PonyFans.com

South Carolina is now under NCAA investigation for about 10 rules violations occurring during Lou Holtz's tenure. One of the charges is the dreded lack of institutional control. Of course the Gamechix (I'm using that name because Gamecokcs seems to get banned on this board) have recommended that they lose a few visitations and scholarships as their only penalty. Let's see if the NCAA decides to show some guts and start cleaning up the cesspool that is the SEC. On the other hand, the NCAA won't be able to show that they gained any competitive advantage because they've consistently stunk.

I vote for the Death Penalty.

nothing will ever happen - they're bcs-bs

let's move on to another topic -

The Death Penalty?

What is this? I thought that was the thing that could only happen to SMU...

Of course BCS teams are different than us Non-BCS teams...Nothing will happen...AT ALL

If Rape allegations ( Colorado buffaloes) don't get the NCAA attention do you really think this will? If you are a big school the rules do not apply.

Before the NCAA can hand out the Death Penalty can be handed out, an investigation has to occur. And since the NCAA has sent the Keystone cops to South Carolina, one can expect a thorough and complete whitewash....ere...investigation. And as always, the NCAA will find no blood no foul. USC walks with one scholarship lost for one year and Centenary College getting 5 years double secret probation.

I think the NCAA will take harsh actions.

I bet they limit USC's media guide by an additional 5 pages...

Has the NCAA created the perfect Catch 22.

If you are a big program, you don't get punished for cheating, but to become a big program you have to cheat.

So the smaller programs have to cheat and not get caught, but if you are a smaller program that is starting to grow, then you must be cheating and you get investigated.

I think I understand now.

DiamondM75 wrote:Has the NCAA created the perfect Catch 22.

If you are a big program, you don't get punished for cheating, but to become a big program you have to cheat.

So the smaller programs have to cheat and not get caught, but if you are a smaller program that is starting to grow, then you must be cheating and you get investigated.

I think I understand now.

You hit the nail on the head!

DiamondM75 wrote:Has the NCAA created the perfect Catch 22.

If you are a big program, you don't get punished for cheating, but to become a big program you have to cheat.

So the smaller programs have to cheat and not get caught, but if you are a smaller program that is starting to grow, then you must be cheating and you get investigated.

I think I understand now.

Well you can think whatever you want but the reason that "smaller program" in Dallas got the Death Penalty in 1986 was because they WERE IN FACT cheating in a manner which involved the university at large on every level, and SMU deserved the punishment that was handed down, irrespective of what the "big programs" were doing.

So whatever happens at SC for whatever SC did does not have any bearing on whether SMU was treated fairly by the NCAA for what SMU did.

jtstang wrote:

DiamondM75 wrote:Has the NCAA created the perfect Catch 22.

If you are a big program, you don't get punished for cheating, but to become a big program you have to cheat.

So the smaller programs have to cheat and not get caught, but if you are a smaller program that is starting to grow, then you must be cheating and you get investigated.

I think I understand now.

Well you can think whatever you want but the reason that "smaller program" in Dallas got the Death Penalty in 1986 was because they WERE IN FACT cheating in a manner which involved the university at large on every level, and SMU deserved the punishment that was handed down, irrespective of what the "big programs" were doing.

So whatever happens at SC for whatever SC did does not have any bearing on whether SMU was treated fairly by the NCAA for what SMU did.

I agree that the NCAA handed down a fair penalty to SMU...but you cannot tell me that other programs shouldn't have gotten the death penalty as well. SMU's case set precedent that has not been followed.

CalallenStang wrote:I agree that the NCAA handed down a fair penalty to SMU...but you cannot tell me that other programs shouldn't have gotten the death penalty as well.

That's right, I can't. I have not done the research necessary to determine what sanctions "other programs" deserved, so I'm not going to try.

jtstang wrote:

CalallenStang wrote:I agree that the NCAA handed down a fair penalty to SMU...but you cannot tell me that other programs shouldn't have gotten the death penalty as well.

That's right, I can't. I have not done the research necessary to determine what sanctions "other programs" deserved, so I'm not going to try.

I don't know of all of them off the top of my head...but I do know that Kentucky went through a scandal similar to ours back around 2000. Here's the scoop...

http://www.kernel.uky.edu/2001/text/0305/01d_news.shtml

UK has admitted voluntarily to the following violations: • Former UK recruiting coordinator Claude Bassett sent $1,400 in money orders as a gift to Memphis Melrose High School coach Tim Thompson.
• Bassett arranged for fall 2000 signees to have summer residence on campus with funded PLUS account cards.
• In February 1999, Bassett wrote an English paper for a player in his own handwriting. The paper was then typed by an office assistant.
• Sixteen Melrose High School prospects were funded $200 each to attend UK's summer football camp.
• Bassett paid for the hotel room and luxuries of Louisville Male prospect Montrel Jones, Kentucky's Mr. Football, during an unofficial visit in October 2000.
•Jackets and UK apparel were illegally given in multiple instances to UK recruits.
• Bassett also gave $60 to one prospect to spend at the shops at the Lexington Civic Center.
• In the summer of 2000, Bassett illegally arranged and paid for an ACT tutor in Lexington for a UK signee from Memphis Melrose High School. Bassett had been told by UK Compliance Officer Sandy Bell that payment for a tutor was a violation.
• When a prospect showed concern that playing football would hurt his chances to be admitted into medical school, Bassett drafted a false memo from the UK College of Medicine detailing admission requirements.

Sound familiar?

don't know if you were around but as pointed out by us "lawyers" on the board the Kentucky case has nothing to do with the facts in the SMU case. The issues in the SMU case involved issues of repeat offenders and the unprecedented lack of institutional control by the governing body of the university even after 3 relatively recent probations. Focusing on the distinction between these types of cases are things a lawyer is trained to do-obviously anmd not surprisingly others pound away over and over on issues which were not really relevant or is it material(I missed that day in law school) to the Death Penalty case. Now if we are talking about how SMU was treated in the two prior NCAA probation realize that our university was lying thru its teeth during those investigations and some high placed officials might well have committed perjury (if under oath). Unfair?

First, as I have always said, we got what we deserved, the problem is that the NCAA isn't giving others what they deserve. Since we got the death penalty, I have reviewed the NCAA database for various violations and I searched by the SEC, Big XII, and Big Ten. I found that Georgia has been on probation four times since we got the death penalty all involving recruiting and inducements. I guess that's not repeating enough. Kentucky has been on probation three times for the same period including the items cited above all involving inducements. Alabama and Auburn have kept each other company at three. South Carolina is now going for its third including a 1991 charge of lack of institutional control. A&M has had three probations as has Baylor all involving inducements and recruiting. Minnesota has four including some academic improprieties. Wisconsin has three. There are a bunch of schools in those conferences at two during that period in fact only Northwestern and Vanderbilt have avoided that number of penalties. Those three conferences have teams cheating at an alarming rate especially the SEC. The major difference is that our representatives were uncooperative and obstructionist with the NCAA after the investigation began. Bob Hitch was excoriated by the enforcement staff. But that being said, covering up the wrongdoing did not make us more competitive, it was the cheating that made us more competitive and that is the wrong these rules are put in place for and those rules state the death penalty is there to even the playing field after improper methods are used to create a competitive advantage. That's what its for and it isn't being used to do that is it?