Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 37
  1. #1

    The NCAA Sanctions on Ohio State and USC

    Ohio State has multiple infractions over several years involving several players and a booster. The head coach knew about it but kept quiet.

    USC had one player whose family, 100 miles from the school, got major benefits. Player also got benefits. Asst coach is accused of knowing about it and lying but kept quiet. No USC booster was involved, the benefits came from a wannabe agent.

    Ohio State gets a one year bowl ban and loses 9 scholarships.

    USC gets a two year bowl ban and loses 30 scholarships.

    NCAA is a TOTAL JOKE.

    SoCal

  2. #2

    penalties

    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalDukeFan View Post
    Ohio State has multiple infractions over several years involving several players and a booster. The head coach knew about it but kept quiet.

    USC had one player whose family, 100 miles from the school, got major benefits. Player also got benefits. Asst coach is accused of knowing about it and lying but kept quiet. No USC booster was involved, the benefits came from a wannabe agent.

    Ohio State gets a one year bowl ban and loses 9 scholarships.

    USC gets a two year bowl ban and loses 30 scholarships.

    NCAA is a TOTAL JOKE.

    SoCal
    And North Carolina has nine major violations (more than USC and OSU combined) with the associate head coach actually funneling money (more money that Ohio State and USC combined) to the players. We have at least four players lying to investigators and the guilty coach refusing to cooperate with the NCAA. He was allowed to resign from his job while receiving a $90,000 severence package.

    What will their penalty be?

  3. #3
    I agree that the NCAA seems to be inconsistent with their punishments, but didn't that one player's family at USC get an obscene amount of benefits? Like in the tens of thousands, or even hundreds of thousands range? (I am not asking these questions in a mocking tone, by the way. I honestly don't know all the facts of the case, but I thought Bush's family got basically a house.) While as far as I know, the Ohio State players traded their memorabilia for free tattoos or sold them on eBay for a couple hundred. Seems like a different scale to me so perhaps that's why USC got a worse punishment, but the Ohio State coverup from a coach's perspective certainly was more blatant. USC also got charged with "lack of institutional control," I believe, with the basketball program being investigated in tandem. Ga Tech got its ACC Championship taken away (as well as a good portion of the season) for one player receiving something like $200 and no coverup involved at all. That seemed unnecessarily harsh to me. Definitely inconsistent punishments, but hard to be please everybody, I suppose. Again, I haven't read extensive details surrounding all these cases, but the above are what I recall, so I apologize for any misstatements.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Inman, SC & Fort Myers, FL

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by Olympic Fan View Post
    And North Carolina has nine major violations (more than USC and OSU combined) with the associate head coach actually funneling money (more money that Ohio State and USC combined) to the players. We have at least four players lying to investigators and the guilty coach refusing to cooperate with the NCAA. He was allowed to resign from his job while receiving a $90,000 severence package.

    What will their penalty be?
    Loss of wine and cheese privileges for one year. Hah!

  5. #5
    alteran is offline All-American, Honorable Mention
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Durham-- 2 miles from Cameron, baby!
    Quote Originally Posted by mgtr View Post
    Loss of wine and cheese privileges for one year. Hah!
    You can maybe take the cheese, but you'll NEVER get the whine out of the tarheels.

  6. #6

    Not exactly the way I see it

    Quote Originally Posted by Bluedog View Post
    I agree that the NCAA seems to be inconsistent with their punishments, but didn't that one player's family at USC get an obscene amount of benefits? Like in the tens of thousands, or even hundreds of thousands range? (I am not asking these questions in a mocking tone, by the way. I honestly don't know all the facts of the case, but I thought Bush's family got basically a house.) While as far as I know, the Ohio State players traded their memorabilia for free tattoos or sold them on eBay for a couple hundred. Seems like a different scale to me so perhaps that's why USC got a worse punishment, but the Ohio State coverup from a coach's perspective certainly was more blatant. USC also got charged with "lack of institutional control," I believe, with the basketball program being investigated in tandem. Ga Tech got its ACC Championship taken away (as well as a good portion of the season) for one player receiving something like $200 and no coverup involved at all. That seemed unnecessarily harsh to me. Definitely inconsistent punishments, but hard to be please everybody, I suppose. Again, I haven't read extensive details surrounding all these cases, but the above are what I recall, so I apologize for any misstatements.
    Bush's family got huge benefits including use of a house. However this was in a time when anyone with a pulse could get a huge mortgage. My problem is how is USC or any school supposed to police families that may be 100 miles away (in this case) or even thousands.

    It would probably be easier to police free tattoos. Ohio State's issues, while less in monetary value, were systemic and over many years and involved a booster. How is that not a lack of institutional control? USC's involved someone who thought he was an agent.

    You are right that the USC basketball team was also penalized. I personally thought the accusations against basketball were worse than those against football. The coach was charged with paying a runner to get OJ Mayo to USC, and the same runner had gotten USC in trouble before with another player.

    I don't think USC should have gotten off. I do think think that 2 years of no bowl games and loss of 30 scholarships over 3 years is too severe.

    From what I have read both UNC and Miami should be penalized more severely than USC. Hard to imagine what that is short of the death penalty.

    As does this guy link

    SoCal
    Last edited by JasonEvans; 12-22-2011 at 01:17 PM. Reason: forgot link

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    California
    Notwithstanding how USC's misdeeds (i.e. benefits for Bush) directly compare with OSU's misdeeds (i.e. tattoos, cars, pants), I understand that USC's penalties were likely made harsher due to their general lack of cooperation with the NCAA and COI, whereas OSU has been relatively proactive in self-reporting, taking mitigating steps, and taking self-disciplinary actions. One has to factor that data in when comparing how the NCAA has handled the two situations, rather than simply focus on the benefits themselves.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Bern, NC unless it's a home football game then I'm grilling on Devil's Alley
    Quote Originally Posted by Olympic Fan View Post
    And North Carolina has nine major violations (more than USC and OSU combined) with the associate head coach actually funneling money (more money that Ohio State and USC combined) to the players. We have at least four players lying to investigators and the guilty coach refusing to cooperate with the NCAA. He was allowed to resign from his job while receiving a $90,000 severence package.
    Their uniforms are ugly, too.
    Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Charlotte, North Carolina
    http://www.charlotteobserver.com/201...-may-face.html

    D Jones is the MAN! I remember when I was in college and I had plenty of money to pay for admission to the club for the first 24 ladies arriving to the party in my honor, and then buy 24 shots every hour on the hour, AND give away $500 to some lucky ladies!

    Glad that UNC has cleaned up their football act. CLEARLY, there is no lack of institutional control at that fine palace of academic virtue.

    The clock is ticking, NCAA...when do we all get to roll our eyes at the sanctions comin' to Chapa Heeya?

    (And, to keep this vitriolic anti-UNC post loosely connected to the thread, how are those sanctions going to stack up against USC's and OSU's? I was going to post this to the old UNC beat goes on thread, but that was locked, and I didn't feel like the wonderfully entertaining Dwight Jones poster story was worth it's own thread).

    PS: I'm kind of old and out of it, but I really really want to attend that party. Ummm, what exactly is a "sexxxy casual" dress code? Maybe I should consult with the ladies of the UNC-CH Chi Omega chapter. They seem really well versed in the etiquette of partying with UNC athletes. Remember ladies...be a classy jersey chaser, and keep your jock-sniffing boyfriends in check! http://deadspin.com/5787963/self-pro...-sisters-first
    Last edited by davekay1971; 12-21-2011 at 08:56 AM.

  10. #10

    Ohio State vs. UNC

    Stewert Mandell of SI has an interesting take on how the OSU ruling impacts other pending cases. His major take: "If anybody's fans should be shaking in their boots, it's UNC's."

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz1h9rbs7Ox

    Heard a recorded opinion piece by Jim Rome (not one of my favorites), talking about the Ohio State ruling -- lambasting AD Gene Smith (the guy Talman Trask wanted to hire at Duke in 1997) for not self-imposing a one-year bowl ban. His argument was that the Buckeyes would be far better off taking their medicine this year -- with a 6-6 team in a minor bowl with a lame duck coach -- than next year, when Urban Meyer will have to stay home no matter what.

    Rome didn't mention it, but I wonder if the same applies to the powers that be at UNC. They elected to go bowling this year and ended up in the Poulan Weed-Eater Independence Bowl (about the worst bowl possible) with a lame duck coach.

    Of course, the UNC response has been that they won't be getting a bowl ban ... that nobody gets a bowl ban with out a LOIC ruling. That's exactly what Gene Smith said at Ohio State and -- surprise, surprise! -- OSO got a bowl ban with the same Failure to Monitor (not LOIC) that UNC admitted.

    I can hear screams from Chapel Hill now if they get a bowl ban. Hope they enjoy their bowl trip now when Coach Fedora will have to start with a team banned from a bowl.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    Quote Originally Posted by Olympic Fan View Post
    They elected to go bowling this year and ended up in the Poulan Weed-Eater Independence Bowl (about the worst bowl possible) with a lame duck coach.
    The Independence Bowl was last sponsored by Poulan in 1996. It has had four different sponsors since then.

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, DC area
    Quote Originally Posted by throatybeard View Post
    The Independence Bowl was last sponsored by Poulan in 1996. It has had four different sponsors since then.
    But "Poulan Weed-Eater Independence Bowl" was such a brilliant name, it bears repeating!

