Treatment of USC has never been ‘fair’


NCAA bylaws require that a successful appeal of sanctions proves an “abuse of discretion.” But fans understand that doing so is challenging. The odds are bleak. College athletics’ governing body must acknowledge its previously rendered decision was incorrect. In essence, it must admit failure.

Since the NCAA amended its procedure for appeals hearings in 2008, just one in 11 cases has been successful. USC athletic director Pat Haden, as a result, has exercised caution when asked about the Trojans’ chances of softening penalties handed down on the football program last June, which infamously include a two-year bowl ban and a loss of 30 scholarships over three years.

“I’m just realistic,” Haden told reporters earlier this month. “I’m just going with the odds — 10 percent of appeals are successful.”

Haden, along with other school officials, such as President C. L. Max Nikias, met with the NCAA Infractions Appeals Committee on Saturday in Indianapolis to present USC’s case that the same organization had erred in its initial ruling last summer.

“All I will say is that I want to thank the NCAA for giving us an opportunity before the appeals committee to have a good and fair hearing,” Nikias said after the meeting at an Indianapolis hotel. “Now we have to wait for the ruling.”

In spite of Nikias’ remarks, however, it’s important to note that when it comes to USC and the NCAA, things have never been “fair.” In many respects, since the inception of sanctionsgate about a year ago, the Trojans have been dealt a rather unfavorable hand.

When the university initially met with the 10-member Committee on Infractions in February 2010, the staff’s inclusion of certain members jeopardized the integrity of the investigation. Heading the committee was chairperson Paul Dee, the former athletic director at the University of Miami.

Under Dee’s watch, the Hurricanes’ athletic program was cited by the NCAA for a “significant lack of institutional control” in 1995 and further sanctioned after a myriad of gun, drug and sexual abuse scandals plagued its football team.

Fifteen years later, Dee applied the same term to the USC football program in dolling out the harshest penalties since the 1987 SMU death penalty, a title that had previously been reserved for Dee’s Canes. Since then many have speculated that the former athletic director was influenced by a desire to have another modern-day football titan carry a distinction that had once been reserved for Miami: dirty.

Other members included Melissa L. Conboy, the deputy director of athletics at the University of Notre Dame, one of the Trojans’ fiercest rivals. For the better part of 22 years, Conboy has worked in the Irish athletic department, creating a possible conflict of interest.

But the decision to replace James O’Fallon, a University of Oregon law professor representing the Pac-10, on the committee with former COI member Josephine Pututo of the University of Nebraska, might have been the most irresponsible action taken. O’Fallon was forced to recuse himself because of Oregon’s conference affiliation with USC, and Dee opted to replace him with Pututo despite having already used up her limit of three three-year terms.

In spite of a puzzling collection of committee members, however, NCAA representatives insisted that the Trojans, who had been fighting allegations regarding improper benefits received by former tailback Reggie Bush since 2006, would be treated fairly and given due process.

During a 2004 hearing in front of Congress, Pututo explained that the NCAA’s enforcement, infractions and hearing procedures not only met due process standards, but in certain cases exceeded the 14th Amendment’s procedural protections. In short, USC was expected to be granted an opportunity to refute claims of a “lack of institution control,” suggesting that former coach Pete Carroll and his staff were fully aware of Bush receiving thousands of dollars in extra benefits.

But in the initial case USC was not afforded such an opportunity. The committee instead found that USC was guilty of a “lack of institutional control” on the basis that it “should have known” of Bush’s dealings with sports marketers Lloyd Lake and Michael Michaels.

“The real issue here is, if you have high-profile players, your enforcement staff has to monitor those students at a higher level,” Dee said in a June teleconference announcing the sanctions. “High-profile players merit high-profile enforcement.”

The rendered decision, however, varies from other, more recent rulings in which such similar logic seems to have been ignored, raising the question that if it’s applicable to USC, then why not other similar collegiate institutions?

When Auburn declared its Heisman Trophy-winning quarterback Cam Newton ineligible in December amid allegations of Newton’s father seeking composition for his son to sign a letter of intent to play at Mississippi State, the NCAA appeared far more lenient.

In a span of 48 hours, it ruled Newton eligible, citing insufficient evidence to take action. By contrast, its investigation of USC and Bush took approximately four years — or 35,040 hours.

“Based on the information available to the reinstatement staff at this time, we do not have sufficient evidence that Cam Newton or anyone from Auburn was aware of this activity,” said Kevin Lennon, NCAA vice president for academic and membership affairs in a news release.

