THE PAC 12 THREAD v.3

[Vitamike]

No doubt that was a very good Bruins team. I just think it's funny that your best example was a team that couldn't finish what they started. Never really understood what happened to that team. I thought they were the best team in the country, but if memory serves, there were some serious issues between the offense and defense that split the team. If that Miami game was played when it was supposed to be, I think you guys would have finished the season undefeated.

On the sanctions, sorry, but you're wrong. You can continue to think what you want, but the fact is, the basketball team was accused of a far worse (according to the NCAA) violation and barely received a slap on the wrist. If anything, based on the accusation, the basketball program should have gotten sanctions closer to what the football team got and the football teams punishment should have been closer to what the basketball team got. But that wasn't the NCAA's agenda. The only other violation that they found was a women's tennis player who was found to have improperly used a phone access card to call home. I'm sure you think that had a lot to do with it too. :rollseyes:

The fact is that the NCAA went in with a pre-determined outcome, investigators were overheard saying that they were going to hammer USC before they ever arrived on campus, and they were going to do what they had to in order to reach that outcome. That is why the sanctions were so harsh.

I knew about the Women's Tennis issues. Funny you brought it up, I didn't and never would have.

So you can say I'm wrong all you want but it was the USC Athletics Department that was punished.

Of course they punished the football team the most, that is where sanctions would have the most impact, besides there was a clear & major amateur status violation.

SC fan can scratch their heads, try to explain it away as an overzealous NCAA, complain about the punishments being too harsh (And there is some legitimacy to all that IMO) but the NCAA probe found a common bottom line....

A lack of institutional control as a whole.

To not put the Mayo factor in all this is like the ostrich burring his head in the sand.

Let me put it to you SC fans this way, if the Mayo incident had never happened, do you think the sanctions put on the football team would have been as severe?

I don't.

This to me, says a lot...

"The general campus environment surrounding the violations troubled the committee," the report said. The report also condemned the star treatment afforded to Bush and Mayo, saying USC's oversight of its top athletes ran contrary to the fundamental principles of amateur sports.

"Elite athletes in high profile sports with obvious great future earnings potential may see themselves as something apart from other student-athletes and the general student population," the NCAA report said. "Institutions need to assure that their treatment on campus does not feed into such a perception."
NCAA announces USC football, basketball, tennis sanctions - College Football News | FOX Sports on MSN

 

[BeaverShaver]

this is awesome

 

[Vitamike]

this is awesome

What is awesome is your avatar!

I didn't see that one coming Shaver but I'm loving it!

 

[963BUSC]

jim, do you watch much college football outside of USC?

That year UCLA had their 8th consecutive win vs USC :rollseyes: and their 20th win in a row at 10-0 going into the final game of the season when the wheels fell off in an upset loss to Miami by 4 points.

Did Lane ever get 20 wins in a row?

Toledo did!

Anyway, a season finale win @ ranked Miami (Damn those coast to coast games, I know you feel me) had them in the National Championship Game that year, they were 10-0 going into the game v the Canes, so yes it was a very good team.

Instead they faced a damn good Wisconsin team in the Rose Bowl, also at 10-1 and despite scoring 76 points in their final two games, they still lost them both.

None the less a very good team and 'at that level' by most peoples standards!

Now... :focus:

That was a great team. If I remember correctly the game vs Miami was postponed due to weather until December. Had the game been played at the start of the season ucla would have probably won. They had been playing much stronger at the start of the season.

Then for the excuse factor Wisconsin was totally pumped up to be playing in the Rose, while ucla was down about missing the Fiesta.

:focus:
Slanted and missing a lot of the facts, but I'll chalk it up to arguing extremism with Jim.

 

[Vitamike]

That was a great team. If I remember correctly the game vs Miami was postponed due to weather until December. Had the game been played at the start of the season ucla would have probably won. They had been playing much stronger at the start of the season.

Then for the excuse factor Wisconsin was totally pumped up to be playing in the Rose, while ucla was down about missing the Fiesta.

:focus:
Slanted and missing a lot of the facts, but I'll chalk it up to arguing extremism with Jim.

Fair enough except 'Back to Topic' for me is the one I jumped in on with you and Mamba after he pointed out SC's last NT was in 1978.

USC's last NT was 1978...

That is cool, but also 37 years ago.

I was 2. Didn't care then and still don't.

 

[trojanfan12]

I knew about the Women's Tennis issues. Funny you brought it up, I didn't and never would have.

So you can say I'm wrong all you want but it was the USC Athletics Department that was punished.

Of course they punished the football team the most, that is where sanctions would have the most impact, besides there was a clear & major amateur status violation.

SC fan can scratch their heads, try to explain it away as an overzealous NCAA, complain about the punishments being too harsh (And there is some legitimacy to all that IMO) but the NCAA probe found a common bottom line....

A lack of institutional control as a whole.

To not put the Mayo factor in all this is like the ostrich burring his head in the sand.

Let me put it to you SC fans this way, if the Mayo incident had never happened, do you think the sanctions put on the football team would have been as severe?

I don't.

This to me, says a lot...

The bolded shows why this is a pointless discussion with you. You don't punish according to which sport would create the most impact. You punish based on the violation.

What the NCAA accused the basketball program of, was by far, the worst of the accusations. It was a clear recruiting violation that involved payment to a player to attend USC and it involved a coach directly paying that player. This is clearly committing a violation in an attempt to gain a competitive advantage.

The football issue was about a player being paid to leave school early. Thus, no competitive advantage gained. The Bush family took stuff they weren't supposed to. That compromised Bush's eligibility and even though USC didn't and likely couldn't have known it about, some level of punishment was warranted. However, to say that the football program deserved to be more harshly punished simply because "it would have more impact" is utterly ridiculous.

By your logic, if the only violation that the NCAA found was the one with the basketball program, they should still punish the football program because that would create the most impact.

 

[BeaverShaver]

What is awesome is your avatar!

I didn't see that one coming Shaver but I'm loving it!

Oregon can claim four MNC's. I have officially awarded 2010 due to michael dyer's wrist touching the ground, and we can claim 2007 due to dixon's injury. 2001 is obvious. and I'm throwing in a fourth just for fun.

fight me on it

 

[BeaverShaver]

lol at schools with recruiting violations and scandals.......

 

[Vitamike]

The bolded shows why this is a pointless discussion with you. You don't punish according to which sport would create the most impact. You punish based on the violation.

What the NCAA accused the basketball program of, was by far, the worst of the accusations. It was a clear recruiting violation that involved payment to a player to attend USC and it involved a coach directly paying that player. This is clearly committing a violation in an attempt to gain a competitive advantage.

The football issue was about a player being paid to leave school early. Thus, no competitive advantage gained. The Bush family took stuff they weren't supposed to. That compromised Bush's eligibility and even though USC didn't and likely couldn't have known it about, some level of punishment was warranted. However, to say that the football program deserved to be more harshly punished simply because "it would have more impact" is utterly ridiculous.

By your logic, if the only violation that the NCAA found was the one with the basketball program, they should still punish the football program because that would create the most impact.

tf did you even read the 'quoted section' of my post you quoted?

It collaborates what I've been saying here. So it's not my logic at all. I am merely expressing the logic the NCAA provided which I know you disagree with so let's keep that in mind.

With that, punishments intent is to cause enough pain to create a deterrent to future infractions.

Besides, it doesn't agree with your contentions about the Mayo affair being far worse in context to the scandal as a whole.

To me, the point is obvious to what the NCAA had to say about lack of Institutional Control.

First, the Football Program, with Bush, was the cusp of the issue that lead to more brazen actions by the SC Athletics Dept that lead to OJ 1 year deal.

Second, the Football Program, with Bush, was more egregious, ongoing and lasted for a longer time and included Bush receiving numerous and lavish gifts from two individuals.

Last, USC had long been known for its lenient admission policy at football practices, which during Carroll's tenure were open to almost anybody from movie stars to regular fans.

If you can't see that, then how did the NCAA put it?

"The general campus environment surrounding the violations" were the issue, beginning with the Football program in 2004.
​

That part is important so I put it in bold and underlined it for you.

Then there is this...

"Elite athletes in high profile sports with obvious great future earnings potential may see themselves as something apart from other student-athletes and the general student population," the NCAA report said. "Institutions need to assure that their treatment on campus does not feed into such a perception."

The perception thing is a huge aspect to the overall picture, and SC fan wants to ignore it for some reason.

 

[963BUSC]

If you can't see that, then how did the NCAA put it?

Then there is this...

