or for post season which would have been a major bummer and out of proportion for what they did "wrong." So you'd think. It's the NCAA that cannot be trusted to mete out punishment that fits the crime. Nothing the players did was illegal, just against NCAA's rules. That's what made it so serious and why Tressel chose to do what he did.
Tressel said he knew of no infractions. That was "his" lie. (cough cough)
IF he really didn't know anything about any infractions (just saying)
he would have been guilty of lack of institutional control.
Either way he was screwed.
Tressel said he knew of no infractions. That was "his" lie. (cough cough)
IF he really didn't know anything about any infractions (just saying)
he would have been guilty of lack of institutional control.
Either way he was screwed.
Something else I dislike about this investigation, and other investigations these days is how the NCAA relies on the assumption that the violator has taken advantage of other programs that do abide by the rules. The sheer number incidents will shoot down that notion eventually, I am sure of it. I would even go as far as to suggest that coaches that have gotten wind of players' indiscretions and said nothing at one time or another outnumber the coaches that have reported all that they knew by a huge margin... you should include AC's as well as HC's.
We just haven't seen all of it unravel yet, but when it does people will see that the way things are being done has not been unfair because everyone is equally guilty for the most part doing like everyone else. But the sticking point of all of this is how so many schools and players defy the NCAA rules which is probably the worst of it right there... and the only ones that get caught are those who talk about it and embarrass the NCAA in so doing. (Tressel's alumni booster buddy with the email blew his case out into the open. Had he just shut up and let sleeping dogs lay, Tressel would still be working at OSU today.)
We are just talking about NCAA rules being violated, nothing in a criminal sense at all. The NCAA doesn't care about criminal violations, just NCAA rules violations and that seems a bit twisted because crime is much more destructive to the sport any way you cut it.
The NCAA's got their panties all in a bunch now because they have lost control over every aspect of the game except playing the "bad cop role" in investigations which is laughable. They used to pass out money which is a much more powerful position of influence to have, however in the 80's, Oklahoma screwed them out of that in the courts because they probably let that privilege get to their heads to the detriment of too many dissatisfied schools.
The OTHER big deal hitting the headlines these days involves recruiting violations... especially the violations that involve middle men or high school "player agents," who are for the most part, 7 on 7 summer league coaches. They are very much like a minor league operation. There is nothing unfair about that either because anyone can play the new "professional recruiting game" as they see fit, at least so far. Until the NCAA once again tries to stick their foot in the door.
Side Note: Since the Oklahoma U vs NCAA court ruling in the mid-80's, college football began to evolve into a competitive professional endeavor where creating a winning image has a direct impact on revenues... greater success results in greater TV exposure etc. It's not hard to see how that works and why winning has taken precedence over preserving the amateur aspects of CFB.
Many football programs pay professionals who know the high school recruits that are available at the time in their area better than everyone else knows them so the schools can gain easier access to the best recruits that suit their program. The recruits are a better fit in most cases than anyone can possibly determine from a generic scouting report from let's say Rivals.com (which is also illegal to use.) So if you are Les Miles, would you rather rely on a professional to find you 25 tailor made recruits or would you likely go out and rake in 28 recruits en mass who are relatively unknown by comparison? Do you think it's worth it to the schools to use professional scouting agents that way? Damn straight it is. And it's probably more cost effective than anything else you can do too.
The NCAA doesn't see this as an amateur activity between high school coaches and college recruiters in a traditional sense because it's clearly not that at all. That means less control for the NCAA and more to the pro scouts that choose to do it their way and get paid for a job well done. My point is that it serves nobody at NCAA headquarters to allow the high school agent his rightful place in the game irrespective of how he may benefit both the players and the teams.
What makes me so irritated by all of these investigations is the fact that many of the goings on that schools are being called out for is so widespread, you can't really say it's unfair. Also, I'm not happy about calling out a school for committing a violation for which there is no clear definition on the books. Case in point, Oregon and the "agents" in Texas... alleged offenders of whatever rule it was that we are still trying to understand has been broken. The Ducks are not in clear violation of anything. The Ducks paid one of these agents a noteworthy sum of money, $25,000. What exactly was the violation? Spending $25,000 for a job well done by selling both the school on the player and the player on the school? A great service was provided for both. They were accurately evaluated and perfectly matched. What sort of recruiting could possibly be better than that? Was it worth $25,000 to the school to find just the right fit for their system? Damn straight.
