[Update x 4] NCAA Nukes Troy: 30 Scholarships Lost, 2-year Postseason Ban, 4 Years Probation
by Meriones on Jun 10, 2010 12:13 PM PDT
in Football
Email
PrintWWL is now reporting the butcher's bill, and there is definitely blood on the scales:
The NCAA handed the University of Southern California a two-year postseason football ban and vacated wins in Reggie Bush's final season, among other penalties, for violations in its football, men's basketball and women's tennis programs on Thursday.
The university was put on four years' probation, while the football program was hit with a two-year postseason ban and the men's basketball team was banned for one year from the postseason, which had already been self-imposed by the school.
USC was hit with scholarship reductions in football and basketball and recruiting restrictions for the men's basketball team.
The school was fined $5,000 and forfeits its $206,200 it earned from the 2008 men's basketball tournament.
In addition the university must vacate some regular-season and postseason wins in all three involved sports.
It gets even better:
The NCAA said its findings included "a lack of institutional control, impermissible inducements, extra benefits, exceeding coach staff limits, and unethical conduct by an assistant football coach."
The violations, which span almost four years, primarily involved "agent and amateurism issues for a former football student-athlete and a former men's basketball studen-athlete," the NCAA wrote in its report.
No doubt, the hits will keep on coming. More updates after the jump.
UPDATE I (N): It's Christmas. Full details from the LA Times:
•Public reprimand and censure.
•Four years of probation: from June 10, 2010, through June 9, 2014.
•Postseason ban for the 2009-10 men's basketball season. (self-imposed)
•Postseason ban for the 2010 and 2011 football seasons.
•One-year show-cause penalty for assistant football coach Todd McNair (June 10, 2010, to June 9, 2011).
•Vacation of all football wins, including football bowl games, from the 2004 and 2005 seasons.
•Vacation of all basketball wins in the 2007-08 season, including the NCAA tournament. (self-imposed)
•Vacation of all wins in women's tennis between November 2006 and May 2009.(self-imposed)
•Reduction of football scholarships by 10 for the next three academic years.
•Reduction of men's basketball scholarships from 13 to 12 for the 2009-10 and 2010-11 academic years. (self-imposed)
•Reduction of the total number of recruiting days in men's basketball by 20 days (from 130 to 110) for the 2010-11 academic year. (self-imposed)
•$5,000 fine. (self-imposed)
•Remittance of the $206,200 the university received for its participation in the 2008 NCAA basketball tournament. (self-imposed).
•Disassociation of football player Reggie Bush, basketball player O.J. Mayo and "booster" Rodney Guillory.
•Release of three men's basketball recruits from their letters of intent. (self-imposed).
•Prohibition of all non-university personnel, including boosters, from traveling on football and men's basketball charters; attending football and men's basketball team practices; attending or participating in any way with university football and men's basketball camps, including donation of funds; and having access to the sidelines and locker rooms for football and men's basketball games.
They are now officially the University Of Sleazy Cheaters.
GO BRUINS.
UPDATE II(N): Here is the NCAA findings (PDF). Pour through it. If you draw out interesting nuggets share in the comment threads. Always feel free to do you own analysis in the Fanposts. GO BRUINS.
UPDATE III(M): Page 58, Paragraph 9 of the Report states:
Limit of 15 initial grants-in-aid and 75 total grants in football for each of the 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 academic years.
If I am reading this correctly, this means that U$C can only offer a maximum of 15 football scholarships during each of the next three recruiting seasons. The ones he just offered apparently are not affected, but the ones he makes during the next three recruiting runs are. Also, the team cannot have more than 75 players on scholarship during from Fall 2011 through Spring 2014. In other words, Blame Kitten's overall team number is reduced by 10 for the next three years, so he can't use scholies for 2012-13 to make up for his reductions in 2011-12, etc.
M
UPDATE IV (N): This is not a surprise. The shameless Trojan administration will "appeal" the ruling:
The University of Southern California today announced that, after reviewing the NCAA Committee on Infractions report, it will accept some of the penalties imposed by the Committee and it will appeal those penalties it believes are excessive.
The university noted that it is pleased that the NCAA determined that USC's self-imposed penalties on men's basketball and women's tennis were sufficient, and that the NCAA imposed no further sanctions.
"We acknowledge that violations occurred and we take full responsibility for them. However, we sharply disagree with many of the findings in the NCAA Committee on Infractions Report. Further, we feel the penalties imposed are too severe for the violations identified in the report," said Todd Dickey, USC's senior vice president for administration.
