USC met with NCAA about getting sanctions reduced

[yeodonie]

USC got fucked. No ifs and or buts.

I am curious that Haden says NCAA asked for more info and NCAA denies that assertion

 

[757Hokie83]

He probably thinks that a player being paid to LEAVE somehow constitutes cheating and a competitive advantage!!

players talk to recruits, recruit hears "come to USC, you gon' get paid!", they are more likely to end up there than somewhere that they might not get paid.

also regardless of whether it creates an advantage or not, the rules on the matter are pretty clear, and they were ignored, they got caught, and were punished accordingly.

 

[badinflu]

players talk to recruits, recruit hears "come to USC, you gon' get paid!", they are more likely to end up there than somewhere that they might not get paid.

also regardless of whether it creates an advantage or not, the rules on the matter are pretty clear, and they were ignored, they got caught, and were punished accordingly.

Which rules were ignored?

 

[trojanfan12]

players talk to recruits, recruit hears "come to USC, you gon' get paid!", they are more likely to end up there than somewhere that they might not get paid.

also regardless of whether it creates an advantage or not, the rules on the matter are pretty clear, and they were ignored, they got caught, and were punished accordingly.

No one at USC has ever denied that what happened with the Bush family was against NCAA rules. USC's argument all along has been that USC didn't know about what the Bush family was up to. The NCAA said that USC "should have known" and then punished as if USC did know!!

In the Cam Newton case, Auburn and Cam were cleared because the NCAA decided that Cam didn't know what his father was up to. In that case, it was alleged that Cam's father was paid so that Cam would attend the school. In USC's case, the Bush family was paid so that Reggie Bush would LEAVE school early and USC gets unprecedented punsihment while Auburn and Cam get nothing. This is fair?

Additionally, USC has never asked to have the sanctions removed, we have only asked that the sanctions be reduced to a level that fits what other schools have received for similar transgressions.

While I agree that the NCAA had no business getting involved in the PSU case and I am happy that they have reduced their sanctions (which PSU never should have received in the first place) they are setting a precedent that should extend to all schools. Essentially, PSU is getting time off for good behavior. If the NCAA is going to do that for one school, then they should be willing to do the same for other schools as well!!

 

[757Hokie83]

Which rules were ignored?

12.1.2 for one

 

[963BUSC]

good, as it should be

By any chance can you site what precedence was followed when the NCAA laid down USC punishment?

 

[757Hokie83]

No one at USC has ever denied that what happened with the Bush family was against NCAA rules. USC's argument all along has been that USC didn't know about what the Bush family was up to. The NCAA said that USC "should have known" and then punished as if USC did know!!

In the Cam Newton case, Auburn and Cam were cleared because the NCAA decided that Cam didn't know what his father was up to. In that case, it was alleged that Cam's father was paid so that Cam would attend the school. In USC's case, the Bush family was paid so that Reggie Bush would LEAVE school early and USC gets unprecedented punsihment while Auburn and Cam get nothing. This is fair?

Additionally, USC has never asked to have the sanctions removed, we have only asked that the sanctions be reduced to a level that fits what other schools have received for similar transgressions.

While I agree that the NCAA had no business getting involved in the PSU case and I am happy that they have reduced their sanctions (which PSU never should have received in the first place) they are setting a precedent that should extend to all schools. Essentially, PSU is getting time off for good behavior. If the NCAA is going to do that for one school, then they should be willing to do the same for other schools as well!!

no, Aubrun should have been slammed just as hard. USC's punishment was just, not only with Bush, but then came OJ Mayo, proving that USC either couldn't control their kids, or just didn't care if they were getting paid, either way something needed to be done to right the ship. Do I think USC got a fair shake, yes and no, their punishment was well deserved, but other schools have gotten off light...in real life, that happens all the time with criminals too, depending on situations, so maybe there was something to the USC one that made it worse? I don't know

Agreed, NCAA should not have been involved at all in the PSU case, but it is not time off for good behavior, it's the NCAA realizing that they should not have been involved, but they can't erase what they did, so they're trying to lighten it and say "hey penn state, see what we did for you, we're good right?"

 

[Wild Turkey]

By any chance can you site what precedence was followed when the NCAA laid down USC punishment?

Not trying to be a smart ass but honestly can we even site "precedence" in 90% of what the NCAA does? That is the real problem IMO.

 

[757Hokie83]

By any chance can you site what precedence was followed when the NCAA laid down USC punishment?

nope, and I don't care enough to look into it either

 

[963BUSC]

nope, and I don't care enough to look into it either

I understand, the NCAA has been unable to find one either.

 

[757Hokie83]

ah, so maybe Bush's whole story was bad enough that it became the precedent

 

[Wild Turkey]

no, Aubrun should have been slammed just as hard. USC's punishment was just, not only with Bush, but then came OJ Mayo, proving that USC either couldn't control their kids, or just didn't care if they were getting paid, either way something needed to be done to right the ship. Do I think USC got a fair shake, yes and no, their punishment was well deserved, but other schools have gotten off light...in real life, that happens all the time with criminals too, depending on situations, so maybe there was something to the USC one that made it worse? I don't know

Agreed, NCAA should not have been involved at all in the PSU case, but it is not time off for good behavior, it's the NCAA realizing that they should not have been involved, but they can't erase what they did, so they're trying to lighten it and say "hey penn state, see what we did for you, we're good right?"

Auburn did no wrong if anyone was to be punished in this case it would have been Cam individually and/or Miss State. Now as a result Auburn may have had to forfiet some games but there wouldn't have been any sanctions nor probation.

Auburn did not pay or offer Cam benefits it was Miss State that did and everyone seems to forget that part it is just assumed that we paid or offered him. The NCAA obtained bank records from everyone involved and absolutely no payments could be found. Let's get the facts straight.

 

[963BUSC]

ah, so maybe Bush's whole story was bad enough that it became the precedent

How was Bush receiving money from an Agent and playing for a national title infinitely worse than Florida's entire team receiving money from an agent and playing for a national title? How was Bush receiving money from an agent when the coaches should have known more than twice as bad as North Carolina's players receiving money from an Agent when a coach was acting as the middle man in giving out the money?

I'm not saying that USC desrved no punishment, but that the NCAA's only guideline they give out on deciding punishments is based on precident, yet they have failed to follow or set any precident in their handling of the situation.

 

[757Hokie83]

Auburn did no wrong if anyone was to be punished in this case it would have been Cam individually and/or Miss State. Now as a result Auburn may have had to forfiet some games but there wouldn't have been any sanctions nor probation.

Auburn did not pay or offer Cam benefits it was Miss State that did and everyone seems to forget that part it is just assumed that we paid or offered him. The NCAA obtained bank records from everyone involved and absolutely no payments could be found. Let's get the facts straight.

How was Bush receiving money from an Agent and playing for a national title infinitely worse than Florida's entire team receiving money from an agent and playing for a national title? How was Bush receiving money from an agent when the coaches should have known more than twice as bad as North Carolina's players receiving money from an Agent when a coach was acting as the middle man in giving out the money?

I'm not saying that USC desrved no punishment, but that the NCAA's only guideline they give out on deciding punishments is based on precident, yet they have failed to follow or set any precident in their handling of the situation.

 

[trojanfan12]

no, Aubrun should have been slammed just as hard. USC's punishment was just, not only with Bush, but then came OJ Mayo, proving that USC either couldn't control their kids, or just didn't care if they were getting paid, either way something needed to be done to right the ship. Do I think USC got a fair shake, yes and no, their punishment was well deserved, but other schools have gotten off light...in real life, that happens all the time with criminals too, depending on situations, so maybe there was something to the USC one that made it worse? I don't know

Agreed, NCAA should not have been involved at all in the PSU case, but it is not time off for good behavior, it's the NCAA realizing that they should not have been involved, but they can't erase what they did, so they're trying to lighten it and say "hey penn state, see what we did for you, we're good right?"

OJ Mayo had nothing to do with the football program and it was actually a worse violation (although it as never proven and OJ Mayo denies it to this day). Why slam the football team harder for what the basketball team did. The basketball team got a slap on the wrist.

Punishment was deserved at USC, but not at the level that USC was punished. Previous precedent for similar transgressions has been about half of what USC got. USC has only ever asked that the sanctions be reduced to what previous precedent dictated.

The only difference between the USC case and other similar cases, is that USC decided to defend ourselves rather than just "throw ourselves on the mercy of the court"!!

What you say that PSU is having their sanctions lessened for might be the real reason, but it is not the reason that the NCAA gave. The reason that the NCAA gave was that PSU had shown progress towards athletics integrity (time off for good behavior). The NCAA, over the last few years has actually used USC as an example of not only making progress, but also achieving athletics integrity. If "progress" is the reason given for PSU having their sanctions lessened, then this should extend to USC and any other schools that show similar progress!!

If the NCAA's reason is the one you gave (and I agree that it's the real reason), then they should say so and tell other schools "don't bother"!!

 

[trojanfan12]

Not trying to be a smart ass but honestly can we even site "precedence" in 90% of what the NCAA does? That is the real problem IMO.

The NCAA sets a precedent with one program, then does someting completely different with another program and claims that there is no precedent for similar transgressions. Imagine if our legal system was allowed to act as arbitrarily as the NCAA does!!

 

[757Hokie83]

OJ Mayo had nothing to do with the football program and it was actually a worse violation (although it as never proven and OJ Mayo denies it to this day). Why slam the football team harder for what the basketball team did. The basketball team got a slap on the wrist.

Punishment was deserved at USC, but not at the level that USC was punished. Previous precedent for similar transgressions has been about half of what USC got. USC has only ever asked that the sanctions be reduced to what previous precedent dictated.

The only difference between the USC case and other similar cases, is that USC decided to defend ourselves rather than just "throw ourselves on the mercy of the court"!!

What you say that PSU is having their sanctions lessened for might be the real reason, but it is not the reason that the NCAA gave. The reason that the NCAA gave was that PSU had shown progress towards athletics integrity (time off for good behavior). The NCAA, over the last few years has actually used USC as an example of not only making progress, but also achieving athletics integrity. If "progress" is the reason given for PSU having their sanctions lessened, then this should extend to USC and any other schools that show similar progress!!

If the NCAA's reason is the one you gave (and I agree that it's the real reason), then they should say so and tell other schools "don't bother"!!

maybe there's the reason...they took a plea deal...there was cheating, it was caught, take the punishment, or fight it and make it worse, I dunno, just speculation

 

[trojanfan12]

maybe there's the reason...they took a plea deal...there was cheating, it was caught, take the punishment, or fight it and make it worse, I dunno, just speculation

First off, there was no "cheating" with the football program!! Cheating is when something is done to gain a competitive advantage. Reggie Bush being paid to leave school early does not provide a competitive advantage. That team that USC had the year after Bush left finished ranked #4!! Do you think maybe having a player of Bush's caliber may have helped them make it to another NCG?

As for the reason the punishment was handed out like it was: the fact that USC chose to defend ourselves is exactly why we were punished as harshly as we were. It has actually been shown via the Todd McNair defamation suit that the NCAA acted improperly and with malice in it's handling of the USC case. The only reason that USC hasn't sued the crap out of the NCAA is because Pat Haden said we wouldn't. I have been supportive of this, however, with the lunacy that the NCAA has shown in it's recent rulings, I wish he'd change his mind.

Interestingly, Paul Dee was the head of the COI in the USC case and he famously chided USC with the statement "High profile players require high profile compliance" and he also said that USC should model it's compliance department after the one they had at Miami (where he was the AD)!!

How does Miami's compliance from when he was the AD look now?

 

[757Hokie83]

• “Maintaining institutional control of [high-profile student-athletes’] conduct presents unique challenges to compliance staff. Close monitoring and follow through on information [concerning high-profile student-athletes] must be employed. In this case, the institution failed to heed clear warning signs. Also, adequate resources must be dedicated to compliance.”
• “Because of the clandestine nature of intentional rules violations, institutions need to have well-conceived processes in place to assist in uncovering potential violations.”
• “Yet [USC} failed to take a ‘proactive’ stance or investigate concerns and questions that arose regarding the relationship.”
• “The failure of the institution to recognize warning signs, to be proactive in monitoring its athletics program, and to follow through on information regarding possible rules violations resulted in a finding of lack of institutional control.”

 

[Jims_Doors]

big difference between USC and Penn St...USC's sanctions are well deserved...Penn St, not

I would say the biggest difference is that Penn St. was givin' no appeals process. This is your punishment and you're going down to 65 scholarships. USC went down to only 75.

To where USC was allowed to appeal and that process was drawn out for almost 2yrs. All the while they were allowed to stockpile recruits with the likelihood knowing that the appeal would be denied. During the appeals process, they landed one of the consensus top-five classes in the nation (Feb. 2011). Plus they got a top RB in Silas Redd from Penn St. to transfer there after his sophomore season.

They may not be bowl eligible and have some injuries (which no one can foresee) but they did / do have talent on that roster to still be successful.