Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Sources: NCAA investigating Michigan football for alleged rule violations related to

As much as I hate Bacon, I do acknowledge that he is plugged into the program. So when he says that he "guarantees" that Jim Stapleton, the same guy that leaked the info that lead to the investigations of the program under Rich rod to the Free Press and is now on the NCAA board of infractions, is the source of the leaks coming from the NCAA I actually believe him. This asshole also was the guy who blackballed Jim with the Vikings job (thanks for that I suppose).

Starts around 6 minutes:

https://www.971thefan.com/episode/john-u-bacon-johnubacon-michigan-author-10-25-23/
 
Being the suspicious type, I'd investigate if there is any connections between Stapleton and Stalions.

EDIT:
This is really going sideways. Apparently, this guy appears to have high aspirations to run the Michigan Football Program some day.

"Stalions, now 28, revealed that he was part of a small group of people?two of whom he said were at low-level positions on different college football coaching staffs?who were putting their heads together on a long-term plan to run the Michigan football program. Stalions claimed to have a Google document between 550 and 600 pages long that he managed daily, containing a blueprint for the Wolverines? future. He referred the document as a movement more than a plan, dubbing it 'the Michigan Manifesto.'?​
 
Last edited:
This Stalions guy sounds like a complete loser

?Pre-covid, stole opponent signals during the week watching tv copies then flew to the game and stood next to [then Michigan offensive coordinator Josh] Gattis and told him what coverage/pressure he was gettin,? Stalions continued.​

Okay, and how did THAT work out for us & Gattis?

If you ever needed an example of how unhelpful sign stealing was...

(To be fair, it's probably more useful to the defense. What was this clown even doing spending his time stealing defensive signs?)
 
This Stalions guy sounds like a complete loser

?Pre-covid, stole opponent signals during the week watching tv copies then flew to the game and stood next to [then Michigan offensive coordinator Josh] Gattis and told him what coverage/pressure he was gettin,? Stalions continued.​

Okay, and how did THAT work out for us & Gattis?

If you ever needed an example of how unhelpful sign stealing was...

(To be fair, it's probably more useful to the defense. What was this clown even doing spending his time stealing defensive signs?)

The guy had a "manifesto" about his "vision for future of Michigan Football" and how he was going to "take over" someday. Dude needs to get some pussy real bad. Props to you for chasing your dream but maybe not be a huge distraction in the middle of the season for your future program? What a lunatic.

https://www.si.com/college/2023/10/25/michigan-connor-stalions-texts-stolen-signals
 
Last edited:
Maybe the larger lesson here is that it's important to vette so-called "low-level" staffers.
 
The guy had a "manifesto" about his "vision for future of Michigan Football" and how he was going to "take over" someday. Dude needs to get some pussy real bad. Props to you for chasing your dream but maybe not be a huge distraction in the middle of the season for your future program? What a lunatic.

https://www.si.com/college/2023/10/25/michigan-connor-stalions-texts-stolen-signals

Sounds like the guy has grandiose delusions. He probably got his job by pestering someone in the program until they put him in some low level spot. Probably used his veteran status to weasel his way in. Well, he is finished at Michigan and probably will not be hired by any other D1 program, except maybe OSU or a program in the SEC.
 
I don't know how he got the job but based on the information available it looks like this dude was doing everything in his power to make himself stand out to the staff. My guess is he was hired because he was good at deciphering opponent signals but it's more than likely he did not share how he was so good at it. It's pretty common in nearly every profession to have people who lie, cheat and cut corners to make themselves look good.

I agree with byco that they need to do better about hiring staffers and would take it a step further and say that their compliance department needs to be better about monitoring their activity. That said, I've got no idea what my direct reports are doing on their free time and it's looking like this dude was doing all of this on his own and then using it to make himself look like a sign-stealing whizz when in reality he was just an overzealous nerd with way too much free time.

He's Michigan's version of Steve Bartman.
 
Maybe the larger lesson here is that it's important to vette so-called "low-level" staffers.

don't hire ex-military guys. most of them are dumb as shit, especially ones that actually went to a service academy.

EDIT: for the haters out there, note I said MOST not ALL.

...

He's Michigan's version of Steve Bartman.

No... Steve Bartman was an ethical person. Stalions does not appear to hold himself to a standard anywhere near Bartman.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
also, if someone writes a "manifesto" - about anything, doesn't matter - chances are good they are highly delusional, if not totally nuts.
 