You could say that the latest round of High School "7 on 7 summer league agents" is a new method of scouting and recruit management because it has become so widespread... it's almost like a minor league in CFB. It's the professionalization of college football in all these different ways. It's not just the pay issue that has the NCAA doing backflips and cartwheels, but the recruiting scene has also become "too" organized (professional) to their liking. All they can do is try to ferret out the "offenders" with antiquated rules that possibly no one may be in violation of anyway.
Also, about the $25,000, the amount that Oregon paid for getting the inside scoop on two recruits -- it's a sellers market at this point in time and the "agents" can practically name their price. If a player is represented to at least one other school... the booster rules don't apply. You might also find one day that $25,000 will be commonplace for football programs to pay an expert for information and introductions because $20 million per conference school in the lucrative TV market is driving budgets to the moon. $25G's is nothing when the budget is as big as $20 million. A couple of exciting skill position players nailed down for $25,000 could easily translate into 2 or 3 rating points... that is money. Remember this is a business.
Here the market forces set the value on the results the schools receive for their fees paid for information shared (both by the student and the football program) like a match done by e-harmony. I seen nothing but good coming from that arrangement in the long run, both for the players and for the schools. No different from buying peaches at the supermarket. The sweeter ones cost a little more... supply and demand etc.
That is PRECISELY what threatens the NCAA. Commerce, any type of commerce. To them all of it is inappropriate. You gotta give the NCAA high marks for idealism but in reality they are the big losers. Us fans are the big winners because we get to watch a better game than ever and professionals are responsible for creating the teams and putting them on TV using the newest crop of amateur college athletes.
And my last point, and you know I always have one of those... the topic of Title IX, pay for athletes, and so on...
If the NCAA is willing to step aside and adopt rules that broaden the definition of "amateur" as the AAU once did for the Olympics (because the Russians had been paying their "amateurs" to play the sport year after year as a team while sending them to the Olympics, professionals in every sense of the word and kicking everyone's ass) anything is possible at that point. Privatizing the benefits college student athletes are allowed to receive through private sponsorships would make it possible for private donors (businesses etc.) to assist college athletes with their living expenses. Even$100/wk within rules that provided severe penalties for anyone stepping over the line would discourage abuse and extra benefits for being the big stud which I think can be very corrupting influence over a young person's mind. Let the NFL corrupt him all they want later on.
Just make it a private matter that the schools would not fund directly but local businesses would be allowed to fund for the benefit of their players... donations, not pay. New SUV's, anything they wished to provide that were done in an above board fashion by private donors, not by schools' budgets which fall under federal law (such as Title IX) I can see certain guidelines established by each conference that guaranteed fairly equal distribution among players with a cap on benefits in line with whatever amateur limits are set by the NCAA.
The Feds have no jurisdiction over private funding of anything, but the NCAA could put a limit on how much it could tolerate within the definition of amateur instead of leaving it at zero as they've been doing. They could define a proper benefit as well as an improper benefit if they chose to do that. Clearly they have been using this power all along but not in a way that benefits players.
In the "spirit" of Title IX, let the NCAA allow the women's fencing team to be subsidized this way too. Just step aside. I'm sure there are a few sporting goods companies in every town that would love to see their name on ads and scoreboards etc. Stop trying to work the system, just let the system work. It will work if the NCAA would just step aside and let it happen. Isn't this a conference call anyway, at least in part? I'm not exactly sure of the demarcation points of where one authority ends and the other begins. It's all just a matter of coming to an agreement and inviting the private sector in instead of keeping it in house exclusively amongst the institutional brethren.
See what government can do to people's frame of mind? I was falling for it myself. It become the vehicle by which everything gets done and then nothing gets done because of the snafus that bureaucracies create since the day they were first conceived.