Interestingly Mike Garrett wasn't sent out to issue their "video release." GO BRUINS.
UPDATE V: Link to NCAA Press Conference recording.
196 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Probably Todd McNair
Who I assume was ruled guilty of knowing about Reggie Bush’s money.
by littlebrother on Jun 10, 2010 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions
Thanks for the full list, N.
Now THAT’s more like it.
There’s your “cannon shot to the groin.”
M
"In this program your passion bucket must be full to play SC." -- CRN, to Dan Patrick, 1/2008
Reposting this
Here’s the PDF of the full report: http://vmedia.rivals.com/uploads/995/952139.pdf
(Note to mods: if this isn’t kosher to post, please remove.)
by JWongUCLA on Jun 10, 2010 12:21 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
That should be fine, I think.
Public record document.
"In this program your passion bucket must be full to play SC." -- CRN, to Dan Patrick, 1/2008
This is better than Christmas
2-year bowl ban
10 scholarships per year for 3 years (according to LA Times)
More than I was expecting from the NCAA. This is great.
•Disassociation of football player Reggie Bush, basketball player O.J. Mayo and "booster" Rodney Guillory.
Hahahahahaha, this is getting better by the minute.
No limits on recruiting contact?
Oh well, I guess you can’t have everything.
Someone explain how the loss of scholarships will work
And also how it’s any sort of real penalty. Or to put it another way, how will the loss of scholarships impact just$c*’s ability to give out enough scholarships to fill up their first and second and third strings on the depth chart? I don’t see any penalty in not being able to offer a scholarship to a guy who will never play anyway.
Redshirts and depth chart
This limits ability to have redshirt scholarships and with injuries, could hurt their depth too. 10 scholarships per year is nothing to sneeze it.
Also, they won’t be able to recruit as many athletes, presumably.
It doesn't work that way
What it does is reduce the probability that the players they recruit will pan out.
If you can offer 15 scholarships, chances are a couple of players will turn out great.
If you can only offer 5…the probability is much less.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
For the next 3 years - starting with the 2011-12 academic year
USC can give out a maximum of 15 new scholarships per year – incoming frosh and transfers (down from the current maximum of 25), and can have no more than 75 players on scholarship, for three years (2011-12 through 2013-14)
formerly bruinhoo
75 in 2011 seems to me like the real killer
I don’t have a breakdown of where SC’s scholies are located by class but a rough glance of recent classes shows they bring in about 17-20 players a year. When you factor in redshits and all …… it is very possible that next year’s class is going to be limited to mid-singles to get down to that 75 number. I’m sure Lane is going to be praying some dead wood leaves on their own because otherwise, next year’s recruiting class may fit in a big phone booth.
If it is true that players with 2 years or less left can transfer
due to the 2 year bowl ban they could hit that number a little easier. Also as always noted scholarships are 1 year agreements so they could just tell their 10 worst players to hit road.
True, but they are still limited to only adding 15 players per year starting in 2011
They could load up further before this fall, but how many decent unsigned HS/JUCO players are there?
formerly bruinhoo
But
This next recruiting class is only going to be allowed 15 scollies right? So, how exaclty would they load up? And why would a JUCO go to SC if there is a two year bowl ban?
A bruin is good forever, a Trojan is only good... ahh eff it, just use tin foil
This is what hurts them the most
One of the strengths SC has had over other programs was depth. As the season wears on, players go down. Not every team has had the depth to deal with players getting injured, where SC has had that depth. This helps them much incrementally more later in the season.
We are generally the last regular season game for them. This helps us tremendously.
Go Bruins!
What's to stop them from giving "academic scholarships" or having alum's pay the tuition?
Does every athlete have to get an athletic scholarship?
And there are lots of scholarships defined in odd ways. How do they know the alums won’t taylor some for players?
sjh
There are rules against this.
Having an alumni pay would be a violation. It is the equivalent of paying a player.
I remember there was a kid who was an awesome volleyball player who also wanted to play hoops. He couldn’t come to UCLA because his scholarship would have counted against basketball even though he was primarily a volleyball player. Their is some type of heirarchy that they use to prevent giving track scholarships to football players, etc, etc. I am pretty sure that in your hypothetical it would count against football first.
Mandel: why this took so long?