    -jk

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Bern, NC unless it's a home football game then I'm grilling on Devil's Alley
    It just dawned on me that Withers better enjoy his time at the Independence Bowl, because since he's off to Ohio State next season he'll definitely be home for the holidays. There is some sort of delicious irony in there, although I don't think as an individual he's deserving of any penalties.
    Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Based on how bad the sanctions were at tOSU, I say "death" to our friends at the state college in chapel hill.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Inman, SC & Fort Myers, FL
    With regard to NCAA sanctions, I am probably in company with a large number of fans -- interested, but not knowledgeable. Given that lack of knowledge, the sanctions appear to have quite a random element, and vary by who is in charge of the NCAA. I also have never quite comprehended why penalties imposed on an institution during a coach's tenure don't travel with him (eg, Calipari and quite a few others).
    I am confident we have members of this board who can enlighten me (and, I hope, others).

  16. #16

    This will help you understand

    Quote Originally Posted by mgtr View Post
    With regard to NCAA sanctions, I am probably in company with a large number of fans -- interested, but not knowledgeable. Given that lack of knowledge, the sanctions appear to have quite a random element, and vary by who is in charge of the NCAA. I also have never quite comprehended why penalties imposed on an institution during a coach's tenure don't travel with him (eg, Calipari and quite a few others).
    I am confident we have members of this board who can enlighten me (and, I hope, others).
    Link

    SoCal

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Inman, SC & Fort Myers, FL
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalDukeFan View Post
    Link

    SoCal
    Thanks, good info. Doesn't much change my mind, however. Still wonder why sanctions don't follow coach.

  18. #18

    Thinking about it

    Quote Originally Posted by mgtr View Post
    Thanks, good info. Doesn't much change my mind, however. Still wonder why sanctions don't follow coach.
    I guess that the coach could coach pro or retire and the sanctions would have little meaning.

    It does seem wrong that players who were in high school or even middle school when the violations occurred have to pay the penalty and the coach can move on to another college job and enjoy success. I will say in most of the recent cases that has not happened. Pete Carroll is in the pros and Tressell is also.

    I also think in some cases it is more the schools responsibility than the coaches. You might have an agent paying a player's family hundreds or thousands miles away. Is the coach suppose to police that?

    If you set very very very low expectations for the NCAA than you will only be mildly disappointed.

    SoCal

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    20 Minutes From The Heaven That Is Cameron Indoor
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalDukeFan View Post
    Bush's family got huge benefits including use of a house. However this was in a time when anyone with a pulse could get a huge mortgage. My problem is how is USC or any school supposed to police families that may be 100 miles away (in this case) or even thousands.

    It would probably be easier to police free tattoos. Ohio State's issues, while less in monetary value, were systemic and over many years and involved a booster. How is that not a lack of institutional control? USC's involved someone who thought he was an agent.

    You are right that the USC basketball team was also penalized. I personally thought the accusations against basketball were worse than those against football. The coach was charged with paying a runner to get OJ Mayo to USC, and the same runner had gotten USC in trouble before with another player.

    I don't think USC should have gotten off. I do think think that 2 years of no bowl games and loss of 30 scholarships over 3 years is too severe.

    From what I have read both UNC and Miami should be penalized more severely than USC. Hard to imagine what that is short of the death penalty.

    As does this guy link

    SoCal
    You may be right in your assessment of comparing the actual violations of the 3 schools, however, I think you are under estimating the cooperation factor. That played a very large role in the severity of the penalties USC received. According to reports, the USC administration and staff went into full denial, circled the wagons, and did not cooperate with the investigators. The NCAA gives a lot of weight to that. It appears that OSU and UNC worked with and cooperated with the investigators much moreso than did USC.

    I think that played a huge role in the sanctions at USC being much more severe than OSU sanctions.

    One thing OSU did wrong, and paid the price for, was not assesing a self-imposed Bowl Ban. That is why they got hit with a bowl ban next year. I fully expect the same thing to happen to UNC. They accepted 2 Bowl Bids (last year and this year) after the investigation had started, and I will be very surprised if the NCAA does not make them pay the piper for doing so, and hits UNC with at least a one year bowl ban.

  20. #20
    Count me as one member of the Trojan Family (JD) who is willing to let bygones be bygones.

    The bowl ban has run its course, we will continue to get the best recruits in SoCal, and Barkley is coming back. And in the process of dealing with the NCAA investigation, we got rid of Mike Garrett.

    On another blog I frequent, I just posted a link to a YouTube video of the Spirit of Troy playing "Conquest" and told them they'd better get used to hearing it. They (and you) might get to hear it 14 times next year.

Similar Threads

  1. What will the NCAA do to Ohio State?
    By SoCalDukeFan in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 03-10-2011, 11:34 AM
  2. Arizona and Olsen slammed by additional NCAA sanctions
    By 4decadedukie in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-30-2010, 03:27 PM
  3. Ohio State-Louisiana State
    By throatybeard in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 01-08-2008, 05:40 PM
  4. Men's NCAA Final (Ohio State-Florida)
    By throatybeard in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 04-03-2007, 03:14 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •