[Updated] Sanctioning Days! Hearing On Trogan (Alleged) Cheating Open Thread
by sam_in_hb on Feb 19, 2010 8:51 AM PST
Email
PrintESPN PAC 10 blog reports:
Trojans running backs coach Todd McNair joined the meeting, so the focus still may be on football. I didn't see former Trojans basketball coach Tim Floyd but he is apparently going to be present at some point.
Unless he changed his mind, former football coach Pete Carroll bolted after the Thursday session and is now in LA.
New football coach Lane Kiffin is also still on hand.
There have been several opinions on this site surrounding the NCAA sanctioning committee. Now, of course, they are underway. Though the committee is only going to convene for 3 days, and will not hand out its decision for 5 to 7 more weeks, I am hopeful that news will start filtering in that will indicate the direction the committee is leaning.
If anyone hears any interesting tidbits related to the meetings, it seems that this is the perfect place to post those updates for everyone to read (and preferably enjoy).
UPDATE (N): A pretty good read in SI.com on the makeup of Committee On Infractions (which is looking into and questing the Trogans for their pile of mess):
The NCAA does not disclose the individuals who will hear a specific case, and it is common for COI members to miss a hearing and/or be replaced by a former member. Still, it is a safe bet that those judging USC in Tempe will boast impressive credentials. The COI chairperson, Paul Dee, is the former athletic director at Miami and a professor at that school. Britton Banowsky and Dennis Thomas are the commissioners of Conference USA and the Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference, respectively, and Missy Conboy has worked in Notre Dame's athletic department for 22 years. Temple law professor Eleanor Myers is an expert on legal ethics, and Rodney Uphoff, a professor at Missouri, is a former defense attorney who helped represent Oklahoma City bomber Terry Nichols.
Per NCAA guidelines, two of the 10 members must be women and three are "public" representatives, usually attorneys or former judges unaffiliated with a school or conference. The three public representatives on the COI roster are all lawyers, the most notable being Roscoe Howard Jr., a former U.S. Attorney.
Among the individuals judging USC will be Josephine Potuto, a tiny woman with red hair who teaches law at the University of Nebraska. (She confirmed to SI.com that she would be Tempe.) Potuto might be the smallest person in the room, but she will also be the most senior, having served on the committee since 1999. She is the person USC athletic director Mike Garrett, school president Steven Sample, and the others representing the school should fear the most as she is a fierce questioner and unafraid to call out school officials who attempt to massage the truth.
Hearings are closed to the public, transcripts of the proceedings are kept confidential, and COI members are forbidden from discussing cases. But Potuto's grilling of former basketball Georgia coach Jim Harrick in 2004 is legendary among followers of the COI, and in a 2008 Florida State hearing -- the transcript from which was transmitted to the university in a way that made it subject to open record laws -- she repeatedly cornered those defending the school.
Read rest of it here. GO BRUINS.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.
24 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Why not call plaSChke?
He is a journalist, and is certain to have his sources inside the meeting room who will give him all the info as it happens.
I don't have a link
But Mr. BB saw yesterday that timmeh is not to happy with Garrett throwing him under the bus for football, and he might be singing like a canary.
Did he say something to reporters?
Or was this more messageboard type of talk? If it’s true though, how bout that “Trogan Family”?
Looks like
In recent interviews with The Times and New Orleans Times-Picayune, Floyd has also talked about his displeasure with Garrett. “Mike’s reputation took precedence over the truth;” Floyd said, adding that Garrett didn’t support him when it mattered most, and that “the athletic director was more worried about himself than our program.”
Floyd’s appearance at the infractions committee hearing is not unusual, said Tom Yeager, a former chairman of the committee. Yeager said coaches tied to university scandals have appeared to “clear their name.”
Floyd has told those close to him that he welcomes the opportunity to talk about “the truth” of his USC experience in the right setting.
The potential for a contentious NCAA hearing is ripe.
No one likes getting thrown under the bus.
If you are into conspiracies,
Pinky would be the secret weapon. He is setup to the one who has a grudge against $C. Everyone expects him to say negative things about the Trogans. However, if Floyd gives a glowing account of his time at $C, the hearing would be thrown for a loop.