1. Investigation was very difficult. Difficult time getting records, no subpoena power
2. The Mayo case came up during the Bush investigation, cases were combined, creating a complex case to put together.
formerly bruinhoo
No mention of McKnight/Schenter
and it states probation period begins June 2010, so that brings into question whether or not Land Rover-gate counts as a “repeat violation”.
SUCs press release due out soon. Should be interesting.
"I don't forget very much" Rick Neuheisel, 11/28/09
My thought exactly.
If they don’t even count McKnight on this, then there could be another hammer somewhere.
"In this program your passion bucket must be full to play SC." -- CRN, to Dan Patrick, 1/2008
well...
they have one ball…not sure about the second one.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
I agree -- just one testicle
If ever an institution was out of control, this was the one.
I think the reason people here are so jubilant is that they did not expect the NCAA to do anything, or much more than a slap.
This is still a light penalty in light of what they did wrong.
sjh
One other thing
Finally, as stated in the introduction of this report, USC is a "repeat violator" under the provisions of Bylaw 19.5.2.3 and was at risk for enhanced penalties set forth in Bylaw 19.5.2.3.2. Although the committee chose not to impose any of these enhanced penalties, stiff sanctions are warranted in light of the serious violations found by the committee and the fact the institution is a "repeat violator."
emphasis added
Gary Klein, LA Times
“How did committee come up with penalties? Did you look at previous cases in deciding penalties? Which ones?”
In deciding penalties, we have in front of us all penalties approved over the years for application by COI. We tried to impose penalties that deal with the institution and to be sure some are punitive. We looked at the fact an ineligible player participated, leading to vacating of records.
Appropriate sanctions should be rendered when due. We felt it was serious and dealt seriously with sanctions imposed. Took committee a while to go through. Other sanctions were considered. These sanctions most properly respond to benefits gained by institution through notoriety gained during this time, led to enhanced recruiting. In the area of scholarship limits, this would be appropriate.
OC Register
“What is their cooperation level?”
“report has the characterization of the cooperation by institution. I direct you to the report. It is a full and fair analysis of the cooperation. They met their obligation, the question was whether there should be any mitigation with respect to that, and the answer of the COI was no.”
Interesting
that the university was put on probation, not a program. That could be major if another program, which had nothing to do with this, get caught in the next four years and how penalties on that could affect all programs.
It’s not the death penalty like some wanted or other more severe sanctions, but I think anyone and everyone will agree that the NCAA didn’t shy away from SC and gave them a meaningful punishment. The fear of them getting off with a wrist slap, allowing all schools free reign, was unfounded.
For everything UCLA baseball, visit my UCLA baseball twitter.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jun 10, 2010 12:28 PM PDT reply actions
ESPN's got a link to the report, too.
I’m printing out all 67 pages. I’ll do a lawyerly breakdown of it by this afternoon and see if I can get to the bottom of the scholarship ban.
M
"In this program your passion bucket must be full to play SC." -- CRN, to Dan Patrick, 1/2008
haha
“Which school will the NCAA recognize for 2004?”
“The NCAA does not recognize a champion for football. That is done by the media, polls and like. The only jurisdiction we have is if the player is eligible for the contest. They are not eligible, therefore the game is vacated. The BCS will have to make the determination on how to handle the NC.”
Snoop is going to be SO SAD
No more sideline tickets during games :(
Found it
From November 2006 to March 2009, a former women’s tennis student-athlete (“former women’s tennis student-athlete”) used an athletics department long-distance access code to make 123 unauthorized personal telephone calls to family members in another country. The total value of the calls was $7,535.
by SuperBruinMan on Jun 10, 2010 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions
More
Further, the former women’s tennis student-athlete made the calls using an institutional access code she knew she did not have the right to use, thus the violations are not inadvertent. The extra benefits conferred were “significant,” as the value of the phone calls was in excess of $7,000. Accordingly, the violations cannot be considered secondary.
by SuperBruinMan on Jun 10, 2010 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions
What ever happened to pre paid calling cards for $20?
No paper evidence and much cheaper…
"former women’s tennis student-athlete"
I wonder what word “former” is modifying. If she’s a “former” woman, then there may be another story there.
Wouldn't surprise me
Have you seen some of the song girls?
by UCLA Band ' on Jun 10, 2010 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions
something about one of their athletes having an $8000 long distance phone bill
i read that on twitter somewhere, I’ll look for a link.
by littlebrother on Jun 10, 2010 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions
It's in the report
I just scanned it, but there’s a TON of stuff in there that wasn’t well-publicised. No wonder the investigation took so long—there was so much mud to wade through.
