Scandal brewing at Mizzou

[OldPony]

Articles in the Columbia, Mo newspaper describing conversations and racist overtones between the Pres. of the school's wife and the wife of the assistant Ad (or b'ball coach-Can't remember) and jailbird Ricky Cleamons ex MU star are blowing the cheating scandall back to the front pages across Missouri. Could possibly end up with the firing of president and Quin Snyder. The Presidents wife calls the white folks "crackers" and tells Ricky to date black girls etc. This was all recorded by the jail Cleamons was in and made public yesterday. NCAA investigation is still ongoing. Board of MU meeting today. Snyder has already admitted giving Ricky clothes but it may go deeper and involvement may even extend to President's office. DP candidate? Naw, their BCS and draw large fan base..

[OldPony]

Forgot. go to www.kansascity.com for story.

[pony91]

Remember Old Pony- NCAA stormtroopers only go after small private schools. We should have been running a clean program like Jackie Sherrill and Barry Switzer?! :hmm:

[MrMustang1965]

Originally posted by pony91:
Remember Old Pony- NCAA stormtroopers only go after small private schools. We should have been running a clean program like Jackie Sherrill and Barry Switzer?! :hmm:

Once again, understand *the reason* SMU got the Death Penalty (in football) over other schools that were just as blatant (if not more so) in thumbing their nose at NCAA regulations...the NCAA saw that SMU's football program was NOT a 'cash cow' for Dallas. After all, there's the Dallas Cowboys. And Dallas has NEVER been a city that's been fully behind happenings on The Hilltop. Halting a Div.1-A football program in Dallas would not hurt the economy of the city one bit. Whereas if you had done that in College Station or Norman or some other 'college town', it would have DEVASTATED the local economy! What SMU did was wrong. No doubt. The NCAA found a 'perfect opportunity' to flex its muscles and show the other schools what *might* happen to them by levying the DP on SMU. However, those other schools are smart enough to realize that the DP will *never* be levied again because the NCAA has realized - although they won't admit it publicly - that it was the worst thing they could have ever done to a school and its football program. Mark my words and take 'em to the bank: you will NEVER see the DP levied again.

[Stallion]

some of you people can dream up more irrelevant reasons for the DP. SMU got the DP because as a Repeat Offender it was caught yet again-the 3rd time in about 5 years-in paying members of the Football program and more importantly a lack of institutional control as demonstrated by the knowing approval and ratification of such cheating and continuation of cheating by the highest officers of the university-said IDIOT Bill Clements et al. Despite the garbage spread around here the NCAA has not been faced with such an easy case as SMU. Now if Missouri's President is involved in and approved of the cheating after Missouri was a Repeat Offender then the facts may present a more analogous situation.

[bhop]

Thank you Stallion. I think some of the people on this board are in DP denial. As much as I love my alma-mater, there is no question that in the 1980s the football program was totally corrupt, the alumni were totally out of control, and the Board of Governors of the University, chaired by Bill Clements and featuring Edwin Cox, were TOTALLY involved. As great as the 1982 season was, don't forget that we were on probation in 1981 and 1983 and couldn't play in a bowl or be on TV in either year. (I think we went 11-1 in both seasons). Getting caught in a scandal the magnitude of the David Stanley deal JUST TWO YEARS LATER was the last straw and the NCAA had to do something drastic.

The DP was not the result of a conspiracy and was not cooked up by jelaous UT alums. The fact is, we brought it upon ourselves. Period.

<small>[ 12-11-2003, 12:47 PM: Message edited by: bhop ]</small>

[Cheesesteak]

Sad to say but, SMU earned its DP.

The national stigma that the DP affixed to the SMU name was horrible.

[MrMustang1965]

Stallion and bhop: I don't deny for ONE MINUTE what your posts say. I totally agree. But you have to look at the BIGGER picture (think 'outside the box' for a minute) of what the DP would do to a 'college town'. Dallas is *not* a college town. The effect of the DP is microcosmic and it has only affected the school and not the surrounding business climate. There are other schools that were (and still are) 'repeat offenders', like SMU was. The problem with SMU back then was the proverbial "our feces doesn't stink" attitude which, in turn, lead the NCAA to levy the DP. And the fact that that SOB Bill Clements was behind it! So help me God...if I ever see him face-to-face....

<small>[ 12-11-2003, 01:31 PM: Message edited by: MrMustang1965 ]</small>

[Hoop Fan]

NCAA punishment is totally subjective and arbitrary, that has been demonstrated over time from Michigan to Alabama. Selective investigation is also rampant. You won't find violations if you dont look. Since you guys know all the facts and are able to say who deserves or earned what, how much did SMU knowingly pay players? How much did the president approve? Regardless of the number, even if you adjust for inflation, its nowhere near the $600,000 Chris Webber got from the Michigan fan who was coddled by their athletic department. Knowing and 'should have known' can both constitute guilt. Michigan should have known Ed Martin was bad news, but they turned the other cheek and everyone knows it. If you are going to have the Death Penalty, it cannot be so narrowly applied that only one school in history receives it for its particular circumstances. Thats like saying out of all the murderers in the world,theres been only one who has been heinous enough to get the DP. Oh really, who says? Completely absurd.

[PonyTime]

Stallion -

Which is more deserving of the Death Penalty:

1.) a School that buys players from High School coaches behind the player's backs - getting HS coaches to influence a kid to make an unwise decision.

2.) a School that gives the student athlete a car and cash to keep up with the rest of the programs in the conference that are offering the same players cars and cash.

Which of these two situations is more deserving of a dp?

Just something to think about, but the Tide will Roll on . . .

hmmmm

[Stallion]

3) the school that has an idiot at the head of it Board of Govenors who approves and ratifies the payment of multiple players despite two prior probations in 5 years.

[bhop]

This is going back aways, but I think the total amount of the SMU slush fund used to pay players was something in the neighborhood of $60,000. Also, the President of the University (Donald something, I'm blanking right now) was not really the guy most culpable. He certainly knew about the payments and didn't oppose them. But under the University's old organizational chart, it was the Board of Governors, not the President, who called the shots. The President was basically a mouthpiece for the Board.

Now, is SMU's the biggest amount of money. . .no. Have other schools committed equal or worse violations involving more money since. . .yes. As Stallion said, however, what set the SMU case apart from all the others are three factors,

(1) the violations were committed with the full knowledge, consent, and involvement of the highest authority in the University (the President and the Board of Governors) I don't think we've seen anything like that in subsequent scandals. In the Alabama case, for example, the violations were committed by a booster acting independently of the university. There was no evidence that his actions were carried out with the knowledge and blessing of the Chancellor of the University.

(2) SMU was caught for MAJOR violations three times in a six year period. I don't think even Alabama was caught for such serious violations so frequently.

(3) SMU's attitude about the whole thing was to approach it as a negotiation. The University did not cooperate with the NCAA, and in fact did just about everything possible to show the NCAA that it was not serious about resolving the NCAA's complaints.

Those were bad, bad times. I'm glad they're gone.

<small>[ 12-12-2003, 05:47 AM: Message edited by: bhop ]</small>

[OldPony]

Stallion is correct on this. The only reason I brought the DP up was the point that it appears, on the surface at least, that the President's wife is being told by a disgraced athlete that he and others have recieved payments. That certainly sounds like a lack of institutional control if the President doesn't do anything about it. Maybe he has already cooperated with the NCAA in their investigation so things aren't as they appear on the surface. MU has at least had several minor violations in the past. Those two things, if true, would subject MU to very harsh penalties. From a PR basis for MU, it is devastating for the President's wife and the wife of the assistnt AD to refer to white people as those "crackers" and how "they be shaking and running around like a bunch of crackheads". Not sopmething you would want in public when as President you are always trying to raise money for some project and you have to go to those "crackers" for it. Some of those "crackers" might be a little vindictive. The NCAA is still investigating and anytime there is an investigation, something will be found, even if minor. The President and AD have refused to resign and seem to be laying the groundwork that Quin Snyder will get all the blame if anything is uncovered. Most likely, an assistant coach will get fired and maybe a schollie or two reduced and that will be the end.

[PonyTime]

Stallion -

You honestly believe that the school that gave some players cash (with the knowledge of board members)deserves it much more than the school that is toying with kids lives and BUYING players from HS Coaches???????

If you don't see some sort of differnece here than it is YOU that have a serious problem.

The Alabama case was not only wrong at the NCAA level, but also on a number of other levels that are far more important than an NCAA rule or regulation.

I agree with your argument at one level.

I guess that in my mind - I see a major difference, however, in your mind, you see code 19 paragraph 12, page 16 of some NCAA document. And because the NCAA doesn't have a rule against murdering your teammates, Buying and Selling human beings, getting hookers for recruits, having Grad assistants take exams and write papers, etc, etc, than by all means . . . ROLL TIDE, Go Gophers!, Fight Irish! and give the DP to SMU.

[Hoop Fan]

No one is suggesting that SMU didn't deserve strong punishment. In fact, SMU definitely deserved the stiffest type of punishment possible. Bill Clements assured that. But the point is, Bill Clements or no Bill Clements, you cannot reasonably reserve a class of punishment for one offender and one offender only. Sorry, but thats called scapegoating and example setting. Even the Ticket idiots who hate us acknowledged that on their morning show today when talking about Baylor. The life of a university is still much more than one man or small group of men at a point in time. The NCAA should have realized that. Ostrasizing one school and only one school for the ills of an entire system and culture was wrong.