Just look at the power that the BCS has garnered over the years and they can't even come to a consensus about anything without controversy. The BCS is a private organization which is why it can operate as freely as it has been all along. The only reason the Feds can mess with it is because it has exclusionary rights as things now stand to the detriment of others who would compete in a fair way for a piece of their exclusive pie, and that is illegal to do no matter who you are. It's an anti-trust problem that the university presidents and their staff of greedy pigs and conference big shots let get the better part of them to the detriment of the sport and the rest of the players and teams on the national scene. Meanwhile they don't have to pay a nickel of tax on any of the profits they've been raking in by the zillions just in TV revenues alone (probably squandering most of it,) with an anti-trust exemption that they've abused since the day they got it.
I'm for locking the bastards up for 3-5 years each just for being ignorant and greedy... yes that's you Bebe you f*cking moron and that Texas prick among a host of others, probably out this way the same as everywhere else.
No need to make the same mistakes twice. I just think there's a lot more money available if small businesses and the private sector were allowed to assist in funding these lofty ideas. Of course that would mean the NCAA needs to voluntarily relinquish some of it's authority over some enforcement activities, and change the ground rules, not so they can fund anything in the face of Title IX, but just to get out the way and let those who's interests make it feasible to do what's right, do what's right.
We just haven't seen all of it unravel yet, but when it does people will see that the way things are being done has not been unfair because everyone is equally guilty for the most part doing like everyone else. But the sticking point of all of this is how so many schools and players defy the NCAA rules which is probably the worst of it right there... and the only ones that get caught are those who talk about it and embarrass the NCAA in so doing. (Tressel's alumni booster buddy with the email blew his case out into the open. Had he just shut up and let sleeping dogs lay, Tressel would still be working at OSU today.)
We are just talking about NCAA rules being violated, nothing in a criminal sense at all. The NCAA doesn't care about criminal violations, just NCAA rules violations and that seems a bit twisted because crime is much more destructive to the sport any way you cut it.
The NCAA's got their panties all in a bunch now because they have lost control over every aspect of the game except playing the "bad cop role" in investigations which is laughable. They used to pass out money which is a much more powerful position of influence to have, however in the 80's, Oklahoma screwed them out of that in the courts because they probably let that privilege get to their heads to the detriment of too many dissatisfied schools.
The OTHER big deal hitting the headlines these days involves recruiting violations... especially the violations that involve middle men or high school "player agents," who are for the most part, 7 on 7 summer league coaches. They are very much like a minor league operation. There is nothing unfair about that either because anyone can play the new "professional recruiting game" as they see fit, at least so far. Until the NCAA once again tries to stick their foot in the door.
Side Note: Since the Oklahoma U vs NCAA court ruling in the mid-80's, college football began to evolve into a competitive professional endeavor where creating a winning image has a direct impact on revenues... greater success results in greater TV exposure etc. It's not hard to see how that works and why winning has taken precedence over preserving the amateur aspects of CFB.
Many football programs pay professionals who know the high school recruits that are available at the time in their area better than everyone else knows them so the schools can gain easier access to the best recruits that suit their program. The recruits are a better fit in most cases than anyone can possibly determine from a generic scouting report from let's say Rivals.com (which is also illegal to use.) So if you are Les Miles, would you rather rely on a professional to find you 25 tailor made recruits or would you likely go out and rake in 28 recruits en mass who are relatively unknown by comparison? Do you think it's worth it to the schools to use professional scouting agents that way? Damn straight it is. And it's probably more cost effective than anything else you can do too.
The NCAA doesn't see this as an amateur activity between high school coaches and college recruiters in a traditional sense because it's clearly not that at all. That means less control for the NCAA and more to the pro scouts that choose to do it their way and get paid for a job well done. My point is that it serves nobody at NCAA headquarters to allow the high school agent his rightful place in the game irrespective of how he may benefit both the players and the teams.
