Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 121 to 128 of 128
  1. #121
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    -Jason "in recent years, the NCAA slammed USC (#84 mil), Ohio State (#3, $167 mil), and Penn St (#10, $125 mil)... if they can be hurt, so can UNC" Evans
    As well as Notre Dame. Although they are private and don't report, I cannot imagine that they are not a top 15 revenue team. As Jason notes, although most of us are basketball-centric in our views, football is where the real money is. Hence, expansion of the leagues.

    UNC is not too big to fail, or too important to punish. They are, however, willing to push these issues to the limits when most schools would just self-report and take their medicine to a large degree.

    Pride goeth before the fall. Carolina, goeth to Hell.

  2. #122
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Deeetroit City
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    As well as Notre Dame. Although they are private and don't report, I cannot imagine that they are not a top 15 revenue team. As Jason notes, although most of us are basketball-centric in our views, football is where the real money is. Hence, expansion of the leagues.

    UNC is not too big to fail, or too important to punish. They are, however, willing to push these issues to the limits when most schools would just self-report and take their medicine to a large degree.

    Pride goeth before the fall. Carolina, goeth to Hell.
    If they beith in hell, to where dost they fall?

  3. #123
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by BD80 View Post
    If they beith in hell, to where dost they fall?
    The lowest ring, my friend. To the lowest ring.

  4. #124
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Deeetroit City
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    The lowest ring, my friend. To the lowest ring.
    Or lower ...

  5. #125
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    The lowest ring, my friend. To the lowest ring.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  6. #126
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    The lowest ring, my friend. To the lowest ring.
    Quote Originally Posted by swood1000 View Post
    Y'all talkin' about this?



    [redacted] them and the horses they rode in on.

  7. #127
    Quote Originally Posted by Olympic Fan View Post
    There is NO chance that UNC will get the death penalty.

    There is almost no chance that the death penalty will ever be levied again -- to anybody.
    I've been wondering about this -- not specifically with reference to UNC (I agree they likely won't get the death penalty), but in general.

    There seems to be a conventional wisdom that after the NCAA hit SMU football with the death penalty in 1987 and SMU became irrelevant for a generation, everyone took a step back and said, "Whoa..." and decided the death penalty was just too big an axe to swing, and therefore likely won't ever be swung again.

    I'm not so sure. That is, I don't disagree that this conventional wisdom exists, or that it might prevent the NCAA from ever using the death penalty again.

    I'm just not sure about the validity of the conventional wisdom.

    It wasn't just the death penalty that killed SMU football. It was the death penalty, plus at least two other things.

    First, after the NCAA lowered the hammer, SMU did a major housecleaning from top to bottom. New president, new trustees, new athletic director and staff, new everything. And they de-emphasized football for a long time. Now, given the degree of corruption at SMU, these were probably necessary and appropriate steps. But it was those steps, as much as anything else, that handicapped SMU football and made it an also-ran (at best) for so long.

    With the restrictions that SMU's new management put on the football program, there was just no way they could field a competitive team. And I'm not just talking about restrictions that said, "Hey, no more slush funds to pay players." The new brass at SMU imposed tight academic requirements, cut the program's budget, and took a number of other steps that really hampered SMU's ability to rebuild a competitive program. There were just a lot of things that SMU just couldn't do, even though they would've been completely within the rules, to try and keep up with other programs.

    The other thing that really hurt SMU was the demise of the Southwest Conference. In 1990, a year after SMU resumed football, Arkansas left to join the SEC, touching off a domino effect of realignment as the major conferences began looking to negotiate their own TV deals and expand their footprints to increase the value of their potential deals. (The same year the SEC added Arkansas and South Carolina, Penn State joined the Big Ten.)

    Reduced to a footprint of a single state, the SWC was ripe for cannibalization. The death blow came a few years later when its two biggest properties, Texas and Texas A&M, left (along with Baylor and Texas Tech) for the Big Eight, which became the Big 12. The remaining SWC members (including SMU) were left without a major conference home, and spun off one by one to mid-major leagues like the WAC and Conference USA. Without a major conference to carry it, any hope SMU had of returning to the upper echelon of college football programs was effectively dead.

    So yes, the death penalty unquestionably hurt SMU. But it wasn't just the death penalty that truly killed SMU for a generation. It was a combination of the death penalty and other events and circumstances -- some of which SMU imposed on itself, but some of which were beyond its control.
    "I swear Roy must redeem extra timeouts at McDonald's the day after the game for free hamburgers." --Posted on InsideCarolina, 2/18/2015

  8. #128
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Quote Originally Posted by Olympic Fan View Post
    There is NO chance that UNC will get the death penalty.

    There is almost no chance that the death penalty will ever be levied again -- to anybody.

    I happen to be one of those who think UNC will be hammered ... but it won't be the death penalty.

    And, yes, UNC will appeal all the way, but unless they can get the case before a UNC judge -- like Orange County Judge Allen Baddour, who has helped them several times -- their chances of winning are infinitesimal.
    I agree that there's no chance that UNC will get the death penalty. For one thing, it's only applicable if a second violation occurred within five years of the starting date of the penalty assessed in a prior case. The effective date of the penalties in the prior public infractions decision was March 12, 2012. However, the allegations in NOA-3 are for activities that only went to 2010-11 (except for those related to Crowder's and Nyang'oro's refusal to participate). So this is for things that happened before the starting date of the previous penalty and so doesn’t qualify under the repeat violator rule.

    The repeat-violator legislation (“death penalty”) is applicable to an institution if, within a five-year period, the following conditions exist:
    • Following the announcement of a major case, a major violation occurs and

    • The second violation occurred within five years of the starting date of the penalty assessed in the first case. The second major case does not have to be in the same sport as the previous case to affect the second sport.

    • Penalties for repeat violators of legislation, subject to exemptions authorized by the committee on the basis of specifically stated reasons, may include any of the following:
    • The prohibition of some or all outside competition in the sport involved in the latest major violation for one or two sport seasons and the prohibition of all coaching staff members in that sport from involvement (directly or indirectly) in any coaching activities at the institution during that period
    • The elimination of all initial grants-in-aid and recruiting activities in the sport involved in the latest major violation in question for a two-year period.
    • The requirement that all institutional staff member serving on the NCAA Board of Directors; Leadership, Legislative, Presidents or Management Councils; Executive Committee or other Association governance bodies resign their positions. All institutional representatives shall be ineligible to serve on any NCAA committee for a period of four years and
    • The requirement that the institution relinquish its Association voting privileges for a four-year period.

Similar Threads

  1. House of Cards
    By chaosmage in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 02-21-2014, 07:57 PM
  2. SoCal Slammed
    By BD80 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 08-27-2010, 11:01 AM
  3. 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
  4. Business cards for children
    By BCGroup in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-09-2008, 08:44 AM
  5. Report cards
    By DukieInBrasil in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 12-10-2007, 10:51 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
  •