Despite far too little evidence in the Bush case, the committee punished USC while giving Newton and Auburn the benefit of the doubt.

Similarly, when five Ohio State football players were ruled ineligible in December for selling awards and exchanging autographs for tattoos, their five-game suspensions were postponed until the 2011 season since “the student-athletes were not aware they were committing violations.”

USC was punished for alleged ignorance in relation to Bush yet conversely the Tattoo Five’s penalties were softened due to ignorance.

This past weekend, Nikias cited fairness during his two-line description of USC’s appeal hearing, a largely optimistic outlook considering how events have transpired over the past 11 months.

We can only hope he’s right, because at this point in time we’re all still waiting for the NCAA to do anything “good and fair” in regard to USC.

“The 19th Hole” runs Mondays. To comment on this article email Joey at jrkaufma@usc.edu or visit dailytrojan.com.

44 replies
  1. EVS
    EVS says:

    Talking about fairness. Is it fair for USC to steal a San Francisco college’s radio station? Would it be fair if a college stole YOUR radio station? All Trojans should be ashamed and embarrassed at what it’s college is doing to college radio in San Francisco. Speak Up. Tell the administration to halt this deal.

  2. SDSurfDog
    SDSurfDog says:

    Let me get this straight. The chairperson was the former AD at Miami where violations ran rampant for almost a decade – a man we can safely assume is desperate to repair his “reputation”. Then the NCAA waive their own rules and bring out of mothballs someone from the accused school’s bitterest rival to help render “impartial” judgement – by the way a school that has been absolutely dominated by the accused for a decade +. Certainly her school has nothing to gain by a decapitated rival. This would be like putting someone, say from Goldman Sachs, in charge of the Treasury and then giving him carte blanche to make unilateral decisions affecting all of GS’ rivals. Oh wait…How’d that turn out for GS and their biggest rival Lehman Bros?

  3. jburkesworld
    jburkesworld says:

    This column is everything it should be:

    1. Totally factual. Seriously, if you can find an error go ahead and let me know because everything here is spot on and clear.

    2. A well-structured and nicely thought-out indictment of the NCAA’s treatment of USC. Seriously, anyone who isn’t a fan of Ohio St (and even some of them are with USC on this), Auburn, or that random public school in Westwood that seems to think it can talk after getting smashed by us in everything from academic rankings to men’s basketball (but that’s ok, they’re a football school anyways) will agree that an objective comparison of the USC case to the ones from this season isn’t anywhere close to fair, and that the wonderful due process that Ms Pututo testified to Congress that we’d be getting didn’t materialize.

    3. NOT a hotheaded fanboy piece. USC clearly had student-athletes that violated NCAA rules and should be retroactively ruled ineligible. That’s just the truth and no one from the USC side is (or should be) disputing that. Having said that, USC operated under the assumption that it would receive due process, that it could question witnesses, face accusers, and on the whole, get “better than 14th Amendment protections.” Apparently the university should have known that two of it’s hundreds of athletes were violating rules and more importantly should have known that testimony delivered under oath to the US Congress by a member of the COI was not a credible source of information on how its case would be handled. This piece is saying that’s wrong, which it is, and nothing more.

    4. A wonderful little fly-zapper that keeps drawing in pathetic USC-hating trolls to it’s light to get fried. If you want to come up with cute little acronyms for a rival school and some of those sick allusion-filled commenter names, that’s awesome and I wish you the best of times roaming around the internet, having a blast calling names and insulting people. But no one here wants to see people embarrass themselves by trying to desperately fling hatful words around. It’s sad to have to watch, and I would hope whatever university you do affiliate with would consider it unbecoming and embarrassing. You can compete on the field, you can only degrade yourself by trying to on a message board.

    Fight On! Great first column Joey!

    • Juice Deuce
      Juice Deuce says:

      Mazel mazel…

      You tried to congratulate your boy on an article that you happen to agree with (because you both went to/go to SUC)…scrambling to paint the dirtiest program in NCAA history in a more flattering light is very admirable.

      Read between the lines, ace. It wasn’t what your male friend wrote, it’s what he DIDN’T write. He conveniently skirted and skated around facts to suit his argument. It’s called yellow journalism.

      • AmyDee
        AmyDee says:

        So let me get this straight: You definition of “the dirtiest program in history” is a program that unwittingly allowed an athlete to play football after a wanna-be agent started negotiating with him to LEAVE USC and go pro.