What makes me so irritated by all of these investigations is the fact that many of the goings on that schools are being called out for is so widespread, you can't really say it's unfair. Also, I'm not happy about calling out a school for committing a violation for which there is no clear definition on the books. Case in point, Oregon and the "agents" in Texas... alleged offenders of whatever rule it was that we are still trying to understand has been broken. The Ducks are not in clear violation of anything. The Ducks paid one of these agents a noteworthy sum of money, $25,000. What exactly was the violation? Spending $25,000 for a job well done by selling both the school on the player and the player on the school? A great service was provided for both. They were accurately evaluated and perfectly matched. What sort of recruiting could possibly be better than that? Was it worth $25,000 to the school to find just the right fit for their system? Damn straight.
You could say that the latest round of High School "7 on 7 summer league agents" is a new method of scouting and recruit management because it has become so widespread... it's almost like a minor league in CFB. It's the professionalization of college football in all these different ways. It's not just the pay issue that has the NCAA doing backflips and cartwheels, but the recruiting scene has also become "too" organized (professional) to their liking. All they can do is try to ferret out the "offenders" with antiquated rules that possibly no one may be in violation of anyway.
Also, about the $25,000, the amount that Oregon paid for getting the inside scoop on two recruits -- it's a sellers market at this point in time and the "agents" can practically name their price. If a player is represented to at least one other school... the booster rules don't apply. You might also find one day that $25,000 will be commonplace for football programs to pay an expert for information and introductions because $20 million per conference school in the lucrative TV market is driving budgets to the moon. $25G's is nothing when the budget is as big as $20 million. A couple of exciting skill position players nailed down for $25,000 could easily translate into 2 or 3 rating points... that is money. Remember this is a business.
Here the market forces set the value on the results the schools receive for their fees paid for information shared (both by the student and the football program) like a match done by e-harmony. I seen nothing but good coming from that arrangement in the long run, both for the players and for the schools. No different from buying peaches at the supermarket. The sweeter ones cost a little more... supply and demand etc.
That is PRECISELY what threatens the NCAA. Commerce, any type of commerce. To them all of it is inappropriate. You gotta give the NCAA high marks for idealism but in reality they are the big losers. Us fans are the big winners because we get to watch a better game than ever and professionals are responsible for creating the teams and putting them on TV using the newest crop of amateur college athletes.
And my last point, and you know I always have one of those... the topic of Title IX, pay for athletes, and so on...
If the NCAA is willing to step aside and adopt rules that broaden the definition of "amateur" as the AAU once did for the Olympics (because the Russians had been paying their "amateurs" to play the sport year after year as a team while sending them to the Olympics, professionals in every sense of the word and kicking everyone's ass) anything is possible at that point. Privatizing the benefits college student athletes are allowed to receive through private sponsorships would make it possible for private donors (businesses etc.) to assist college athletes with their living expenses. Even$100/wk within rules that provided severe penalties for anyone stepping over the line would discourage abuse and extra benefits for being the big stud which I think can be very corrupting influence over a young person's mind. Let the NFL corrupt him all they want later on.
Just make it a private matter that the schools would not fund directly but local businesses would be allowed to fund for the benefit of their players... donations, not pay. New SUV's, anything they wished to provide that were done in an above board fashion by private donors, not by schools' budgets which fall under federal law (such as Title IX) I can see certain guidelines established by each conference that guaranteed fairly equal distribution among players with a cap on benefits in line with whatever amateur limits are set by the NCAA.
The Feds have no jurisdiction over private funding of anything, but the NCAA could put a limit on how much it could tolerate within the definition of amateur instead of leaving it at zero as they've been doing. They could define a proper benefit as well as an improper benefit if they chose to do that. Clearly they have been using this power all along but not in a way that benefits players.
In the "spirit" of Title IX, let the NCAA allow the women's fencing team to be subsidized this way too. Just step aside. I'm sure there are a few sporting goods companies in every town that would love to see their name on ads and scoreboards etc. Stop trying to work the system, just let the system work. It will work if the NCAA would just step aside and let it happen. Isn't this a conference call anyway, at least in part? I'm not exactly sure of the demarcation points of where one authority ends and the other begins. It's all just a matter of coming to an agreement and inviting the private sector in instead of keeping it in house exclusively amongst the institutional brethren.
