bonniebeavermd

That's not the way the NCAA works. They don't have subponea powers nor can they force people to cooperate. They don't have to "prove" anything. They're perfectly content depending on hearsay, innuendo and circumstantial evidence.

When they investigate they piece together a version of events that they're satisfied actually happened. It's up to the university to appeal and make a case, proving it didn't happen.

Again, the UofL case is the perfect example. There wasn't a single shred of direct evidence proving money exchanged hands between a UofL staff member and the strippers. No paper trail, no nothing. There was actually court testimony and evidence (lack thereof) to the contrary.

The NCAA's core evidence was the biased testimony of recruits who were supposedly present and/or partook. I say biased because take Blakeney for example. The NCAA went to him and told him to play ball, tell them what they want to know, and they'd give him immunity. They dangled his eligibility over his head. That's coercion and it gave Blakeney every incentive to lie or to at least say whatever, trying to keep his eligibility and appease the NCAA.

Depending on how he chose to answer, Blakeney had a lot to lose or a lot to gain, which hardly make his words unbiased evidence; yet, his coerced, biased words, along with others, were enough for the NCAA to give out one of its harshest punishments in history and it has noting to do with them proving violations, but because UofL couldn't prove it didn't happen.

My point isn't that LSU is going to be targeted or unfairly punished, but instead that relying on "The NCAA can't prove it" is foolish and setting yourself up for failure. Always remember, they answer to no one in these situations. Whatever they say goes. They choose when, where, why and how to enforce the rules.

The NCAA is not a court of law. They don't have to prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt.