USC fans- what's your take on all this "scandal" mess

[Rolltide94]

I'm more 40-60 on Fisher and he is with St. Louis now

Pete Caroll was 4th choice when you guys hired him, so the right coach may not even be in the discussion at the moment.

 

[badinflu]

Pete Caroll was 4th choice when you guys hired him, so the right coach may not even be in the discussion at the moment.

The guy I'm high on (which means nothing) is James Franklin

 

[963BUSC]

maybe im just an asshole always pointing a finger. fair is fair...if I get popped for a drinking and driving...and some other guy I know damn well is drunk gets stopped a then I expect him to get the same punishment I got. maybe a bad comparison but that's how I see it.. yeah maybe cases aren't exactly the same. I think a large percentage of usc, penn st or whoever else feels they were wronged by ncaa will feel outraged if Alabama comes out of this without any substantial sanctions.

USC wasn't treated fairly and I wish bad things on Britton Banowsky, John S. Black, Melissa Conboy, Brian Halloran, Eleanor Myers, Josephine (Jo) R. Potuto, Richard H. Larson, and Dennis Thomas daily. These are the unfit judges that deserve to get smacked.

If they hit Alabama and other schools for something they really have no control over and gives your school no benefit it is bad for college football. Neither Alabama, Tennessee, nor MSU gained a benefit out of an agent paying players that were already there.

 

[963BUSC]

Second post where you've said the NCAA doesn't like success. Still pulling that out of your ass, or do you want to support your statement? What interest would the NCAA have in penalizing success?

How has the NCAA justified their punishment of USC vs UNC? UNC more players, direct coach involvement, academic fraud, longer period of time, less money = And received LT 1/2 the penalty. Penalizing success makes as much sense as anything. The NCAA certainly has been unable or at least unwilling to provide any justification or point to what precedence was set or followed.

 

[trojanfan12]

Second post where you've said the NCAA doesn't like success. Still pulling that out of your ass, or do you want to support your statement? What interest would the NCAA have in penalizing success?

How has the NCAA justified their punishment of USC vs UNC? UNC more players, direct coach involvement, academic fraud, longer period of time, less money = And received LT 1/2 the penalty. Penalizing success makes as much sense as anything. The NCAA certainly has been unable or at least unwilling to provide any justification or point to what precedence was set or followed.

I think that you are both right!! How's that for standing firmly in the middle?

Seriously though, I think that the NCAA likes having successful teams, but also likes bringing them down a notch or 2!!

Just using the USC example: when we were sitting at the top of college football, the NCAA loved it's "cash cow" (this was the most common reason given by many as to why we would receive a mere "slap on the wrist")!! The NCAA waited until the SEC started it's current run and USC had a 9-4 record before they finally wrapped up their investigation and sanctioned us!!

I'm not convinced this was a coincidence!!