They keep mentioning a "restaurant owner."
Based on what I’ve read/heard over the years, is this John Papadakis, Petros’ dad? Before they closed their restaurant you used to hear about them throwing $UC events there.
He only got called out for secondary violations, but the fact that he had multiple offenses was part of the reason the trogans got nailed for lack of institutional control. Loving it.
My wife is a sex object. Whenever I want sex, she objects!
I brought this up 6 months ago...
I didn’t think it was a coincidence that the restaurant shut down within weeks of Carroll bolting to Seattle. I’m thinking money was flowing to them or something.
by BruinInDenver on Jun 10, 2010 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions
Pat Forde, ESPN
“one recruit told by Lame Kitty that there would be no major sanctions. que paso?”
“This isn’t the subject of what our committee does. If there are issues there are other avenues available to SI, including filing appeals or asked to be released from LOI.”
I can't help it.
I have to say that I expected them to get a much ligher jolt of electricity, so I’m qute surprised that the ncaa mustered up this much courage. That said, I wanted to see when the firing squad was going to be organized.
Fox
Something tells me they simply won’t be able to toe the line, even now. Given their staff, their attitude, their level of beligerance, they’ll violate their probabtion—fairly quickly—and the wolves will move in. You know better than anyone that their characters are simply not designed to learn from this and better their behavior.
On a lighter note, when are you and Tasser doing the half-naked street dancing?
Love My Bruins
NCAA's cojones only go so far
They’re already going to have to deal with the trogans appealing these penalties; they probably didn’t want the Trogan Times and WWL howling about “another SMU.”
RIP Coach Wooden (1910-2010).
by BigKahunaMan on Jun 10, 2010 12:40 PM PDT up reply actions
re: 2010 recruits
“if 2010 is released from LOI, do they have to sit out a year”
“they have to follow the rules of NCAA and National LOI. That is beyond the scope of our committee.”
Can somebody translate
for someone who does not know the rules for National LOI?
From what I gather, I believe the LOI is binding, meaning despite these findings, anyone who has signed an LOI (and, I think, is enrolled in school/summer school) has to abide by the rules of the LOI, which means if they choose to transfer they have to have the necessary paperwork filled out and wait out the standard 1 season to do so.
by bruinhopeful on Jun 10, 2010 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions
But
If they have not started classes, the player can request to be released from his LOI and if the school agrees, he can leave without penalty. Odds that SC allows it?
For everything UCLA baseball, visit my UCLA baseball twitter.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jun 10, 2010 1:01 PM PDT up reply actions
If it's to a non-Pac 10 and non scheduled school
Pretty likely I would think.
On the one hand, not allowing it would be a PR nightmare
On the other hand, they’re SUC. I don’t rule anything out, nor do I discount whatever BS generators Lame/Ogre seem to have to get these kids to go there in the first place.
RIP Coach Wooden (1910-2010).
by BigKahunaMan on Jun 10, 2010 1:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Yup
And odds that garrett does it? 1000-1
Odds that garrett has a job in 2 months? off the board
by bruinhopeful on Jun 10, 2010 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions
Bobo Morgan
Was in a similar situation. He had signed a LOI, but not attended classes. He was allowed to participate as a Frosh.
"What can USC do to respond to this report? Timeframe?"
All matters are open to appeal by any affected party to the infractions appeal committee.
The beginning is quickly, the setting of hearing and filing of materials… he then goes on about the amount of documents, it’d be about a meter tall. When the committee (infractions appeal) they have to go through the record, and after is filed and everything sent to committee, it will take a while for them to set a hearing time.
I do not have a good guess about the length of time it would be for the hearing to be scheduled.
"can you make recommendations to BCS about the championship?"
No. That’s an independent championship
“Miss Convoy” (who the heck is that?)
She withdrew and decision was made with her presence but without her input.
Pete Carroll influence on penalty?
no penalties are not directed at individual. We selected penalties that appropriate respond to the violations by the institution, associated with institution, and would not have been different if he had stayed.
Will Tim Floyd face individual sanctions?
Mr. Floyd was not found to have violated any rules.
(WHAT?)
The rule for appeals?
If they appeal, all penalties are stayed and consequently, they can proceed into next season and do what they wish to do, there is a risk to that that it pushes the penalties back further.
