Posted on 01/25/2007 8:19:42 AM PST by bluebeak
"The problem is that if something like this would cost Alabama 20 scholarships and a threat of the death penalty."
Since this is $30 grand over what Alabama got busted for they should get whollped. But they won't. You are right about the subjective and, well, arbitrary punishments.
This is how it will play out..
NCAA: "Trojans, this looks bad"
USC: "We didn't know - we can't watch the kids 24 hours a day"
NCAA: "Oh ok, makes sense - case closed.
I have to agree with you, the NCAA rules are absurd and frankly I hope they do remove USCs championship so they can start listing asterisks in their record books. And why start with Bush at USC? We know OSU players took money (Clarrett) on a recent championship of theirs; same for Florida and FSU.
My question is what Federal Law did Bush break (assume he took money hand over foot) that is so important that the U.S. Attorney General has to waste resources on this investigation? Can not the NCAA keep their own house clean? The NCAA by-laws are not Federal Laws, are they?
Why are the Feds wasting our tax dollars investigating something we have yet to determine is an actual crime?
Bush may have to give back his Hiesman if he is declared ineligible.
USC could end up an 0-13 National Champion in 2004 and 0-13 last year. So, if this happens, does USC have thier championship taken away? Does it make Oklahoma BCS Champion? Does it make Auburn AP champion?
Beside the NCAA santions that could happen to USC (Yeah right like they will ever put the SACRED TROJANS on probabtion) -- this opens up all kinds of cans of worms.
SO - the NCAA violations are not causing a Federal Investigation. The Federal Investigation is finding evidence that points to NCAA violations.
TY for the reply. So the probe is continuing because the Feds believe extortion may have occurred.
I'll assume this will eventually find its way to the IRS and the matter of whether taxes got paid on money given to Bush and his family got properly reported as income wil become the ultimate issue for him.
If the sports agent secretly recording Bush, is that crime?
So next season, suppose a disgruntled wide receiver at say, LSU, is angry at the coach/program because he has been relegated to second string, or perhaps he is still first string but not a big enough part of the LSU offense. He sets up an arrangement with someone having an agenda against LSU, takes a $50,000 payment with a 'future services' commitment similar to Reggie Bush's alleged agreement. After the LSU bowl game, the player has someone leak the arrangement to the press. You gonna call for sanctions against LSU, and have them forfeit all their games as well? What would LSU have done to warrant probation and forfeitures?
programs like USC and "the" Ohio State seem to get passes (not just Clarett, a few others have been caught there).
Both schools have the best talent booster money can buy!
I think the congress is going to have to investigate "big" college football! :>)
Oh, man, I love it.
Mold and mildew everwhere and I was at the JW Marriott. The casino was packed with retirees on the slots. Absolutely packed.
amen brother....espn radio has already spent most of the day covering USC's ass.....the question here is why did bama get as heavily penalized as they did because of the shenanigans of boosters but poor coach carroll didn't realize anything was going on with bush....my ass!
Answer : IN A HEARTBEAT!!!!! The NCAA rules are clear : If a player does something that makes him INELIGIBLE, the University will forfiet every game in which that individual played while he was ineligible.
The Precedent is there. After Alabama won the National Championship in 1992, Antonio Langham met with a sports Agent and was given $500 "ernest money" for agreeing to sign with the agent when he entered the NFL Draft. Well Langham decided to play his senior year. Right before Alabama's bowl game the next season Coach Gene Stallings learned of Langham's meeting (Alabama had gone a YEAR without knowing Langham spoke with an agent). HE immediately notified the NCAA, and nCAA records now record Alabama as going 1-12 in 1993.
Then why were there no sanctions or forfeitures related to Maurice Clarett at Ohio State, or Rhett Bomar at Oklahoma, when they were found to have received illegal benefits while playing for those schools? The individuals took the hit, the programs didn't.
The point to my original post is to illustrate the precedent you set when hammering the university for the actions of those outside the control of the university. You open the door for considerable abuse, even to where you expose the schools to the shenanigans of those who might wish to undermine the program.