How does this make a guy crazy? Someone who wrote out all his goals and had a vision. Do successful people NOT do this? Did he also have a weapons cache that he planned to take over the world with? This guy is getting run over the coals because he is a low level staffer and not making a couple million dollars a year. He's delusional because he doesnt have money is how Im seeing it. And Im still not seeing a rule infraction. Let me know when they have evidence of our HIRED staffers at games before a game against an opponent took place. Because that, right there, can be the only rule broken. All other fluff on how signals were gotten is legal....LEGAL!! Stallions could send out a hundred guys to each and every game to film and its still NOT an infraction. They are not staffers. This guy is dedicated to the University. Unlike that fat glob of shit they call a Warde Manuel. And, also, if he wasnt effective at his job, do you really think they would keep him around?
 
I mean you just said Warde sucks and they kept him around soooo...

Nobody is faulting the dude for the drive, they're faulting the methods and the fact that he's been a major distraction for the best team in our lifetimes. I agree that based on what we've seen thus far he hasn't actually broken any rules. But the decision as to whether or not the Michigan football program was going to operate in that gray area is WAY above his pay grade and he (allegedly) took it upon himself to make it for everyone.
 
I hate the sound of sign ?stealing?. It?s more like sign deciphering. Football is tactical, like military exercises. Part of the game is counter intelligence. When you have smart coaches it?s no different than having smart generals that crack the codes and anticipate the enemy?s next move. Smart coaches decipher signs? Sore losers complain about it. Man up bitches
 
It is pretty common for just about any profession to have people that lie, cheat and cut corners. It?s also quite common for organizations with little regard for the rules, that lie, cheat and cut corners to have a scapegoat?
 
Last edited:
Didn?t realize Tim hates the ncaa so much. But what I don?t understand is why They would leave such a trail. So dumb in my opinion?This Stallions guy is just a idiot. He didn?t think he would get caught. What I still don?t get is you can get all these signs from the all 22?s and other game footage. Do it the right way. Also this slow leak of information seems strange to me. Idk. Seems one sided.

I just can?t believe Jim would allowed this. . It?s the only thing to hold your hat on. If Jim knew about this he is just so stupid.

https://youtu.be/GaMoTY9Cado
 
Last edited:
Harbaugh categorically denies any knowledge of this scheme. The blowback of being caught in a lie is far worse than admitting complicity. Stalions, the Marine officer, leaves a blood trail that any dog can sniff. Did he think he was within NCAA guidelines? Did anyone think to ask HOW he obtained this Intel? Did they just think he was watching playbacks of in-season games? Is he a rogue agent and they trusted his methods without questions? Stalions lie about his methods? I still would be interested in two other matters: are there ties between Stapleton and Stalions? And what is Stalions' credit card payment activity? If he is outspending his ability to pay and his balance is low, I'd want to know who leveled his account.

Hold everything. This is interesting. It somewhat negates what I just posted.

From the link:

"You can steal signs. You can hire third parties to scout opponents in person. You can record opponents? signals if you?re not on a football field playing against them. There is no rule suggesting that combining these things makes them a collective rules violation.."
 
Last edited:
Pretty solid breakdown of the NCAA rules and bylaws provided by a MGoBlog poster:

Introduction/High-Level Takeaways

The NCAA might not be on Michigan?s side when it comes to the current allegations about sign stealing, but its rules and bylaws are. This diary is about to get long, so here are the high-level takeaways:

There is no rule against sign stealing as such.
The rule that forbids recording an opponent?s signals only applies to a team when it?s on a field for a game.

A football program can hire third parties to scout future opponents in person. Seth and the poster who goes by Ghost of Fritz Crisler found the most important points below.

Okay, let?s go through Michigan?s supposed rules violations.

The Rule that Categorically Prohibits Sign Stealing

There is no such rule. You can steal signs in at least some circumstances.

Rule 1-11-h of the NCAA Football 2023 Rules Book. It says this:

Any attempt to record, either through audio or video means, any signals given by an opposing player, coach or other team personnel is prohibited.

That seems cut and dried, but it cannot be read alone. As a preliminary matter, it?s worth noting that Rule 1-11-h is part of Rule 1, which is titled The Game, Field, Players, and Equipment. Next, per Rule 1-6-b, the Rules Book?the entire thing?applies to the following:

Everyone in the team area, players, substitutes, replaced players, coaches, athletics trainers, cheerleaders, band members, mascots [!], public-address announcers, audio/video/lighting system operators, and other persons affiliated with the teams or institutions.