So much for Snoop
I’ve skimmed the report; obviously nobody was mentioned by name. The only reference I could find to a celebrity was one of the Reggie Bush would-be agents having a friend who’s described as a “comedian and actor who has appeared in various roles in television and motion pictures.” Unless they mean unintentional comedy, I’m pretty sure that ain’t talking about ol’ Snoop. Anyone have an idea who it is? Can’t be Will Ferrell, since the celeb grew up with “agent A” (Lloyd Lake?) in San Diego, and Ferrell grew up in Irvine.
RIP Coach Wooden (1910-2010).
Tennis
Im pretty sure this was the girl they are talking about…..
http://www.usctrojans.com/sports/w-tennis/mtt/niculescu_gabriela00.html
http://www.govandals.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=17100&ATCLID=204794348
Will there be a separate McKnight investigation?
or will nothing come of that….
From Mandel's twitter
If Mike Garrett still has a job tomorrow, NCAA should hit USC with another sanction.
For everything UCLA baseball, visit my UCLA baseball twitter.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jun 10, 2010 12:46 PM PDT reply actions
I figure he'll be there another year
Let the new president fire him. How long has he been there anyway?
by bruinbabe2000 on Jun 10, 2010 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions
BCS money can't be given back?
Because NCAA doesn’t own/operate BCS, our jurisdiction is limited in the area, but indirectly a fine may have been imposed that may have had a similar result but that isn’t the case.
BCS said a couple months ago
they would comply with the NCAA concerning their championship. The AP though is a different story
RESCUING DANCE MUSIC FROM THE BLAHS
Considering how the AP dealt with that juicer Cushing...
…don’t expect any miracles.
RIP Coach Wooden (1910-2010).
by BigKahunaMan on Jun 10, 2010 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions
AP would only need to technically vacate the 2nd one
Since Bush found in violation 12/04 on. So those guys could still claim something…pretty lame.
re: 2 year bowl ban - how did you come up with the number
It was the number of bowl games Reggie participated in.
re: Rule if Jrs/Srs want to transfer?
He hasn’t reviewed it, but it’s best to go with a review of the rulebook. Please contact our media person.
What's up with Montana?
ESPN Poll: If you were a top college football recruit, would you attend USC if your career overlapped with its two-year postseason ban?
Yes: 20%
No: 80%
All states are majority “No” except Montana is majority “Yes.”
http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/post/_/id/5271697/staying-home-bowl-season
[Yes, I know small sample size. I’m pretty sure that’s already 1/2 of the entire population of Montana, though.]
re: SC didn't impose sanctions on football, did it play a role?
Over a period of time for discovery/investigation by SC and enforcement, the university did acknowledge some of violations, but hadn’t done that at beginning.
Separately they did not self impose, can’t say why they didn’t.
Another question:
“did self imposition of sanctions help out?”
Each one is different. The activity in one sport doesn’t affect another – the committee independently treated them.
on tWWL
Mark May (of all people) just ripped the Trogans a new one while Herbie continued to dwell on how strong the penalty is. He kept referring to the fact that Ogre and Lame were on staff during the infractions, so they ultimately got what was coming to them.
"why aren't head coaches held accountable for lack of control?"
Depends on where the committee sees where the lack of control. They didn’t see it, so they didn’t charge him under Rule 10.
"did the high profile of the athlete factor in?"
“if they were a fourth round draft pick, they probably wouldn’t have happened.”
The real issue here is if you have high profile players, your enforcement staff has to monitor those students at a higher level. It is important the people receiving these interactions from those outside the institution are those who will provide a reward somewhere down the road. High profile players demand high profile compliance.
Congratulations Oregon!
On your 2005 Pac-10 title and good luck against Vince Young when the BCS re-plays the 2005 Title Game.
(For the record, I can’t wait to play Oklahoma in the re-played Holiday Bowl)
don't forget Auburn vs. OU in '04 Orange Bowl
"The true athlete should have character, not be a character."- John Wooden
Why was Todd McNair given a penalty?
We reacted to charges brought before us, and we considered the ones that were brought. We didn’t hear anything with respect to charges against Carroll.
UCLA: Future Pac-10 Champs!
"Whoever said WAR is HELL must have been talking about Aaron Rowand" - McCoven faithful
under construction - www.benchrowand.com/ check back for progress!
Doubt anyone will ask the question or the committee would answer
But I wonder how much the re-hiring of Lame, the Ogre and McNair (if he actually is still there) affected the decision, almost like daring the NCAA to drop the hammer.
RIP Coach Wooden (1910-2010).
They were just asked
They said not at all.
Is our December 2004 game against SC in the timetable of vacated wins?
I know it says 12/04, just wondering if there was exact date.
I would think it would be
If memory serves me right, we were the only opponent USC had in December that year. They played the Orange Bowl in January.
Yeah that game was in December
I was just wondering if it’s all wins from say 12/01/04 on or something like 12/25/04 on.
LINKY? YouTube? Justin TV?
Anyone have a link to a live video feed or YouTube video of this?
I must say
I’m pleased with the sanctions that the NCAA handed U$C. The 30 scholarship losses are a big penalty. I’m glad the NCAA punished those Trogans.
You've gotta be kidding me
USC to appeal, blames “unscrupulous sports agents…”
College Football Live
Funny to see Herbstreet with tear in his eyes. That scumbag is such a Trogan at heart even though he is Big 11 guy. Good to see that the NCAA finally had the cajones to come down on a BCS program.
I made a banner that got shown in Southern Campus in 65 or 66 -
“Even the Pope Hates TrOJans”
I was very proud of that one.
As expected
Just updated the post with Trogans issuing a release about appealing the ruling. Interestingly they didn’t send Garrett out this time with a video release.
2 USC grads in offices on both sides of me...
needless to say, ESPN is on and the volume is up!
Just came by to see if the party started.
Looks like ya’ll are enjoying the schadenfreude as much as we are.
/up top
Managing Editor/Chief Lackey-And The Valley Shook
Very Interesting Question
In light of this, will Lane honor the verbals that have already come in. Because here is their quandry. They may only 6-8 scholies to offer next season (to get down to 75). And presumably, they are going to save those for their top guys. But what happens if they have a verbal or three from guys who wouldn’t crack that cut? Do those guys get told …. "we wanted you when we were rich but beat it now that we’re poor? "
I'm sure they're gonna buffer that number
by “encouraging” upperclassmen who aren’t starting to transfer.
"Encouraging"
A polite way to say “beat it”
It's been clear in KU basketball
that scholarships are a series of one-year ‘deals’ and not a guaranteed four-year ride. Granted, it makes a school/coach look like an ass to toss someone aside, but it can be done, and none of us think u$c* would keep a player around just because that player ‘thought’ they’d be around for four years.
Lane had been telling recruits that there wouldn't be major sanctions
Let’s see how many of their verbals stick.
For everything UCLA baseball, visit my UCLA baseball twitter.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jun 10, 2010 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Say...
…is this what good ’ol Steve meant when he said things will be “great” as he walked out of the NCAA hearings?
I think we should start spelling it “SCanctions”
Even with a successful appeal...
say the ban goes down a year and you get a few scholarships back….they are still dragging this out longer than it needs to go. For their own pride they are going to hurt future recruiting with this cloud of shame hanging around.
If they accept the sanctions then they are clean to compete in the new Pac-16 for 2012.
BSPN working OT
To make u$c look like a martyr. This is just too much. These guys are completely out of touch with reality. u$c cheated and they deserve to pay, much like their athletes got paid.
Also funny to see that the women’s tennis team couldn’t stay out of the mix and wanted to be a part of the cheating parade. I’m surprised that $c didn’t shove them under the bus too.
Re: Appeal process
Doesn’t the fact that they acknowlege wrongdoing in BBall and Women’s Tennis weaken their argument, especially with regard to “Lack of institutional control.” In essence they would be saying, “Well, yeah, we did that, but we didn’t do this.”
Also, since additional penalties were not added for the lack of control (noted above) , wouldn’t an appeal open the door for additional penalties to be added? One of the higher ups at the NCAA could probably make the whole appeal process go away with a well placed threat of that possibility.
"Make each day your masterpiece."--JRW
Thank You
In the real world, the answer to both of those questions must be an unqualified “yes.”
I’m just worried about the MaGoo factor here.
Love My Bruins
Keyshawn
much like most $uc products……an NFL bust
"He has to want it because talent only takes you so far. How much you want it is the difference between good and great." - Rick Neuheisel
by SonsOfWestwood on Jun 10, 2010 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions
+1
"He has to want it because talent only takes you so far. How much you want it is the difference between good and great." - Rick Neuheisel
by SonsOfWestwood on Jun 10, 2010 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Meaning of cooperation:
“I have a great love for the University of Southern California and I very much regret the turn that this matter has taken, not only for USC, but for the fans and players,” Bush said in a statement.
“I am disappointed by [Thursday’s] decision and disagree with the NCAA’s findings. If the University decides to appeal, I will continue to cooperate with the NCAA and USC, as I did during the investigation. In the meantime, I will continue to focus on making a positive impact for the University and for the community where I live,” Bush said.
Thanks for all the cooperation, Reggie.
Why not just cooperate $C off a cliff?
"In this program your passion bucket must be full to play SC." -- CRN, to Dan Patrick, 1/2008
How About
starting with those college scholarships you promised to those kids, and then left them hanging with some excuse.
How about starting there?
Love My Bruins
Quick question
Why doesn’t the NCAA use any names in the report?
"He has to want it because talent only takes you so far. How much you want it is the difference between good and great." - Rick Neuheisel
Fundamental privacy issues would be my guess.
Since this is technically an employment/ educational rules matter, and not a formal legal proceeding.
"In this program your passion bucket must be full to play SC." -- CRN, to Dan Patrick, 1/2008
View from WeSuc...at least accepting some blame for things they didn't know
According to the NCAA:
1. McNair was in regular contact with Lake, knew of him as a contact to reach Bush, and had a close mutual friend — then lied about all of it to the school and to the NCAA. In addition, McNair involved Lake in the process of recruiting one prospect that was being hosted by Bush!!!
2. Bush received cash for a car in December of 2004 from Lake, and then brought the car to campus in January of 2005 — USC was specifically aware of the car and its purchase, even listing it in reports as an athlete’s car with a value of $19,000, but failed to inquire about how it was acquired
3. Pete Carroll is alleged to have suggested an internship program for USC athletes with a sports marketing agency.
4. Papadakis Taverna was found to have engaged in improper recruiting activities on the basis of the owner’s contacts and conversations with prospects who were brought to the restaurant. (Okay, we suspected this one, but did not know that it rose to the level of an impermissible action!)
- We all knew of the Mayo stuff. Stupid, stupid stuff. But not part of the “football discussion.”
- We had heard essentially nothing about the female tennis player who misused a phone card.
So, what does it all add up to?
For involved individuals:
Bush should be banned, and disassociated forever from USC.
McNair should be banned, and disassociated forever from USC.
Garrett must be dismissed immediately.
The compliance staff will have to be cleaned out (sorry, everyone must go).
Pete Carroll did not actively do anything wrong, but like John Wooden,
he is guilty because he should have stopped it.
All of these folks let us down. Bush and McNair above all others.
The USC as a whole:
The NCAA is basically right.
There was a lack of adequate and appropriate control.
USC football deserves major sanctions. Wins should be vacated.
Probation is a must. Scholarship limits are appropriate.
A bowl ban ar is not unfair.
Should USC appeal?
Yes.
USC’s actions and inactions were less severe than the actions of
other institutions that have received lesser penalties.
The bowl ban of two years is excessive.
The scholarship limits of 30 scholarships in three years are excessive.
"like John Wooden"
Give me an f’ing break!
i wish
petros was going to be on the radio today – it would be nice to hear him make excuses for his old man…
"Success is never final, Failure is never fatal. It's Courage that count's"
John Wooden.....
Sorry...
… I had problems reading the NCAA report. I was too busy gut laughing.
Fake Pundit. Real Fan.
http://www.andthevalleyshook.com
Here's to $uc
ringing in the potential new age of CFB and the pac-xx in shame and mediocrity. Cry on!
Hey guys
I re-crunched the numbers and it looks like the football series since 1980 is 14-13-1 our favor. :)
EGO TROIORUM MALLEUS SUM
per Wolf...
USC coach Lane Kiffin is flying to the Bay Area this afternoon to speak to a booster group…
I’d love to see this! I almost feel bad for kiffin…haha…not!
This makes me so happy
CRN has already done some magical things with recruiting. Now lets see what incredible things he can do with all this.
Good thought
I don’t think we have any idea how much this means to CRN’s west coast recruiting, more specifically Southern California. Seems like the possibilities are endless at this point
"He has to want it because talent only takes you so far. How much you want it is the difference between good and great." - Rick Neuheisel
by SonsOfWestwood on Jun 10, 2010 1:50 PM PDT up reply actions
i'm guessing most
of the thugs they recruited over there couldn’t qualify academically so let em go to miami where they can rape and pilage…Wow did i say that out loud? LOL
"Success is never final, Failure is never fatal. It's Courage that count's"
John Wooden.....
