Jeremy Fowler’s report that Miami will go silent as it prepares its response to the Notice of Allegations includes a way for Miami to potentially stick it to the NCAA:
From what I’ve gathered after asking around, Miami will likely use most or all of the 90-day window before formally responding to the NCAA’s Notice of Allegations. After receiving the notice on Feb. 19, that means a rebuttal will surface in mid-to-late May.
Miami would prefer a swift resolution to the two-year-long probe into its athletic department but needs to be thorough. There are moving parts in this case – including several coaches now in different jobs – that complicate the process. How Miami responds could persuade a Committee on Infractions that must make a difficult judgment on a messy case.
That means with a quick turnaround, the Committee on Infractions could meet its goal of a June hearing date. But is Miami’s goal of a quick resolution a good idea?
Generally the idea that a school would try an infractions case in the court of public opinion with an eye toward future litigation is foolish and rarely turns out well. Miami’s case is different. Miami has all but confirmed that a lawsuit is coming if they are not happy with the Committee on Infraction’s decision. Not to mention the potential of a Florida attorney general investigation into the NCAA.
In that environment, slowing the case down may be more to Miami’s advantage than speeding it up. As long as the case is wrapped up before signing day, Miami may be ok from a recruiting standpoint. Even without the misconduct by the enforcement staff, a third postseason ban would seem unlikely. A push by the COI for a quick hearing can easily be spun into part of an NCAA cover-up. And Miami delaying the case can be spun into the school just doing what it needs to do in order to enforce its rights. On top of it all, the NCAA would likely still shoulder the blame for any delays in the case.