CU Slush Fund

[EastStang]

You'd have more luck suing the NCAA to actually enforce their rules because their lack of enforcement is creating a competitive imbalance. While discretion is involved, there comes a point when discretion is being abused. Schools like SMU have to be purer than the driven snow while schools like CU get to rape, pillage and pass around the maryjanes without any appreciable action by the NCAA. On our seventh violation we got the death penalty, Auburn didn't.

[Hoop Fan]

if the private association laws are rock solid here, how is that any member can ever bring suit against the NCAA for any reason? It has been done, private association or not.

I dont think there is much chance a lawsuit would go anywhere, but I do think the NCAA should help a program it buries to recover. Despite the Nazis, didn't the Allies help Germany rebuild after WWII? Extreme analogy I know but reparations, rebuilding support, something was needed. The NCAA leveled us as an example in an enviroment where everyone knew good and well that cheating was rampant everywhere in the same substantial ways. The NCAA should have either used SMU as an example and helped us rebuild as a better example for all or it should have leveled the same punishment throughout college athletics until cheating ceased. It hasnt and we were obviously screwed because the NCAA did neither.

[jtstang]

if the private association laws are rock solid here, how is that any member can ever bring suit against the NCAA for any reason? It has been done, private association or not.

When has it been done, and by whom?

The answer to the first question is anybody with a piece of paper and about $150 can sue anybody else. Doesn't have anything to do with the merits. And I did acknowledge some exceptions to the general rule.

And yeah, the death penalty royally screwed SMU for sure...but analogous to the Nazis?? Come on now.

[SoCal_Pony]

Actually JT, my earlier post was written in the context of 18 years ago, not today, as I agree there is statute of limitation issue.

I can tell you that if I had the financial resources back then that I do today; I would have at least inquired and not with some second-rate firm either; I suspect some people did, but have no idea.

And Hoop Fan, you have been listening to Senator Robert Byrd too much. It is ludicrous to think the NCAA would admit any wrongdoing by helping SMU out now. They will be the last people to ever admit any fault.

[Hoop Fan]

yeah, that was extreme but that was the point. It had nothing to do with the subject of evil or anything like that, obviously I dont think college sports is that important. Just pointing out the NCAA dropped an atomic bomb on SMU and then turned the other cheek which is almost as absurd as never dropping the bomb again on any other evil doers within the ol association.

[jtstang]

Actually JT, my earlier post was written in the context of 18 years ago, not today, as I agree there is statute of limitation issue.

I can tell you that if I had the financial resources back then that I do today; I would have at least inquired and not with some second-rate firm either; I suspect some people did, but have no idea.

Even back then, one big problem with litigating what the NCAA did to us is that we'd also get to litigate what we did to deserve the DP all over again. Talk about going to court with unclean hands--the history of violations at SMU was long and distinguished by the time the death penalty was handed down. I hate the shambles we've been left in, but nobody will ever convince me we did not deserve what we got--we stunk all the way up to the governor's mansion for godsakes. But as I said, it's all water under the bridge now, but I still think those who are upset that Alabama and Colorado didn't "get what they deserved" are missing the point that SMU did.

[Hoop Fan]

And Hoop Fan, you have been listening to Senator Robert Byrd too much. It is ludicrous to think the NCAA would admit any wrongdoing by helping SMU out now. They will be the last people to ever admit any fault.

believe me, I am not confused or naive about that. More of a pure theoretical. The NCAA has some inherent problems as a policing and enforcement body, which have been pointed out more and more around the country over the past few years. There was outrage around the Big 10 about Michigans slap on the wrist for major violations. The best SMU can hope for is system that someday truly does discourage cheating and demands good academics. What has occurred since the DP has been a farce.

[Hoop Fan]

Actually JT, my earlier post was written in the context of 18 years ago, not today, as I agree there is statute of limitation issue.

I can tell you that if I had the financial resources back then that I do today; I would have at least inquired and not with some second-rate firm either; I suspect some people did, but have no idea.

Even back then, one big problem with litigating what the NCAA did to us is that we'd also get to litigate what we did to deserve the DP all over again. Talk about going to court with unclean hands--the history of violations at SMU was long and distinguished by the time the death penalty was handed down. I hate the shambles we've been left in, but nobody will ever convince me we did not deserve what we got--we stunk all the way up to the governor's mansion for godsakes. But as I said, it's all water under the bridge now, but I still think those who are upset that Alabama and Colorado didn't "get what they deserved" are missing the point that SMU did.

thats very righteous JT, but why should SMU be the sole black sheep stigmatized forever more? I know about inflation and all, but $600,000 to a player at Michigan? 150K to a prospect for Alabama? Who cares where it came from, the substance is the same. The form of our cheating sucked granted, but all cheating is done for the purpose of gaining competitive advantage the rest is just window dressing and a way for the NCAA to punish who it wants when it wants. Thats the joke of it all, institutional control, yeah right.

[jtstang]

Not to belabor this too much, but you're making my point for me. I don't know why Michigan and 'bama didn't get popped, I have a pretty keen idea why SMU did.

[EastStang]

In the NCAA's defense, they have been someone consistent lately in not squashing anyone. Fresno State basically flipped a big bird at the NCAA by hiring Tarkanian who of course broke virtually every rule in the book there, and they missed one post season in which they probably would not have gone dancing anyway. I know what we did, and I know what Alabama, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Auburn, Colorado and others did. We were certainly no worse than they have been. Add in academic fraud (which was never an issue at SMU) which is arguably ten times worse than paying players and you see the NCAA has thrown in the towel on enforcement.

[jtstang]

I know what we did, and I know what Alabama, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Auburn, Colorado and others did. We were certainly no worse than they have been.

Were the governors of Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Alabama, Colorado and "other" states neck deep in the improprieties at those institutions? I think there is a difference, if only in perception. Who knows what the thought process is over at NCAA.

[Hoop Fan]

I know what we did, and I know what Alabama, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Auburn, Colorado and others did. We were certainly no worse than they have been.

Were the governors of Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Alabama, Colorado and "other" states neck deep in the improprieties at those institutions? I think there is a difference, if only in perception. Who knows what the thought process is over at NCAA.

Not being a public U, the governor part should actually be totally irrelevant to the NCAA. The voters of Texas should dole out punishment for that aspect. Being a school trustee was obviously a big, big perception problem. But its totally arbitrary how you weigh that. Is it worse for a school to systematically pay $10K to top players or is it worse to have "renegades" (yeah right) out there paying $150K like at Alabama? Form over substance.

[jtstang]

Is it worse for a school to systematically pay $10K to top players or is it worse to have "renegades" (yeah right) out there paying $150K like at Alabama?

Obviously the NCAA thinks its worse to have the trustees of a school blessing the payments. At least there is some insulation of the school with the "renegade" (yeah right) scenario. Like I said, who knows what the NCAA thought process is. There is a major infractions database at NCAA.org which I feel sure contains the committee reports on all of these schools if you're interested in contrasting them with the SMU findings.