ADVERTISEMENT

usc sanctions....?

wazzubruce

Hall Of Fame
Gold Member
Aug 30, 2004
3,723
248
63
I'm curious. We all know what happened at sc and the Reggie Bush cheating scandal...... but I want to know what others think should happen to North Carolina for their huge academic cheating scandal that was University sanctioned. Does UNC deserve a bigger penalty then sc got?

I think NC should get hammered for Univesity sanctioned cheating.... that is the definition of the dreaded loss of institutional control label. Hammer away on n'caroline NCAA !!
 
I'm curious. We all know what happened at sc and the Reggie Bush cheating scandal...... but I want to know what others think should happen to North Carolina for their huge academic cheating scandal that was University sanctioned. Does UNC deserve a bigger penalty then sc got?

I think NC should get hammered for Univesity sanctioned cheating.... that is the definition of the dreaded loss of institutional control label. Hammer away on n'caroline NCAA !!
Not even close. UNC should get something this side of the death penalty. USC's charges were mostly trumped up by members of the NCAA committee who had a vendetta against them. The emails show that.
 
I bet that the NCAA will be so angry at NC that they will place Slippery Rock College on a death penalty status Thanks Tark The Shark.
 
I'm curious. We all know what happened at sc and the Reggie Bush cheating scandal...... but I want to know what others think should happen to North Carolina for their huge academic cheating scandal that was University sanctioned. Does UNC deserve a bigger penalty then sc got?

I think NC should get hammered for Univesity sanctioned cheating.... that is the definition of the dreaded loss of institutional control label. Hammer away on n'caroline NCAA !!
NC should get hammered about as hard as it gets - I mean like the sanctions that were originally levied against Penn State for the Sandusky issue. The big issue in my mind is that in fact, UNC did not have a "loss of institutional control"...the institution was under control and was knowingly/intentionally breaking the rules across multiple sports for a decade.

I know the NCAA doesn't want to swing the death penalty hammer, and I know what it did to SMU, but this is the kind of offense that deserves it. The entire athletic department and university administration should get hit with a show-cause order.
 
I'm curious. We all know what happened at sc and the Reggie Bush cheating scandal...... but I want to know what others think should happen to North Carolina for their huge academic cheating scandal that was University sanctioned. Does UNC deserve a bigger penalty then sc got?

I think NC should get hammered for Univesity sanctioned cheating.... that is the definition of the dreaded loss of institutional control label. Hammer away on n'caroline NCAA !!

No scholarships offered for 5 years. No home games, must play all games away for 5 years. No official visits to be paid for by the university for 5 years. No coaches on the road recruiting for 5 years. All television and bowl revenue is forfeited for 5 years. Only full academic admits for 5 years.

After 5 years there is an additional 5 year probation. Any offense results in resetting the initial penalties at year 1, for 5 years. Essentially start all over.

UNC should be forced by the NCAA to go from an academic cheating scandal to the epitome of true student athlete athletics. Make them a D3 school playing BCS sports.

Take their revenue, take their scholarships, make them be the higher education athletic department they have said they are.
 
Yeah the problem with NCAA sanctions is the lack of consistency in governing them. I don't really have a problem with what they did to SC, but there needs to be consistency and it needs to deter the cheating. Schools seem to come out ahead when they cheat and get punished, vs not cheating at all. That needs to change...drop the hammer on NC and I'm in favor of harsh punishments for even minor recruiting violations, etc. these schools and their staffs know the rules and are making decisions based on risk/reward.
 
Yeah the problem with NCAA sanctions is the lack of consistency in governing them. I don't really have a problem with what they did to SC, but there needs to be consistency and it needs to deter the cheating. Schools seem to come out ahead when they cheat and get punished, vs not cheating at all. That needs to change...drop the hammer on NC and I'm in favor of harsh punishments for even minor recruiting violations, etc. these schools and their staffs know the rules and are making decisions based on risk/reward.
You should have a problem with what they did to SC or any school if they treated them like the NCAA infractions committee treated USC.