Think about it. Floyd landed on his feet rather quickly with a cushy new job at New Orleans.
by Gen2Bruin1987 on Feb 19, 2010 9:58 AM PST up reply actions
It sounds like Timmeh drank his own Kool-Aid
How in the world can he “clear his name” if he tells the truth? The truth is that he cheated. He admittedly let himself be recruited by the most notorious rule breaker since Freddie Blassie. He allowed locker room access to the guy that caused sanctions in the past in connection with Trapanier (whose name I don’t recall)? I’m especially looking forward to how he clears his name about disposing of that envelope full of money. And the DeRozean/Li’l Romeo recruiting. And the Assistant Strength Coach job or whatever it was that opened up for a kid’s dad. And all the rest.
If he wants to clear his name, he can admit to all the cheating, that he told Garrett and Sample in advance what he was going to do and that it was cheating, and that Garrett and Sample not only encouraged him to cheat, but gave him pointers on how to cheat.
From what I've been reading
Floyd seems very interested in clearing his name, and I’m not sure how he can take down the university and achieve that goal at the same time.
Frankly, I do not have much interest in anything Floyd has to say. He has already been offerred up as a sacrifice, so really how much credibility will anyone give him?
I do, however, have a keen interest in the interactions that took place between the committee and Todd McNair.
"I don't forget very much" Rick Neuheisel, 11/28/09
"singing like a canary"
Would be most appropriate for someone nicknamed Pink Floyd.
(sorry; don’t remember who coined that)
I also liked Cheatey Petey's comment
about being a “good soldier”. What does a good soldier do? Whatever the bosses tell him to. To me, he’s implying that he did what suc wanted him to do, rather than say what really happened. If you’re telling the truth, you don’t need to say you’re being a “good soldier”. By the way, I mean in no way to be negative about soldiers. It’s just the phrase says to me that he lied for the “school”. Anyone else read it that way?
Go Bruins!
Here's the link
and the quote: "Pete Carroll emerged from the first four hours of the USC’s hearing before the NCAA enforcement committee with a grin but no comment other than he “was being a good soldier” and planned to leave this afternoon."
Go Bruins!
I bet he took a page out of fellow trogan Mark McGwire's playbook
“I’m not here to talk about the past”
Along the same lines, did anyone see Taylor Mays say that he was just following orders and told to go for the kill shots by the coaches at $C rather than the ball?
“I think there is some truth to [his reputation for going for too many big hits] but at the same time that is what I was coached to do. At USC, I was coached to deliver knockout shots. I have the potential athletically and mentally to catch the ball and go after the ball. In one week (at the Senior Bowl) I was able to go from only hitting receivers to going after the ball. I just want a chance to work with coach who can help me do that.”
by jtthirtyfour on Feb 19, 2010 1:01 PM PST up reply actions
Rod Uphoff
Wow, what a small world!
Rod Uphoff is one of the best law students I taught — extremely bright, unquestionable integrity, with good instincts and the ability to use and read a smell test.
He has a strong background in criminal law and procedure. I taught him several classes, including trial advocacy — he knows how to cross examine and get to the truth.
He was so good, that when I decided to step away from running a criminal defense clinic and focus solely on classroom teaching, Rod was hired to replace me.
So, here I come browsing on BN and I’m reunited with very fond memories of one of my favorite students. It’s great know where he is and what he is doing. And, I feel a lot better about this investigation knowing that he is a part of it.
sjh
PS. He was a varsity athlete in college — totally understands the milieu.
sjh
I don't know, sjh
Sometimes a person gets stuck in a bureaucracy for too long and starts thinking like a bureaucrat. The “Befehl sind Befehl” might have worked if the judges had been part of a similar bureaucracy. I hope I’m wrong and you’re right.
All of this sounds very encouraging.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
He's busy
Just as OJ1 is looking for the real killer, Timmeh is looking for the real cheater. Someone who looks like him and talks like him was seen passing out cash to athletes, and Timmeh is determined to find out who this guy is, by golly. Anyway, all this activity means he can’t make the meeting.
this was a GREAT read
Seems to sum everything up nicely
Is this accurate?
The story says just$c* has the burden of proving its innocence: “It is quite the opposite, whatever was discovered in the NCAA investigation is considered the truth and it is up to the accused to prove their innocent unlike in courts where that burden sets with the accuser to prove the other party is guily. So, the NCAA doesn’t have to prove USC did commit violations, USC has to prove they did not commit violations.”
Is this the evidentiary standard? I hope it is. I also hope there is some penalty attached to lying, which we all know that just$c* is lying every time it opens its collective mouth.
Why should it be just 1 title?
Even if the Bush misdeeds occurred in 2004-05, shouldn’t that mean that he was not an amateur his entire “career” at justsc? And that should mean that the trogans should stop saying that they “won” a title in 2003 via the AP poll. They’ve won nothing during the Cheatey Petey era.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