See what government can do to people's frame of mind? I was falling for it myself. It become the vehicle by which everything gets done and then nothing gets done because of the snafus that bureaucracies create since the day they were first conceived.
Just look at the power that the BCS has garnered over the years and they can't even come to a consensus about anything without controversy. The BCS is a private organization which is why it can operate as freely as it has been all along. The only reason the Feds can mess with it is because it has exclusionary rights as things now stand to the detriment of others who would compete in a fair way for a piece of their exclusive pie, and that is illegal to do no matter who you are. It's an anti-trust problem that the university presidents and their staff of greedy pigs and conference big shots let get the better part of them to the detriment of the sport and the rest of the players and teams on the national scene. Meanwhile they don't have to pay a nickel of tax on any of the profits they've been raking in by the zillions just in TV revenues alone (probably squandering most of it,) with an anti-trust exemption that they've abused since the day they got it.
I'm for locking the bastards up for 3-5 years each just for being ignorant and greedy... yes that's you Bebe you f*cking moron and that Texas prick among a host of others, probably out this way the same as everywhere else.
No need to make the same mistakes twice. I just think there's a lot more money available if small businesses and the private sector were allowed to assist in funding these lofty ideas. Of course that would mean the NCAA needs to voluntarily relinquish some of it's authority over some enforcement activities, and change the ground rules, not so they can fund anything in the face of Title IX, but just to get out the way and let those who's interests make it feasible to do what's right, do what's right.
This one hits a bit close to home as running 7On camps during the summer with my associates, we see a lot of these guys. As I've said before, "if" a school calls me to get a second opinion or additional info on a kid, their family, or how to approach them, that's valid. Same for a family though. IF the family asks me about a coach, school, community that the school may be located in or potential fit, I do the same. We see a lot of HS football games during the season and get to see these guys in 7On from in their HS years. There are, however, some real sleazebags out there especially.
We've had to add security the last 3yrs for our 7on7 camps as they pose as asst coaches from D1 or D2 schools when what they are trying to do is get close to a guy and potentially later broker some type of deal.
Fortunately, one of the great things that we've been able to do is invite coaches down for our tourney. Coaches have to pay but with that payment they access or our site or DVDs should they select to have them.
WinOne!!
Seems like there isn't a day that goes by that we don't hear bad news about OSU. I'm also amazed at the paper trail that has been left behind. It points to a clear "Lack Of Institutional Control" violation. Which, If I had to guess, won't be a slap on the wrist if this is the way the NCAA sees it. Something else that isn't good is the Feds are now involved with this investigation because they also find it hard to believe that the staff and AD and the higher ups didn't know about all of these violations. Hell Pryor drove 8 different cars. I know these people aren't blind.. It went on for way too long for them not to get wind of the situation...It's now very easy to see why Pryor left today without any apparent reason to before the NCAA comes out with it's penalties. Now we know. And we know why Tressel pulled a Pete Carroll and got out of town as quickly as possible. This may be getting ready to get very nasty in the next few weeks if these violations keep popping up.
Would agree with the lack of institutional control. But it's going to take the NCAA so long to investigate this stuff because more keeps coming out that the intensity of it will have died down. UNC just got their letter from the NCAA this week where the NCAA tells them that they are beginning the investigation. Its been a year already. OSU has one of the largest compliance offices in the country so the whole thing should be gutted completely because they seemed to turn a blind eye to it all.
They warned the photographer to stay away from the program. How about placing a restraining order on the guy to keep him off campus. There is no judge in Ohio who would not have issued a restraining order had Ohio State asked for it. If you really want to keep some over zealous hanger-on away, that's the way to do it. Use the legal system because you can always go back to the NCAA and say followed appropriate steps and it's documented.
Just Outrageous!!
They warned the photographer to stay away from the program. How about placing a restraining order on the guy to keep him off campus. There is no judge in Ohio who would not have issued a restraining order had Ohio State asked for it. If you really want to keep some over zealous hanger-on away, that's the way to do it. Use the legal system because you can always go back to the NCAA and say followed appropriate steps and it's documented.
Just Outrageous!!
