Kansas cited for "lack of institutional control"

by **DickerJames** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 10:33 pm

A six year period that led to dozens of violations in football and men's and women's basketball. The school has self imposed a two year probation period and is waiting on a NCAA meeting to determine what will happen.

by **mr. pony** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 11:35 am

Wow, it seems cheating is all over the Big 12.

But UT is squeaky clean, thank God ....

by **NavyCrimson** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 1:25 pm

well - u can bet nothing will happen to them (ku & tu)

they make too much doe for the ncaa's stalin police wannabes!!!

by **jtstang** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 2:48 pm

mr. pony wrote:Wow, it seems cheating is all over the Big 12.

But UT is squeaky clean, thank God ....

You poor, sad and jealous man....

by **mr. pony** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 5:42 pm

Wrong on all 3 counts.

Have another nice day, d***head. (stands for dumbhead.)

by **jtstang** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 4:36 pm

mr. pony wrote:Wrong on all 3 counts.

Have another nice day, d***head. (stands for dumbhead.)

Pitiful whiney sad man. And chronically envious of UT to boot...

by **tmustangp** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 4:39 pm

mr. pony wrote:Wow, it seems cheating is all over the Big 12.

But UT is squeaky clean, thank God ....

yah and we were sqeaky clean in the 80's

by **NavyCrimson** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 5:24 pm

i have to agree with mr pony on this one -

they're anything but squeaky -

they're TEXAS

with a 30% grad rate, that is enough to start the investigations but it ain't happening & life marches on -

by **Danny Noonan** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 6:23 pm

When you're Texas, you don't have to cheat. That's why they have 20 football recruits already. They are turning them away.

Flagship University in Texas plus national championship = easy recruiting.

But it must be true because mr. pony says it over and over and over (without one bit of evidence).

by **giacfsp** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 6:45 pm

Not having to cheat doesn't necessarily mean it doesn't happen.

I'm not saying that it does, either - I don't know one way or the other. I'm simply suggesting that the two are not mutually exclusive.

by **mr. pony** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 8:11 pm

UT gets what it wants when it wants it, and has LOTS of powerful folks to keep 'little problems' from becoming 'BIG problems'. It also has countless sycophants in the media.

UT hasn't been found guilty of a major infraction in football since 1987. They received one-year's probation - no loss of TV or bowls. Also limited to 20 scholarships for 1 year and 75 official visits. (OOOO, THAT hurt!)

In two previous major infractions at UT in 1965 and 1982, they lost no TV, bowls or scholarships. Just one year probation each.

(Gee, '82 and '87 were five years apart - why no death penalty?)

source: NCAA.org

by **mr. pony** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 8:15 pm

[quote="giacfsp"]Not having to cheat doesn't necessarily mean it doesn't happen.[/quote]

Exactly. Did Alabama HAVE to cheat?? ('95 and '99 - narrowly missed DP -infraction committee said they spared Bama because, unlike SMU, the WHOLE SCHOOL wasn't involved. Right - how convenient.)
source: NCAA.org

Kansas cited for "lack of institutional control"

Kansas cited for "lack of institutional control"

Who is online