The precedent is set that the NCAA rules in an arbitrary fashion. At OSU Troy Smith won the Heisman, at Alabama it would have cost the team 20 scholarships and Maurice Clarrett would have gotten the program the death penalty.
As a USC fan, you have nothing to worry about. The NCAA has no agenda against you so the school will not be affected.
In 1997, Michigan's Charles Woodson won the Heisman Trophy and Michigan won the national title. It was shown several years later, in 2001, that prior to and during his Heisman year at Michigan, 1997, Woodson took money and other benefits from Summit Management, a sports agency. Auburn's All-American Victor Riley was also shown to have taken cash, and a third player, also from Auburn, running back Stephen Davis, admitted in an interview that he took cash from Summit while at Auburn.
NCAA spokeswoman at the time Jane Jankowski said that accepting such benefits while competing would violate NCAA rules, but that the NCAA typically does not investigate such cases after the player has left the school unless there is blatant evidence that university officials knew, or should have known, about the violations. "We don't see any evidence of that" Jankowski said. Jankowski also said the NCAA would have no power to revoke Woodson's Heisman Trophy.
So first of all, apparently Auburn is on the 'favored list' as well, because I don't recall seeing any Auburn games forfeited due to the actions of these two players. Secondly, if USC didn't have any involvement or knowledge of Bush's step-father's shenanigans, this is a pretty close parallel to the Woodson case. Michigan still has their wins and their title, Woodson still has his trophy.
Well with Alabama a much more minor incident happened (the Langhaman incident detailed above) and that ended up costing them about 20 scholarships and 10 games of forfeits. That was the first time that Alabama was ever on probatation.
But your larger point stands, historically the NCAA doesn't care about cases like this unless they have a bone to pick with the team involved. For whatever reason, the NCAA wanted to hammer Alabama and they seized on the first thing they could.
Right now, the NCAA has no problem with USC and they are probably the 2nd most profitable team right now behind ND so they won't be touched.
To be clear, I don't think that USC knew directly what has going on, but they also made it their business not to know. That is how all schools do it. I don't blame them a bit.
The problem is that it is like the 55 mph speed limit. It makes everyone a violator and the NCAA can pick and choose who to hammer.
Exactly.....
Doesn't it seem weird to you though, that the people who ultimately became Bush's agents and marketing agents didn't just tell him to settle with these knuckleheads and be done with it? That's the one thing that isn't adding up for me.
Regarding Alabama, I think the impression back then and previously was that the SEC and the older SWC had a lot of trouble with boosters 'greasing' the players, and 'boosters' are seen as affiliated with the school. The NCAA probably was looking for a way to hammer them, perhaps as much for prior stuff as the 1992 issue. Although, UCLA's basketball program during the John Wooden days was probably as bad as any of them, with that Sam Gilbert guy taking care of everything for those players all those years. But as you said, they weren't going to take down St. John.
What really pisses off all of us out here is that Bush soiled the program with this thing. One of the best parts of the Pete Carroll era is the way the players have behaved (for the most part) on and off the field, as compared to the 10-15 years before Carroll arrived. USC had that bad stretch with the attitudes, the shaky academic guys getting in and staying eligible suspiciously, the defensive lineman doing the big dance on the field after a sack....when they were down by 20 in the 4th quarter, all that crap. Carroll's guys just didn't do this stuff. They still had some problems, off the field fights a couple times, stuff like that. But when starting running back Chauncey Washington didn't keep up in class, he was ineligible for two consecutive years and they took away his scholarship. He got eligible and got it back. Most of the guys seem pretty well-spoken when interviewed, they say the right things, it has just been a better group and a better program. Then stupid Reggie (primarily stupid step-dad) goes and throws a mudball all over Heritage Hall. They couldn't just wait another 11 months until the kid got drafted to start making the money? Ridiculous. Reggie's mom has worked in the sheriff's department for years. You would think that the law would have some meaning, at least with her.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.