"Elite athletes in high profile sports with obvious great future earnings potential may see themselves as something apart from other student-athletes and the general student population," the NCAA report said. "Institutions need to assure that their treatment on campus does not feed into such a perception."

Using Paul Dee's Quote kind of ruins any argument you made.

 

[BeaverShaver]

too much research and quoting being done here. God I wish we could just have some football. this is what happens in the offseason.

 

[Vitamike]

Using Paul Dee's Quote kind of ruins any argument you made.

Yes because two wrongs always make a right.

He was right about the perception thing though, maybe he knew a thing or two about how those things work, don't you think.

 

[963BUSC]

too much research and quoting being done here. God I wish we could just have some football. this is what happens in the offseason.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dfAKv-JWeQ

Enjoy.

 

[Vitamike]

too much research and quoting being done here. God I wish we could just have some football. this is what happens in the offseason.

Good enough, I'm done!

 

[WhiteMamba]

Oregon can claim four MNC's. I have officially awarded 2010 due to michael dyer's wrist touching the ground, and we can claim 2007 due to dixon's injury. 2001 is obvious. and I'm throwing in a fourth just for fun.

fight me on it

don't forget about 1905 undefeated season That would be 5 sir

 

[WhiteMamba]

Man it sure is pleasant without any mutts stinking up the joint.

 

[WhiteMamba]

That is one thing we can all agree on.

 

[trojanfan12]

tf did you even read the 'quoted section' of my post you quoted?

It collaborates what I've been saying here. So it's not my logic at all. I am merely expressing the logic the NCAA provided which I know you disagree with so let's keep that in mind.

With that, punishments intent is to cause enough pain to create a deterrent to future infractions.

Besides, it doesn't agree with your contentions about the Mayo affair being far worse in context to the scandal as a whole.

To me, the point is obvious to what the NCAA had to say about lack of Institutional Control.

First, the Football Program, with Bush, was the cusp of the issue that lead to more brazen actions by the SC Athletics Dept that lead to OJ 1 year deal.

Second, the Football Program, with Bush, was more egregious, ongoing and lasted for a longer time and included Bush receiving numerous and lavish gifts from two individuals.

Last, USC had long been known for its lenient admission policy at football practices, which during Carroll's tenure were open to almost anybody from movie stars to regular fans.

If you can't see that, then how did the NCAA put it?

"The general campus environment surrounding the violations" were the issue, beginning with the Football program in 2004.
​

That part is important so I put it in bold and underlined it for you.

Then there is this...
The perception thing is a huge aspect to the overall picture, and SC fan wants to ignore it for some reason.

I understand that it's the NCAA's logic. That doesn't make it any less flawed nor the investigation any less corrupt. By the NCAA's logic, if any program at UCLA commits a violation, then the basketball team should get hammered, after all, that would have the biggest impact.

Also, while 2 wrongs may not make a right, the fact that Paul Dee issued that statement while the athletic department that he was in charge of had far more numerous and far worse violations going on, while he was leading the investigation in to USC and issuing that statement (later, he even went so far as to say that USC should use Miami as a model for their own compliance), would tend to call into question his integrity and the integrity of the investigation he led. Which has been the point all along.

That's why it's looking more and more like the NCAA is going to lose the lawsuit that McNair has against them. So please, feel free to continue to quote the NCAA as if it somehow backs up your point.

 

[Vitamike]

Man it sure is pleasant without any mutts stinking up the joint.

That is one thing we can all agree on.

 

[Vitamike]

I understand that it's the NCAA's logic. That doesn't make it any less flawed nor the investigation any less corrupt. By the NCAA's logic, if any program at UCLA commits a violation, then the basketball team should get hammered, after all, that would have the biggest impact.

Also, while 2 wrongs may not make a right, the fact that Paul Dee issued that statement while the athletic department that he was in charge of had far more numerous and far worse violations going on, while he was leading the investigation in to USC and issuing that statement (later, he even went so far as to say that USC should use Miami as a model for their own compliance), would tend to call into question his integrity and the integrity of the investigation he led. Which has been the point all along.

That's why it's looking more and more like the NCAA is going to lose the lawsuit that McNair has against them. So please, feel free to continue to quote the NCAA as if it somehow backs up your point.

You fail to see the whole picture here, I can't help you.

Like I said earlier, I'm done.