1. Pearl admits unethical conduct, lying to the NCAA, trying to influence others, accessing confidential information from his assistants about the inquiry, and what does Hammy do? He doesn't fire him; he doesn't suspend him 1 game; he lets him recruit some more for a brief time off-campus; he issues a lighter self-imposed penalty than is ever accepted by the NCAA in such a case; and publicly stands behind Pearl. Pearl is the first head coach any AD has ever tried to keep knowing that unethical charge against the HC for lying is coming. That's mistake #1.
I don't see how suspending Pearl and Jones for one year, Forbes for six months, and Shay for three months, from off-campus recruiting, can be considered a "light" penalty. That is a tougher recruiting restriction than the NCAA just gave UConn.
2. Pearl converses with a recruit off-campus 4 days after his crying contrition. Hammy still clears it and doesn't self-report under some bogus theory it wasn't a violation. That elevates it to a major violation. That's mistake #2.
I want to hear why Hamilton cleared it before I form an opinion here.
3. The NCAA begins discussion of the LOA details, so Hammy knows there will be 9 major violations alleged, most involving the HC personally, and accusing the university and HC of institutional failure, Pearl of unethical conduct, several assistants of dishonest conduct, and violations within 4 days of the crying contrition speech. Hammy doesn't take any additional action against the coaches, doesn't spin a story to explain how his department "cleared" what the NCAA says was a violation within 4 days of Pearl's speech, and pretends he doesn't have the report to people like Hubbs until the NCAA leaks the fact we got it to national press. Mistake #3.
I don't see why Hamilton should take additional action if he knew what was going to be in the letter. I also don't see why he is obligated to publicly discuss the argument he is going to make before the NCAA.
4. After news outlets document that any coach in Pearl's position (unethical conduct charge) has received a show-cause order, Hammy has Hubbs telling people again and again that such a show-cause order wouldn't apply to Pearl under some ludicrous theory it only applies to programs other than the program the coach committed the violations at. Mistake #4.
I have read multiple definitions of "show-cause." If other VN posters are correct when they say a show-cause penalty means the associated substantive penalties follow the coach to another job, then the show-cause penalty itself won't affect UT (other than more bad PR).
5. We're going to go through the season, the conference tourney, and the national tourney riding & cheering a coach the NCAA just made unethical conduct charges against, which will send the same sort of signal Mike Garrett sent to the NCAA during a similar stage of the USC inquiry by hiring Kiffin & crew. (How did that work out for USC?) Mistake #5.
The underlying offenses at USC were much worse than Bruce's cookout, and they hired them right before making their case. There is no comparison there. I thought USC was stupid for bringing in the guys who were there when the Bush violations happened.