You would hope that any school would be treated fairly and impartial. USC was not. When a judge comes out and writes about the NCAA regarding the investigation, "tend to show ill will or hatred" and "Malicious" you know that USC got a raw deal.
 
Yeah the problem with NCAA sanctions is the lack of consistency in governing them. I don't really have a problem with what they did to SC, but there needs to be consistency and it needs to deter the cheating. Schools seem to come out ahead when they cheat and get punished, vs not cheating at all. That needs to change...drop the hammer on NC and I'm in favor of harsh punishments for even minor recruiting violations, etc. these schools and their staffs know the rules and are making decisions based on risk/reward.

Like 1990 said, you should have a problem with what they did to SC. The whole issue has been exposed, have you not read ANY of the emails that have been revealed by the courts? You need to. They reveal a significant & personal bias against McNair, in effect using him to create the personal face of SC "cheating" that they just KNEW had to be there. These emails are now a matter of public record, and they represent only the tip of the iceberg, being only those the ncaa threw at the courts to mollify them....I would guess more are coming, and those will be worse.

Every fair-minded person should have a problem with what happened to SC....because it revealed an ncaa that was not nearly as objective and fair-minded as they are supposed to be....in essence, they had lost "institutional control" of their own organization.....
 
Thanks Glory Hole for telling me what I should think..for a minute there I actually thought I was entitled to my own opinion...silly me!

Not that I care if you read my post or not or what your opinion is, but my main point was that I'm in favor of harsh sanctions to deter the behavior...so that the risk outweighs the reward. Do I think the NCAA is a crock of $h**...yes. And there was some issues in the WAY in which they handled USC. I think the end result was absolutely justified though...they cheated- they had a player (probably players) receiving additional benefits and in my opinion they should have been hammered. But it doesn't really matter as they have no consistency in the way they handle these issues and self-serving bias usually gets in the way of logic for this organization.


Like 1990 said, you should have a problem with what they did to SC. The whole issue has been exposed, have you not read ANY of the emails that have been revealed by the courts? You need to. They reveal a significant & personal bias against McNair, in effect using him to create the personal face of SC "cheating" that they just KNEW had to be there. These emails are now a matter of public record, and they represent only the tip of the iceberg, being only those the ncaa threw at the courts to mollify them....I would guess more are coming, and those will be worse.

Every fair-minded person should have a problem with what happened to SC....because it revealed an ncaa that was not nearly as objective and fair-minded as they are supposed to be....in essence, they had lost "institutional control" of their own organization.....
 
A little OT, but watching the documentary "Happy Valley" this morning- disgusting that the sanctions they received would be reduced under any circumstances, but especially the way the school and community responded.
 
Thanks Glory Hole for telling me what I should think..for a minute there I actually thought I was entitled to my own opinion...silly me!

Not that I care if you read my post or not or what your opinion is, but my main point was that I'm in favor of harsh sanctions to deter the behavior...so that the risk outweighs the reward. Do I think the NCAA is a crock of $h**...yes. And there was some issues in the WAY in which they handled USC. I think the end result was absolutely justified though...they cheated- they had a player (probably players) receiving additional benefits and in my opinion they should have been hammered. But it doesn't really matter as they have no consistency in the way they handle these issues and self-serving bias usually gets in the way of logic for this organization.
I am a Cougar fan, not a Trojan fan. But, I will stick up for anyone that I consider being wronged. This is the problem that I have with your statement. One, you say "They" cheated. Who is they? USC? Reggie Bush took money and gifts. The NCAA investigated USC for around three years. Contrast that with the weeks long investigation they did with Auburn, Ohio State, etc. If there was more fire (players), the NCAA would have found it during that long of an investigation. Reggie Bush cheated. If Coach Todd McNair wins his lawsuit against the NCAA (and so far, he is kicking the NCAA's butt), then it will prove that the only guilty party was the wannabe agent and Bush.

Ryan Leaf admitted he took money during the Rosebowl season. Does that mean that WSU cheated and the entire program should been nailed as hard as USC was? Or does that mean that Ryan Leaf was rogue?
 
Thanks Glory Hole for telling me what I should think..for a minute there I actually thought I was entitled to my own opinion...silly me!

Not that I care if you read my post or not or what your opinion is, but my main point was that I'm in favor of harsh sanctions to deter the behavior...so that the risk outweighs the reward. Do I think the NCAA is a crock of $h**...yes. And there was some issues in the WAY in which they handled USC. I think the end result was absolutely justified though...they cheated- they had a player (probably players) receiving additional benefits and in my opinion they should have been hammered. But it doesn't really matter as they have no consistency in the way they handle these issues and self-serving bias usually gets in the way of logic for this organization.

Opinions should be better thought out than yours. So sure you have the "right" to be stupid, but why not be informed? My guess is that you have read NONE of the emails or the record, so you are totally ignorant on the subject (not much of a surprise, actually). Your childish attempt at the "end justifies the means" argument has justified a ton of evil in history, and the dictators that use it always depend on the ignoratiti such as yourself to go along. If "harsh sanctions deters the behavior" then--as CS Lewis pointed out over fifty years ago--it really doesn't matter if you got the right person or not....as long as the punishment deters. Good work. I love your snide little hushed tones "probably players" as if someone like you who disdains reading or curiosity knows....right. So sure, you have the "right" to be stupid and ignorant and uninformed....and, as our country continues its descent your numbers grow daily.....So enjoy your right.
 
I am a Cougar fan, not a Trojan fan. But, I will stick up for anyone that I consider being wronged. This is the problem that I have with your statement. One, you say "They" cheated. Who is they? USC? Reggie Bush took money and gifts. The NCAA investigated USC for around three years. Contrast that with the weeks long investigation they did with Auburn, Ohio State, etc. If there was more fire (players), the NCAA would have found it during that long of an investigation. Reggie Bush cheated. If Coach Todd McNair wins his lawsuit against the NCAA (and so far, he is kicking the NCAA's butt), then it will prove that the only guilty party was the wannabe agent and Bush.

Ryan Leaf admitted he took money during the Rosebowl season. Does that mean that WSU cheated and the entire program should been nailed as hard as USC was? Or does that mean that Ryan Leaf was rogue?


Ouch.....
 
Haha. Touché Glory Hole. Must have been a fun Sunday for you working that up to make you feel smart. Hope it worked for you. Id get my dictionary out to try and decipher what you said and think of an even more brilliant comeback, but I'm too busy enjoying the fruits of my stupidity with a cold one in hand. You are truly a clown.

Opinions should be better thought out than yours. So sure you have the "right" to be stupid, but why not be informed? My guess is that you have read NONE of the emails or the record, so you are totally ignorant on the subject (not much of a surprise, actually). Your childish attempt at the "end justifies the means" argument has justified a ton of evil in history, and the dictators that use it always depend on the ignoratiti such as yourself to go along. If "harsh sanctions deters the behavior" then--as CS Lewis pointed out over fifty years ago--it really doesn't matter if you got the right person or not....as long as the punishment deters. Good work. I love your snide little hushed tones "probably players" as if someone like you who disdains reading or curiosity knows....right. So sure, you have the "right" to be stupid and ignorant and uninformed....and, as our country continues its descent your numbers grow daily.....So enjoy your right.
 
Haha. Touché Glory Hole. Must have been a fun Sunday for you working that up to make you feel smart. Hope it worked for you. Id get my dictionary out to try and decipher what you said and think of an even more brilliant comeback, but I'm too busy enjoying the fruits of my stupidity with a cold one in hand. You are truly a clown.

Yeah, I already placed you as white trash, so no surprise there. My bet is that the last time you looked in ANY dictionary, some biddy was wiping your nose in class, drying your tears and telling you not to worry...."your sexual identity will sort itself out....."
 
Wow you nailed it again Glory Hole impressive! Because everyone who enjoys a cold one on a 70 degree weekend is white trash...brilliant! as for your sexual identity comment, maybe you ought to pick up a newspaper...its 2015 and people don't seem to have the issues with that which existed 30 years ago...the age you are still living in. Perhaps you should wander over to the Husky board where unfounded arrogance and wine tasting are more widely accepted??
 
Since you guys insist on continuing this thread, I will note (for probably the third time over the last many years...I've lost count) why I have limited sympathy for USC in the Reggie Bush matter. Not zero sympathy, but it is limited. As SC is always quick to point out, the NCAA had an axe to grind. But USC's pinhead AD did everything he could to sharpen that axe, so in my mind it was mutual, or at the least self induced. And there were charges for which any credible court would probably have held that the evidence was circumstantial, and no conviction would have been forthcoming. Hard to argue that, especially the Bush's house and how it was paid for. But Pete Carroll was HC, and was therefore nominally in charge of football. Reggie parked his luxury vehicle adjacent to the practice field. Pete knew it was there, knew that neither Reggie nor his family could have bought it, and must personally have approved its parking place, or every player on the team would have been parking there. I saw it, and I was just a visitor, so you know that half of the campus knew about it. So there was cheating and "incentives" happening. The only disagreement of which I'm aware is over the level of proof for some of the allegations and whether, in light of the lack of hard proof (particularly regarding the Bush's house), the penalty was appropriate. I'll agree with SC that if you believe in innocence unless proven guilty, the penalty was too severe. Because there was no hard proof for some of the allegations. The circumstantial evidence was pretty damning, but by definition, circumstantial is not hard proof. As others have noted, my biggest problem with the NCAA is its lack of consistency, which I personally view as being due to both incompetence and bias. And the possibility of mercy for Penn State, when the magnitude of the wrong doing and responsibility is so clearly light years beyond USC is just the latest poster child for how the NCAA's crock of justice operates.

The USC penalty was too severe. But it didn't happen in a vacuum, and USC was cheating. With a less arrogant AD, they might even have gotten away with it.
 
Reggie parked his luxury vehicle adjacent to the practice field. .

This has been told several times that it was a luxury car. The committee started this lie. In the deposition, Pete Carroll asked if they had even seen the car. They hadn't. The car was an old $1500 Impala.
 
This has been told several times that it was a luxury car. The committee started this lie. In the deposition, Pete Carroll asked if they had even seen the car. They hadn't. The car was an old $1500 Impala.
I'm afraid I can't throw stones at any program, particularly regarding a running back with a luxury car. Derek Sparks lived near me for part of my time in Pullman. Drove a really nice car with personalized plates that said "FIVE"...pretty sure it was a BMW (not a 1979 one either). That always seemed odd to me, and then when his book came out and described his high school career...well, the math didn't seem all that tough.
 
1990, I guess luxury is in the eye of the beholder. I bought my Impala new in 2001 with every factory accessory. The car I saw was a heck of a lot nicer than mine. Used? Very possibly. There were 5 years or so of Impalas during that time frame that all looked pretty much alike. But if somebody paid $1,500 for the car, they buried $15-20K somewhere. The idea that that car was a $1,500 junker (and even then that was all you could get for $1,500) is so absurd, the words should not be able to leave your keyboard.


Edit: Maybe Reggie actually paid $1,500 for a $15,000 car. That actually makes sense under the circumstances.
 
1990, I guess luxury is in the eye of the beholder. I bought my Impala new in 2001 with every factory accessory. The car I saw was a heck of a lot nicer than mine. Used? Very possibly. There were 5 years or so of Impalas during that time frame that all looked pretty much alike. But if somebody paid $1,500 for the car, they buried $15-20K somewhere. The idea that that car was a $1,500 junker (and even then that was all you could get for $1,500) is so absurd, the words should not be able to leave your keyboard.


Edit: Maybe Reggie actually paid $1,500 for a $15,000 car. That actually makes sense under the circumstances.
I saw a picture of the car on either ESPN or Deadspin. It was an average car that was in good condition. It was already a ten year car (1995 Impala) when Bush received the car. The commission acted like it was a Mercedes or BMW. It wasn't.

Now, it is possible the car may have been worth more than the $1500 than the wannabe agent paid for it, as he may have had connections. But, the car was a car, not an expensive luxury car and again, the car was 10 years old when Bush took possession.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT