USC vs. SMU

[that's great raplh]

i'd like to have some of USC's problems

[expony18]

i'd like to have some of USC's problems

[PonyTime]

I absolutely agree . . . someone please explain to me how USC of the last 10 years is all that different than SMU of the early 80s . . .

Both small private schools in large metro areas competing in a Conference full of publics.

Both competing for NCs each year.

Both with long and storied traditions.

The only reason that USC would get a free pass is because the NCAA won't give out the DP again because of what it did to SMU. Otherwise - they ARE SMU of the early 80s - except they pay their players and players families 20x what SMU did (and are much smarter about it).

USC can do whatever they want and get away with it - just like OJ (and I don't mean Mayo) . . .

[redpony]

The NCAA won't touch USC because it is a high profile school with a lot of clout. The NCAA is afraid of big schools and can only find the 'balls' to punish those schools that can (or won;'t) fight back.

GO PONIES!!!

[orguy]

EastStang:

What SMU president are you referring to?

Don Shields was president of Cal State Fullerton before coming to SMU. He held a PHD in Chemistry from UCLA. No USC ties.

[Stallion]

yeah actually President Zumberge was President at SMU when the cheating network was set up under Ron Meyer and then bailed during the glory days of the early 80's for USC-not the other way around.

[FWMustangGirl]

Of course, USC's PROVEN CHEATING under NCAA rules is essentially ZERO because there has been no proof that the money was funded by a authorized representative of the university while in SMU's case the decision made by the Chairman and members of the Board of Govenors leaves no doubt. Hate to actually throw cold water on such a layman's theory but actually a university is entitled to some due process even under NCAA rules. No university should be held responsible for a rouge agent with no connection to the school. Your burden is to prove he was an authorized representative of the USC-very well might be-just as Sherwood Blout was a rouge agent AND representative of SMU at the same time-but most on here are simply assuming the essential link in the case with no real demonstrated proof.

Not disagreeing at all, but I'm wondering what makeup (rouge) has to do with any of this.

[D1Football]

This thread cracks me up. Full of incorrect information, assumptions and USC haters.

[SMUer]

Of course, USC's PROVEN CHEATING under NCAA rules is essentially ZERO because there has been no proof that the money was funded by a authorized representative of the university while in SMU's case the decision made by the Chairman and members of the Board of Govenors leaves no doubt. Hate to actually throw cold water on such a layman's theory but actually a university is entitled to some due process even under NCAA rules. No university should be held responsible for a rouge agent with no connection to the school. Your burden is to prove he was an authorized representative of the USC-very well might be-just as Sherwood Blout was a rouge agent AND representative of SMU at the same time-but most on here are simply assuming the essential link in the case with no real demonstrated proof.

USC knew who Guillory was and who he represented...This is the same guy who had gotten them into trouble with the NCAA just eight years earlier by giving gifts to Trepagnier.

Based on the amount of contact their athletes seem to be having with agents, USC's athlete-agent oversight seems to be limited to prayers of "please God, don't let ___ agree in writing or verbally to be represented by ___ before he/she ends their eligibility" before bed each night . Whether or not there were gifts, whether USC knew about them, ignored them or took kickbacks themselves remains to be seen, and if substantiated, aggressive sanctioning should follow. However, the fact that USC is allowing agents who have got them into trouble before intimate and often contact with their athletes seems like departmental negligence to me. Fool USC once, shame on the agent; Fool USC twice, blame should go on USC because they don't seem to mind being fooled very much. Other facts aside, if witnesses are available saying Guillory was in the USC back offices and with Mayo for an inordinate amount of time, the NCAA should hit USC with a lack of institutional control label for failing to create an atmosphere of rule compliance. It isn't reasonable for USC to believe that (or foster situations so that) its athletes are having dealings with known sports agents and yet they are somehow maintaining an environment that is compliant and in the spirit of NCAA rules.

[SMUtrojanFAN]

except they pay their players and players families 20x what SMU did (and are much smarter about it). [u]

Yeah, they're called stipends. SMU players get them too.

[peruna81]

guys ( and gals ), nothing will happen to USC, save the proverbial slap on the wrist...it is still a matter of revenue generating institutions like USC that keep the NCAA in the green. SMU in the 80's was not that type of player. The old adage of 'follow the money' plays here. The NCAA will not gouge the goose laying the golden egg.

SMU had institutional issues that involved cheating on a massive scale, from the sitting govenor of the state to rogue ( or rouge if you like ) boosters. It would be difficult to say/prove that the situations involving cheating and major universities were all that similar since. Large amounts of cash funneled to select athletes, yes...lax school compliance, no doubt...but SMU got what we deserved with the rules written as they were in the early-mid eighties. The argument that others should get the same treatment for their violations is not our call, and seems irrrelevent and a moot point to most college football fans today.

Fair? No....but it is the way it is.

[Stallion]

USC has an obligation as part of its institutional control function to supervise violations by its own players-but players have the right to seek legal and or other professional help such as agents as long as they don't sign with the agent. USC is not responsible for the unknown acts of agents who are not representatives of USC. So the NCAA would have to prove that USC was deficient in detecting the cheating based upon standards of supervision of institutional control which is far more difficult task that merely establishing that USC is responsible for the agent's actions.

[Chuck Norris]

i'd like to have some of USC's problems

How to get cut from a cheerleading squad?

[EastStang]

Lack of institutional control. I didn't see that high def flat screen television in his dorm room. Must have beamed in from outer space or his mom gave it to him. Come on. The grown-ups should have been all over this one. They played a kid in many games who was being paid by an agent. There is pretty good evidence that they knew or should have known something was going on. All they needed to do was ask where the creature comforts came from. If he lied and said his mom won the lottery, and then the Coach could have called his Mom and said, I heard you won the lottery. If mom confirms that, great, if she denies it, then he knows he has an ineligible player. But the coach doesn't want an ineligible player, he wants Mayo out there winning games for him. So, he does an imitation of Sgt. Schultz. USC should be slapped hard, but the NCAA will instead go after Appalachian State and pat itself on the back for cracking down on such a renegade program.

[orguy]

William P Clemments? or is it Clemmons?

Guy did not even graduate from SMU. Just attended for awhile and then dropped out. What a clown. With guys like this on the board, it was inevitable that the payments continued. This of course ended up bringing SMU the death penalty and led to PIG PYE as president. Both Athletics and Academics tanked under his reign. The dark years post death penalty... Thank god for Turner.