How long until Auburn is forced to vacate title?

[ponyte]

It is no surprise that the two programs hit the hardest by the NCAA, SMU and USC, are in major cities.

Notice that both of the above are small PRIVATE Universities with Methodist ties and influential alumni!

Makes you ponder the NCAA's agenda.

And the harshest penalty ever handed out by the NCAA during the early 70s (and until SMU's DP) was to Centenary College over the recruiting of Robert Parrish.

Note, Centenary is the oldest charter liberal arts college west of the Missisppi and also

affiliated with the United Methodist Church.

Oh, and one other common facter, I have a degree from 2 of the 3 mentioned.

[RGV Pony]

good thing Auburn broke its Methodist ties long ago..or will that be good enough?

[soccermom]

No way anything is going to happen to Auburn. They will retain the title and he will keep his trophy.

[CalallenStang]

good thing Auburn broke its Methodist ties long ago..or will that be good enough?

Didn't work for USC (they broke away from the church in 1952, though, so Auburn has almost 100 more years of a lack of Methodist affiliation)

[HB Pony Dad]

good thing Auburn broke its Methodist ties long ago..or will that be good enough?

Didn't work for USC (they broke away from the church in 1952, though, so Auburn has almost 100 more years of a lack of Methodist affiliation)

The results of the NCAA actions with respect to USC's appeal on the sanctions will tell us more.

Small Privates are at a disadvantage compared to the large Public U's (Alabama, Michigan, Tennessee, et. al) so Auburn may not feel the full wrath after all.

[stc9]

Thanks, Stallion. I had never seen that. But again, if this was already out there and the NCAA has completed their investigation, I see it going nowhere. If it has come up after the fact then yes it should be followed up. I just have zero faith in the NCAA wanting to go any farther with this.

The eligibilty committee and the infractions/investigatory committee are two different things. The NCAA could still be investigating this (not likely) and the eligibilty committee would not know anything about what they have uncovered unless the case was brought to them by the investigating/infractions arm. Cam Newton was declared ineligible by either Auburn or the SEC, not the NCAA. Auburn or the SEC presented their initial evidence as to why they declared him ineligible and then defended the Newton. Nobody, but Auburn, the SEC and the eligibility committee know the quality of the evidence (it could have been as simple as press clippings about the scandal). The eligibility committee ruled on the "evidence" presented by the party that declared him ineligible. The eligibilty committee generally sides with the student athlete (at AQ Schools). They reinstated Newton after 24 hours. In theory the infractions committee is still investigating this.

[Stallion]

I think people that claim that USC's probation is the 2nd harshest NCAA has handed out have short memories. TCU, Oklahoma St and OU were hit with harder probations which included no TV, bowls and deep scholarship cuts. I bet there are more-can't remember the sanctions for Clemson, Florida and Auburn from the 1980s but I bet they were comparable. NCAA in the 1990s generally lowered the sanctions levels in the 1990s-do they even impose TV sanctions any more?

[HB Pony Dad]

I think people that claim that USC's probation is the 2nd harshest NCAA has handed out have short memories. TCU, Oklahoma St and OU were hit with harder probations which included no TV, bowls and deep scholarship cuts. I bet there are more-can't remember the sanctions for Clemson, Florida and Auburn from the 1980s but I bet they were comparable. NCAA in the 1990s generally lowered the sanctions levels in the 1990s

USC's are probably the harshest for a dominant team since SMU's.

The NCAA tries to mitigate the penalties for the TV revenue generating schools so as not to kill the goose...

do they even impose TV sanctions any more?

No TV penalties are too destructive for the real power behind the NCAA!

[1983 Cotton Bowl]

Here's a question about sanctions:

Obviously, the DP case in 1987 against SMU was the ultimate NCAA punishment. However, the 1985 SMU case was really, really harsh as well. Even without the DP, it would have taken years for SMU to recover from the 1985 sanctions. Particularly so if, as was apparently happening, the team payroll was being phased out. I believe the sanctions against SMU included ZERO football scholarships in 1986 and only 15 in 1987. Naturally, the 1987 reductions became a moot point. But has any other D-1A program in, say, the last 40 years had football scholarships reduced to zero as SMU did in 1986?

[Stallion]

No it was a tough probation that would have decimated the program further but we did sign something like 15 players in 1986. I think we could sign 15-20 in the next year too. But schools signed more players back then too as I remember. The 85 man limit was originally 105 and later reduced to 95 and then 85 although I can't remember the exact years. The program really was hit hard by previous scholarships and it really began to show by 1985 and probably would have suffered like OU when they were hit by similiar probations after Barry Switzer got OU on probation with severe schoolarship limitations.

[No Quarter]

1983 Cotton Bowl & Stallion,

I also remember a recruiting cycle before the end of Footballl I where SMU was prohibited from signing players. I think I had a copy of the publicity release from the AI office about the twelve (seems like the number) key walkons who had agreed to attend and who would lessen the impact. I suppose the piece was for Mustang Club members - which I was not - and the press but the AI office gave me a copy one time when I visited Dallas.

Be interesting to know if those "volunteers" ever played at SMU or anywhere. If 1983 and I are wrong about this same comment would apply to the fifteen Stallion says were signed. Did any of them ever play?

[SMU 86]

It will be interesting to see if the NCAA can trace any money that Auburn boosters may have given to the Newtons. That usually takes time.

[Stallion]

We had a recruiting class in 1986 and in all years prior to DP but it was limited to 15 or so. I could name some kids in the Class-so I know we had scholarship players. Tre Giller, Gerard Mark and I think John Stollenwerck etc. We did actively seek walkons to fill gaps. Mitch Glieber was one-Ben Hummel's brother was another. Wasn't Michael Bowen another

[RGV Pony]

Ill net Auburn covers its tracks better than that. It would take a deepthroat informant with carnal knowledge.

Yall have fun with that

[1983 Cotton Bowl]

It's amazing how badly the SMU program was reeling by around 1985. In Pony Excess, there is a scene where Dale Hansen states that it was a "sick atmosphere" surrounding SMU football during that timeframe. I'm not a big Dale Hansen fan, but I think that pretty much sums it up.