[2006alum]

Some of the items in this discussion are seemingly expressed opinions of the authors.  For instance, "flagrant".  If someone can provide NCAA or Stanford use of that word regarding Rittman's activities, it would be illuminating.  Until that is provided, such a word is just someone's opinion.

To be clear, my initial point was that if the NCAA put a show cause penalty in effect, it must have thought this was a particularly flagrant violation. Now that might not be the technical term, but it just seems odd to me that the NCAA would find, in effect, that what Rittman did was so bad that Stanford had to terminate him, if all that was was a few minor misreportings of practice hours. Maybe I'm missing something? Otherwise the NCAA seems incredibly punitive, and Stanford should have pushed back, rather than fired Rittman.

[2006alum]

Some of the items in this discussion are seemingly expressed opinions of the authors.  For instance, "flagrant".  If someone can provide NCAA or Stanford use of that word regarding Rittman's activities, it would be illuminating.  Until that is provided, such a word is just someone's opinion.

To be clear, my initial point was that if the NCAA put a show cause penalty in effect, it must have thought this was a particularly flagrant violation. Now that might not be the technical term, but it just seems odd to me that the NCAA would find, in effect, that what Rittman did was so bad that Stanford had to terminate him, if all that was was a few minor misreportings of practice hours. Maybe I'm missing something? Otherwise the NCAA seems incredibly punitive, and Stanford should have pushed back, rather than fired Rittman.