In partnership with CBSSports.com
We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.
Where the madness isn't just in March.
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
I'll explain it like this.
If a prosecutor says to a prisoner before trial: You can accept a life sentence or take a chance at the DP, there's no coercion. He has a choice - take a shot in court, or forego the DP for a life sentence.
If a prosecutor says to a prisoner before trial: You can accept a life sentence or you will get the DP, we don't need to do anything else because we are both the prosecution and the judge, it's coercion.
It's tough to explain because there is no way a prosecutor would ever be a judge (as the NCAA is in this instance - strictly with regard to the sanctions and not the criminal stuff obviously). Your comparison is possible, but you missed a nuance to it.
And listen, I understand you don't agree with it and find it laughable. I'm on the fence to be honest (I try to be objective, and there are parts with merit and then parts that are difficult for me to agree with unless they have more information than I do), and it will be interesting to see in court. But neither of us are judges who will see this.
I don't think it's laughable or a slam dunk when looking at it objectively.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports