PonyFans.com

Dooby wrote:I love it when people say there should have been or would be a lawsuit by alumni against the NCAA if the death penalty happened today.

THERE WAS ONE. IT WAS DISMISSED.

Details please (or is it on Rivals? ). Who, what school, why dismissed etc.

GO PONIES!!!

There was a case by an SMU alum, a booster and cheerleader (maybe a bandmember, too). It was shortly after the death penalty. It was filed against the NCAA in the US District Court. It was dismissed for lack of standing.

McCormack v. National Collegiate Athletic Asso., 845 F.2d 1338 (5th Cir. 1988).

Neither McCormack nor any of the cheerleaders satisfies these requirements. The cheerleaders assert only the loss of the opportunity to lead cheers, which clearly does not qualify as an injury to business or property. The only injuries McCormack alleges are the devaluation of his degree, the loss of the opportunity to see football games, and the damage to his contact and association with current and prospective student athletes derived from his membership in the Mustang Club, "an athletic fund-raising organization." Of these three, only the first is even arguably an injury to business or property. Although the Supreme Court has emphasized that "property" in this context "has a naturally broad and inclusive meaning," we cannot conclude that the devaluation of McCormack's degree is an injury for which the antitrust laws were designed to afford a remedy. The alleged connection, moreover, between the NCAA's actions and the devaluation of his degree presents the sort of "speculative" and "abstract" causal chain that the Supreme Court has held insufficient to support antitrust standing.

(footnotes deleted)

Dooby- thanks for the info. Very interesting. However, I believe the university would have had a right to sue and perhaps get a hearing rather than an action by some alums.

GO PONIES!!!

Insane_Pony_Posse wrote:

Stallion wrote:
However, SMU decision not to pursue litigation was correct. The cheating at other schools is irrelevant, immaterial and wouldn't have been admitted as evidence in any defense of SMU's action before the NCAA or any lawsuit against the NCAA. Its like defending a murder of Victim A by claiming that you didn't shoot Victim B. There is no defense to the lack of institutional control in SMU's case. The evidence was overwhelming. It was a SLAM DUNK case against SMU due to the bumbling fools that ran the university PRIOR to Ken Pye.

It may have been a "Slam Dunk" case, but Stallion in hind-site would a defendent not have an argument upon appeal that no other defendent in history had ever received such harsh punishment and probably never will again thus opening the possibility that the "Death Penalty" was cruel and unusual punishment? Yeah maybe no other guilty as hell defendent had been caught so red-handed, but the punishment still seems "cruel and unusual". However I guess we can agree that Pye actually did as much or more damage to SMU football than the NCAA did. Pye should get as much blame as the NCAA. Pye also cost us Larry Johnson did he not?

It would not have been a slam dunk case. This would not have been a criminal case, it would have been a civil case tried in a Dallas court and there would have been multiple theories, including breach of contract because the NCAA was not enforcing the rules equally among schools. I have no doubt that we could have found a friendly forum that would have at least temporarily enjoined the NCAA from enforcing its penalty against us, and then I would have fought like hell to bring every school within 500 miles of here into the discovery net. By the way, the case that was filed was correctly decided. The alum had no standing.

If you take the Top 10 teams over the past 25 years in both BB and FB you would have 500 teams in total.

To JT, Stallion, or anyone else for that matter....how many of these top 500 teams do you believe 'cheated' i.e. paid some of their players?

I would put that number at somewhere between 450 to 500.

If that is indeed the case, the argument about 'how' the cheating was implemented becomes immaterial IMO, the bigger issue here is that everyone is breaking the rules yet only 1 is being punished.

I find it ironic that our attorney friends feel there is no recourse through the judicial system for an obvious miscarriage of justice. While that might be true, there is also the court of public opinion. We should not have rolled over as easily as we did.

So you want a Tier 2 National University to stand up and say that we admit we cheated, admit we were guilty 5 times in a little over 10 years but we think we have a right to continue cheating because we think everybody else is doing it. This is what I'm talking about-too many SMU fans too close to the situation regurgitating this crap to each other over and over again until they've actually believe this is logical. Lack of Leadership at all levels of the university that allowed this perverted thought pattern to fester. The defenition of lack of institutional control. SMU joined the NCAA and agreed to abide by their rules. SMU cheated its [deleted] off and broke NCAA rules even after Death Penalty sanctions created- SMU admits ALL FACTS necessary to establish lack of institutional control-otherwise known as "telling the truth for once". Either abide by NCAA rules you agree to follow or leave the NCAA and start your own University Professional Football League and play by your own rules. Case Dismissed. Attorney's fees awarded to the NCAA for SMU filing of a frivolous lawsuit. Next case.

Stallion wrote:So you want a Tier 2 National University to stand up and say that we admit we cheated, admit we were guilty 5 times in a little over 10 years but we think we have a right to continue cheating because we think everybody else is doing it. This is what I'm talking about-too many SMU fans too close to the situation regurgitating this crap to each other over and over again until they've actually believe this is logical. Lack of Leadership at all levels of the university that allowed this perverted thought pattern to fester. The defenition of lack of institutional control. SMU joined the NCAA and agreed to abide by their rules. SMU cheated its [deleted] off and broke NCAA rules even after Death Penalty sanctions created- SMU admits ALL FACTS necessary to establish lack of institutional control-otherwise known as "telling the truth for once". Either abide by NCAA rules you agree to follow or leave the NCAA and start your own University Professional Football League and play by your own rules. Case Dismissed. Attorney's fees awarded to the NCAA for SMU filing of a frivolous lawsuit. Next case.

So you think the "death penalty" was fair? Do you remember that some of the infractions we were placed on probation leading up to this debacle included an assistant coach playing handball with a recruit (illegal tryout) and giving a recruit a polaroid photo of himself from a party (illegal gift). If you think we were treated equally to UT, then I agree with you. I live in Austin. It is a fools paradise down here and the athletes have the run of the town. The point is that the NCAA looks the other way when the teams that attract big money are involved, i.e. Alabama.

Yes we certainly deserved the death penalty under the terms of the NCAA rules and regulations which we voluntarily agreed to follow. Quit minimizing by pointing out trivial, minor points. It was the most outrageous violation of both the spirit and specific rules and regulations by an NCAA Institution by the controling University officials ever clearly proven. No case comes anywhere close to this monumental screw-up by the each and every one of the AD, Head Coach, Coaching Staff, President, Board of Govenors, ad hoc committee of the Board Chairman and the great magical wizard Govenor Elect William "the Clown" Clements.

Stallion wrote:Yes we certainly deserved the death penalty under the terms of the NCAA rules and regulations which we voluntarily agreed to follow. Quit minimizing by pointing out trivial, minor points. It was the most outrageous violation of both the spirit and specific rules and regulations by an NCAA Institution by the controling University officials ever clearly proven. No case comes anywhere close to this monumental screw-up by the each and every one of the AD, Head Coach, Coaching Staff, President, Board of Govenors, ad hoc committee of the Board Chairman and the great magical wizard Govenor Elect William "the Clown" Clements.

So where is the line drawn that seperates the "NCAA ignors the cheating because only ______ is involved" to " it's a Major infraction worthy of severe punishment because _______and _______and _______were involved?" Let's face it, we weren't given the DP because we were paying players just like everyone else was...we were given the DP because we flipped the NCAA a big stinking bird and told them to go F themselves (for all practical purposes). Right?

I can't believe people even argue this. SMU, the last time it was put on probation, explicitly stated that Sherwood Blount was no longer associated with the university and had nothing to do with the program and that the paying of players had stopped. Then, SMU is caught again, and low and behold, not only is SMU still paying players, but Sherwood Blount is knee-deep in it. If you are the NCAA, what the hell are you supposed to do to SMU? The NCAA clearly could not trust a word SMU said.

Stallion wrote:Either abide by NCAA rules you agree to follow or leave the NCAA and start your own University Professional Football League and play by your own rules. Case Dismissed. Attorney's fees awarded to the NCAA for SMU filing of a frivolous lawsuit. Next case.

Stallion, if you care to respond, you can have the last word as I have truly kicked a dead horse and this will be my last post on this thread.

I happen to think over 900 of the top 1,000 teams from the past 25 years have cheated. You encapsulated my whole complaint.....NOBODY is abiding by the rules.

I do agree with you that if any school deserved it, it was us. I just believe nobody deserved it.

SoCal_Pony wrote:I happen to think ...

And there is the answer to you question as to why this "obvious miscarriage of justice" cannot be redressed through the courts. You have no competent evidence. But don't feel bad, nobody does.