In case there is any confusion about what the above means by ?the teams,? Rule 1-1-1-a tells us that ?(t)he game shall be played between two teams of not more than 11 players each?? So, we?re talking about the two teams that are playing a given game, not all D-1 football teams everywhere. And, for the rules to apply to a person, that person must be affiliated with the teams playing the game and in the ?team area.?

What is the ?team area?? Rule 1-2-4-a defines it as being ?(o)n each side of the field? in the back of a ?limit line? (I won?t subject you to that definition) and between the 20-yard lines. The major point is that it is to the sides of a football field where the two teams play. Thus, to be subject to Rule 1-11-h, you have to be on the side of a field. People who are watching games from the stands are not that.

2022-2023 NCAA Division 1 Manual Bylaw 11.6.1. Okay, let?s move onto the big one. Bylaw 11.6.1 says this:

Off-campus, in-person scouting of future opponents (in the same season) is prohibited, except as provided in Bylaws 11.6.1.1 and 11.6.1.2 [these two exceptions aren?t relevant].

We don?t have the nice, clean explanation of whom the Bylaws apply to that we had in the Football Rules Book. But Article 11 of the Bylaws, of which 11.6.1 is a part, is titled Conduct and Employment of Athletics Personnel. More, in Bylaw 11.1.1, we?re told that ?Institutional staff members found in violation of NCAA regulations shall be subject to disciplinary or corrective action?? Also, we have common sense to tell us that the NCAA cannot mean 11.6.1 to apply to all humans everywhere. If nothing else, the average fan does not have ?future opponents.? It seems safe to say, then, that the rule applies on its face to employees of athletic departments (or schools, if you like). If you think there is ambiguity there, however, we go to our next point.

And here is where we encounter what Ghost of Fritz found and the biggest point of confusion: typically, we?d be correct to think that you cannot absolve yourself of punishment for a prohibited act by paying someone else to do it. Agency liability and criminal conspiracy charges come to mind. But that logic just doesn?t seem to apply here.

Prior to August 2013, Bylaw 11.6.1 prohibited schools from off-campus, in-person scouting of opponents for football, basketball, and women?s volleyball?but not for other sports. This was balanced out to some extent thanks to then-Bylaw 11.6.2, which said that football, basketball, and women?s volleyball enjoyed a carve-out from the following prohibition:

?a member institution shall not pay or permit the payment of expenses incurred by its athletics department staff members or representatives (including professional scouting services) to scout its opponents or individuals who represent its opponents?

In other words, you couldn?t scout an opponent in person for your football, basketball, and women?s volleyball teams, but you could pay ?representatives? to scout opponents for those sports.

Then, in August 2013, the NCAA changed the rule and prohibited off-campus, in-person scouting of future opponents (in the same season) for all sports but balanced that by completely discarding the prohibition against paying for scouting. In doing so, it published the following rationale:

In the interest of simplicity and consistency, it is appropriate for one rule regarding scouting to apply to all sports. In most cases, video of future opponents is readily available either through institutional exchange, subscription to a recording/dubbing service or internet sites accessible to the general public.

There is only one reasonable interpretation of what happened in August 2013 when the rule was changed: schools could pay for scouting services for football before the rule changed and can still do so now (the rule hasn?t been amended since). It would make absolutely no sense to repeal the rule that banned payment for scouting for most non-football sports as a way of banning payment for scouting for football. The explicit rationale for the rule change also wouldn?t make sense. Accordingly, schools can pay third parties to scout opponents.

Let me say this in a different way: there is only ambiguity in 11.6.1 if you?re not convinced by its text that it only applies to school employees. And the legislative history of the rule makes clear that you should be convinced of that. As seen in 11.6.1 prior to August 2013, the NCAA knew what to say to ban third-party scouting. And, rather than applying that to football, the NCAA did away with that ban for all sports.

The Rule Against Hiring Third Parties to Scout & Record Opponents in Person to Steal Signs

You can steal signs. You can hire third parties to scout opponents in person. You can record opponents? signals if you?re not on a football field playing against them. There is no rule suggesting that combining these things makes them a collective rules violation.
 
Back
Top