iMBlue2

November 13th, 2023 at 4:39 PM ^

I think they released what they had already and the story never got reported in the way stations stuff did so never got any traction and the b1g said in they’re statement they didn’t care about what Michigan had provided going so far as to call what other teams did as “deciphering” as opposed to “stealing”. Media types theses days with they’re routine doublespeak 

Macenblu

November 13th, 2023 at 4:25 PM ^

I have no clue what they have or don’t have.  We know they presented something that at the time the B1G didn’t find it credible or it didn’t fit their narrative.  I think at this point whatever Michigan thinks they have would be brought up at trial (if this thing gets that far).  The obvious issue that will come up if it goes that far is the identity of the private investigation firm as well as who hired them.  A buddy of mine is in management at a PI firm in NY.  They don’t work for free or out of the goodness of their hearts 

GoBlueDenver

November 13th, 2023 at 6:16 PM ^

For the sake of conversation, what good would it do this investigation on us to tie the PI firm directly to OSU? 

For the court of public opinion, sure, I see how it would make OSU look like douchebags, but we're still having to deal with our own broken rules.

If we uncover that OSU hired a PR firm, then that's kind of a different story.

RGard

November 13th, 2023 at 4:48 PM ^

No.  If you have it, you release it when it will do you the most good and your enemies the most harm.  You let this BS with the B1G run its course.  Let them set a precedent, then you release and see if they can follow their own precedent.

Releasing anything now does Michigan no good.  Whataboutism won't help us here.

DiploMan

November 13th, 2023 at 6:37 PM ^

I think this is the reasonable take.  It seems way more probable than not that the sending of the investigative report to the NCAA was timed for maximum impact -- if indeed there was suspicion that Michigan was cheating last season (such that OSU was taking countermeasures), then why wait 11 months before reporting those concerns to the NCAA if not to have the biggest impact on Michigan's season?

This "campaign" (if you will) is waged on multiple fronts -- the NCAA inquiry, the B1G's pre-emptive penalty, and the leak-driven media/PR campaign.  Michigan's argument with the B1G is a procedural one, so it's important to keep the process points front and center until there is more clarity about where that is heading.  The time to point out the ridiculousness of others' reactions to what actually happened will be after the facts are more clearly established.

Eng1980

November 13th, 2023 at 4:42 PM ^

Being close to MSU, ND, and Michigan for over 40 years, I know for a FACT that the NCAA is very selective on what they act on.  VERY SELECTIVE.  As R.I.P. Coach Bobby Knight said, “Cleveland State is gonna get hammered” by this new rule/investigation.  But not Kentucky or North Carolina.

Amazinblu

November 13th, 2023 at 3:44 PM ^

I’m not an attorney, but - based on the type of hearing - will there be an opportunity for Harbaugh to speak, make a statement, or testify?

It’s great that he’s going to be there - and, I’ll cheer for him.  

What does this procedure allow?

kehnonymous

November 13th, 2023 at 4:27 PM ^

Knowing Harbaugh, he may spend his time advocating for Brown Jug burgers

I love our coach as much as the rest of y'all, but he is in the wrong here.  Shoulda taken the recruits to the far superior Ray's Red Hots around the corner, and I say that as someone who doesn't like hot dogs - except for the ones I got there.

Ed Shuttlesworth

November 13th, 2023 at 4:22 PM ^

In which case, he better tell the truth or he'll be guilty of a crime.  

His record in telling the truth to investigator and attorney types, to date, is a bit ... spotty.  To say the least.

Plus he doesn't really have much if anything to add to the legal B1G vs. UM case.  I doubt he testifies under oath.  From a lawyer's perspective, he's the ultimate loose cannon.

EGD

November 13th, 2023 at 9:47 PM ^

Preliminary injunction hearings can be anything from just the attorneys arguing over legal points to basically a complete bench trial. All depends on the nature of the case and salient issues, the amount of time the court has, which witnesses are available, etc.

If Harbaugh testifies then I expect it will mostly be to establish the harm that not being able to coach on the sidelines causes to him personally and to the team and the university. I don’t imagine M’s lawyers would ask him about the alleged violations or the Conner Stalions or any of that. The opposing lawyers might on cross-examination but hard to predict to what extent that would be allowed because it’s of limited relevance.

Harbaugh might conceivably also testify about the limited value of sign stealing, the lack of any impact on player safety, and other stuff within his expertise as a football coach—though if I were M’s lawyers I would get independent expert for that.

UcheWallyWally

November 13th, 2023 at 3:48 PM ^

What I want to see Harbaugh say? 
 

After a lopsided victory over OSU when approached by all American girl Jenny Taft as he walks out onto the field.  
 

“Where’s Lou Holtz”  

Ryno2317

November 13th, 2023 at 3:48 PM ^

I admire the thought, however, Harbaugh's lawyers will not let him talk in court.  Nothing but downside and I assume the judge would swear him in if he was permitted to say anything.  No way.

blanx

November 13th, 2023 at 4:15 PM ^

While I am a lawyer, I am not his lawyer, and I am not your lawyer, either.  But I have handled multiple TRO hearings, some in front of this judge. 

If it were my case, I would not have Coach testify at all on Friday-  this is about what the B1G did, and anything that takes away from that focus at this hearing is not helpful. 

Also, IIRC Angelique Chengelis tweeted afterwards that Jim wasn't sure he'd be speaking at the hearing.

EGD

November 13th, 2023 at 10:03 PM ^

I don’t know if the Big Ten will file a response brief before the hearing. But whether JH testifies could well depend on (1) what the B1G argues and (2) what the judge wants to know.

To me, the irreparable harm prong is obvious. If the Big Ten concedes irreparable harm and just want s to argue over the likelihood of success, or if the judge says he thinks irreparable harm is clear and only wants to hear about likelihood of success, then JH’s testimony wouldn’t be relevant. But if the Big Ten contests the irreparable harm prong and the judge isn’t convinced, Harbaugh’s testimony could be needed to establish that element.

three_honks

November 13th, 2023 at 4:45 PM ^

(Not a lawyer here)  If Harbaugh were to speak, wouldn't he be subject to cross examination?  He's already been suspended for paying for $10 burgers (while other programs shell out tens of thousands of dollars per recruiting visit).  Given how the B1G has been operating, I'd expect the B1G lawyers to attempt to trip him up on his memory of some petty, inconsequential detail.

Run the Victory Formation in court, Jim.