NCAA and SMU

by **ALEX LIFESON** » Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:19 am

Because of my Tech wife, I have to keep up with the Red Raiders a bit, here is an interesting thread on what they are saying about SMU and the NCAA.

http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?S=188#S=18 ... 0&T=714040

by **smu diamond m** » Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:54 pm

Who are these supposed lawyers attempting to go after the NCAA for anti-trust? Surely they read ponyfans...

by **westexSMU** » Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:01 pm

Very interesting to see how Tech fans view SMU being unfairly treated by the NCAA in the 80's, with the death penalty, compared to recent large state schools light punishments. They conclude that SMU should still sue the NCAA.

by **NavyCrimson** » Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:08 pm

I can definitely agree with that idea!!!

by **ALEX LIFESON** » Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:16 pm

More fun stuff.

http://cbs.sportsline.com/columns/story/10255471

by **NavyCrimson** » Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:34 pm

Interesting.

The big difference between the BCS-bs-NFL farm system training schools such as OU & other universities like SMU, etc. is that they were & are now never "targets" of the NCAA. What a hypocritical organization. The NCAA has to be dragged kicking & screaming into investigating them while we & the others always had targets on our backs. Remember the cartel we've been writing about for the last several years? Yeah - we ain't members boys & girls.

Just think if they were scrutinzed like the rest of us??? You can bet your sweet $%*&^ that we would have never made the current list of "... top rules-breaking college football programs of all time." :idea:

5. SMU. An old-school classic. Received the death penalty. Harkens back to a time when the NCAA had testicles and did not pucker up to the derriÃ¨res of fat-cat college presidents. Those were the days, when men were men and cheaters took great pride in their work. Cash payments distributed in a timely fashion, luxury cars handed out like heads of lettuce, players bought and paid for. Made you proud to be an American.

BS!!! That's because the NCAA never went after the cartel then & now. Hypocrisy!!!

by **jtstang** » Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:39 pm

I don't think I realized that Conference USA was an original BCS signatory.

http://www.bcsfootball.org/bcsfb/about

by **mr. pony** » Sat Jul 14, 2007 6:25 pm

Gee whiz.
I suggested this a while back and was roundly criticized as being an ignorant [deleted].

I'm certainly that, but, it appears, not for this suggestion.

There's no way the NCAA should get away with handing down a one-time neutron bomb penalty. They've had MANY CHANCES TO DO SO against some big schools and that ought to make them look pretty bad in court.

Bring out the big legal guns. It's way past time.

by **NavyCrimson** » Sat Jul 14, 2007 6:44 pm

I'm with ya - Mr. Pony :!:

by **jtstang** » Sat Jul 14, 2007 8:17 pm

That's not what makes you an ignorant [deleted].

Sorry, couldn't resist.

by **covok48** » Sat Jul 14, 2007 10:55 pm

"Because of the BCS arrangement, the bowl agreements are more open than they have ever been. Every Division I-A team is eligible to quality for the National Championship game or for one of the at-large berths-all within the framework of the bowl system that is an integral part of college football's grand tradition...."

Upon reading this I couldn't help but throw-up in my mouth.

by PK » Sun Jul 15, 2007 12:49 am

covok48 wrote:"Because of the BCS arrangement, the bowl agreements are more open than they have ever been. Every Division I-A team is eligible to quality for the National Championship game or for one of the at-large berths-all within the framework of the bowl system that is an integral part of college football's grand tradition...."

Upon reading this I couldn't help but throw-up in my mouth.

What did you expect?...it's on the BCS website...Duh!

by **Insane_Pony_Posse** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 10:58 am

"I know a group of SMU lawyers that are putting together an anti-trust suit against the NCAA as we speak. Of course they have been working on it in their "spare time" for more than 3 years now but who knows?"

Could this be done without President Turner's blessings?

by **Stallion** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 12:08 pm

No alumni do not have standing to sue in the name of a university based on precedent in a lawsuit brought by SMU's own alumni in the past

No there is zero possibility of a successful lawsuit against the NCAA because the statute of limitations has long since passed

No no evidence of cheating by other schools (the "everyone is doing it defense") would likely be admitted as a defense to the most brazen, stupid episode of cheating in NCAA history over a 10 year period. Apparently that is some kind of twisted application of constitutional law on strict scrutiny of discrimination against suspect classifications such as race, gender, creed, national origin, religion etc. SMU is not in a suspect classification so the NCAA would only need to show that's its due process was rationally related to a legitimate policy of the organization-a slam-dunk for the NCAA.

No no lawsuit is possible now because SMU did not exhaust its administrative remedies with the NCAA by appealing the decision within the NCAA due process framework. SMU in fact accepted the findings of the NCAA so the Ballgame is over.

Now you can continue with more nonsense.

by **mr. pony** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 12:22 pm

The NCAA's 20-year history of non-compliance with death penalty requirments since giving it to SMU is a powerful indictment.

(It's taken this long to be assured the NCAA never intended to use it again.)

Did anyone think in '87 it would never be used again?
Did the NCAA? If so, it should taken the rule off the books - and we could sued them at the time!

You may cross-examine, counselor.

NCAA and SMU

NCAA and SMU

Who is online