As if 12/4/10 wasn't important enough
A win this year, and I’ll go as far as to say we control “the battle for los angeles”
"He has to want it because talent only takes you so far. How much you want it is the difference between good and great." - Rick Neuheisel
WOW...more from Wolf...you just can't make this stuff up!
In USC’s response today, the university said, ``to provide us with recommendations about the best way to protect our student-athletes and their families from those who seek to violate the rules, we have retained the Freeh Group, headed by former federal judge and ex-FBI director Louis Freeh.’’
Here’s what one blog said about Freeh: ``Freeh represents Prince Bandar and argues that a plane given to Bandar by BAE was for Saudi Arabia’s military purposes and was not a personal gift. And, no, according to Freeh, the fact that Bandar used the plane himself and had it painted in the colors of his beloved Dallas Cowboys doesn’t change the aircraft’s military nature.
United States China Marketing anyone?
Right here
I swear to god I took that for snark, until I went to Wolf’s blog.
Wolf cited this site in his post.
formerly bruinhoo
They can also hire Gonzo
Randy Cross just retweeted this:
RT @SECGridironLIVE: That’s like saying BP will appeal the oil spill RT @FOXSports USC will appeal punishments
They have to fire Garrett, Immdiately
if for no other reason than to create the impression they are dealing with these things.
sjh
Didn't think about that
I thought the new president would give him at least a year, but that seems more logical.
by bruinbabe2000 on Jun 10, 2010 2:47 PM PDT up reply actions
Timeline
Below is a timeline of events leading up to today’s release of the infractions case involving Southern California.
2001 — Southern California appears before the Committee on Infractions for alleged academic fraud violations in football and women’s swimming. The school is penalized with two years of probation and scholarship reductions in both sports.
2006 — April 21: NCAA Agent, Gambling and Amateurism (AGA) staff received information that a former Southern California football student-athlete might have received impermissible benefits while a student-athlete at the institution.
April 24: NCAA staff contacted the Pacific-10 Conference to work cooperatively on the case.
September: Major enforcement investigators join the case.
2007 — April – November: Interviews conducted by the NCAA’s Academic and Membership Affairs staff, AGA staff, major enforcement and the institution.
2008 — June: Interviews by the NCAA, conference and institution continue.
August 27: Notice of Inquiry sent to the institution.
2009 — April – May: Former student-athletes and members of the men’s basketball coaching staff are interviewed by the NCAA, Pac-10 and institution.
September 24: A Notice of Allegations is sent to the president of ht institution, former head men’s basketball coach and the assistant football coach. Per NCAA policy, institutions have 90 days to respond to a notice of allegations.
December 23: Southern California submits its response to the Notice of Allegations.
2010 — January 4: Assistant football coach submitted his response to the Notice of Allegations (extension granted by committee).
January 11: The former head men’s basketball coach submitted his response to the Notice of Allegations.
January – February: The enforcement staff conducts prehearing conferences with the institution and involved individuals. The prehearing conferences are held to prevent new information from being introduced at the hearing.
February 18–20: The institution appeared before the NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions in Tempe, Arizona.
March 2: The Committee on Infractions completed deliberations regarding findings and penalties for the former head men’s basketball coach.
June 10: Infractions report is released.
What about providing recuits one-half of a scholarship?
I recall that UCLA and some other schools offered recruits one-half of a scholarship or some portion of a scholarship. Could’n’t USC do this to get around the reduction in scholarshps?
Good Question
We currently do that in baseball. Would a kid still want to go to SUC if he got free tuition but had to pay for his own housing?
Tired of trOJie Histrionics
Let them waste time spinning and spewing self-defeating, self-incriminating vitriol across SoCal, cloggin up the legal system with media sound bytes, appeals and rebuttals. Sometimes when you find yourself in a hole you gotta put down the shovel and stop diggin’!! But we know y’all ain’t that bright to understand that nugget of truth!!
Let’s continue to keep it clean in Bruinland and win games all around for Wooden. May he R.I.P.
ALREADY RENEWED OUR SEASON TIX FOR FB!!! GO BRUINS!!!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bruins Nation
Related FanShots on Bruins Nation
![Notre Dame fan gives us a picture of "Southern cal's youth, community conscious people and church groups." [ND Nation]. For a larger version of that 'artwork' click here.
GO BRUINS.](http://cdn0.sbnation.com/fan_shot_images/126499/4482414398_e5bed14eaf_o_small.jpg)
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
