The saga continues. The latest from PremierDrum is a good place to start. 

This might be more appropriate in the "who do you trust" thread, but adding here since it includes a meaningful issue on the investigation. 

Last night BS led their MASSIVE stream with the clickbait "EXPLOSIVE new details emerging in Michigan case?" headline. The boys went on to discuss "the next draft of the NOA" outlining the "distinct and clear advantage" that the impermissible scheme provided. 

This is not accurate, best I can tell. The NOA isn't some Google Doc being edited by different folks, being shown to scUM between each addition and asking "OKAY BUT WHAT ABOUT NOW?" I'm picturing Michael Scott dropping the series of different letters into Stanley's file. 

As explained to me, one of TCUN's defensive lanes in the current and ongoing discussions was to question if the scheme provided an onfield advantage. The NCAA is believed to have a whole supplement drafted that demonstrates the actual advantage of the scheme. I'd guess this includes descriptions of specific plays and maybe quotes from opposing coaches, but I don't know that for sure.

In any event this wasn't included in the NOA itself, as the bylaw doesn't stipulate that a competitive advantage must be gained to be enforced. Rather, these supplementary materials have likely been created to bolster the NCAA's position in negotiations and to protect their course of action should things go to appeal. 

So, anyways, good morning.