        Meanwhile the Chairman for the COI was the for AD of Miami where, among other things, boosters literally PAID athletes for dirty hits and TDs. School officials were directly involved in a Pell Grant scam to have football players (and other athletes) steal money from the federal government. And Paul Dee, himself, suspended a drug monitoring policy, thereby allowing ineligible athletes who had tested positive for drugs to play.

        Looking at Alabama alone, USC isn’t even the dirtiest program of the decade, let alone the history of the NCAA. Either you are completely ignorant, are so blinded with envy that you are incapable of being intellectually honest, or you are a Paul Dee lackey trying to cover up for the corrupt man. Regardless, you have displayed you have no credibility on the subject.

      • CaseJack
        CaseJack says:

        “scrambling to paint the dirtiest program in NCAA history in a more flattering light is very admirable.”

        Go ahead and cite your source that shows that USC has a dirtier history than SMU, Auburn, Alabama, just to name a few. Oh wait, you can’t because you just pulled this comment out of your @ss. And just in case you’re a UCLA fan, here’s two words for you: Sam Gilbert. John Wooden and UCLA basketball was much, much dirtier than anything USC has even been accused of doing. But thanks for the laugh.

      • jburkesworld
        jburkesworld says:

        I love it, more silly accronyms and now apparently I can’t congratulate someone because heaven forbid that a positive word be spoken on your internet. Oh and way to go on the “male friend” line. Love the specificity, ace.

        So just so that I can keep this wonderfully complex argument all clear… you’re accusing Joey of skirting and skating around facts to suit his argument. Ok, that’s actually a great point… assuming you have even one good example of a fact he skated around… which you don’t, ace.

        And then you call USC the “dirtiest program in NCAA history.” That’s a totally valid stance to take… assuming you have even one good piece of evidence USC committed more major violations than SMU, Miami, Alabama, or the University of San Francisco… which you don’t, ace.

        Wait, so Joey can’t skirt facts in his column, but you can in your condemnation of it?

        It’s called accusing someone of something, without proper evidence (USC fans, sound familiar?), while doing the exact same thing in that accusation.

        This is too easy.

  4. Hasbro
    Hasbro says:

    Auburn gets by with their infractions because they couldn’t be in the NC a few years ago – how ridiculous is that?

  5. Ann
    Ann says:

    I’m seriously ashamed of going to USC whenever someone here says “ucl-gay”. Cmon dude that’s just ignorant.

  6. Juice Duece
    Juice Duece says:

    What this “writer” (conveniently) neglects to mention is that $c was ALREADY on probation for previous violations when the Reggie Bush, OJ Payo, extra coach hiring (er, consulting), and those tennis player-related transgressions occured. Cheating was rampant on Figueroa Tech’s campus throughout this time (see: one compliance officer).

    Stick to your blog, Joey–your pathetic whining rings hollow, and you’re clearly not ready to write for an actual publication…even if it is the Daily trOJan.

    Cheat on, $c!

    • bRuined
      bRuined says:

      It humors me that chumps from Un Challenging Liberal Arts aka “floodgate for jr. college transfers who pursue slacker majors” love to troll our blog. This issue doesn’t even involve ucl-gay, yet the envious ones love to pounce on us when we’re down. Hey asstard, remember: 24-12 despite our team “cheating.” So how about that stale, hackneyed “there’s always next year” by NeuWeasal?

      Go back, to your coddled bubble in Westwood, pursue your unchallenging liberal arts/humanities degree at ucl-gay, and talk about how your school is so academically prestigious when majority of your undergrads pursue bullshyt, EASY, non-math/science based majors like ethnic-studies, poli-sci and whatever worthless, underwater basket weaving “I can’t find a job” with this hyped up jr. college degree aka ucla-BA.

      • Juice Duece
        Juice Duece says:

        You seem very articulate…couldn’t dispute the facts so back to more whining and 3rd-grade insults. I’m sorry you couldn’t get into ‘UCL-gay’, ‘ass-tard’. Even OJ is ashamed of you…

        Whine on, trOJan!

        • Fight On!
          Fight On! says:

          Juice Duece,

          One would assume that you work for the NCAA based on your ability to make up facts. USC’s Football program had not been recently sanctioned nor penalized for past violations. Furthermore, the NCAA is unable to punish the Football program for violations of other teams. The NCAA took 4 years to investigate this matter even thou they claim they had such solid evidence. One does not take 4 years to complete an investigation when the evidence is solid. This was a hit job on the Trojans by the NCAA because no one was able to compete with them on the recruiting front nor on the football field. Those are the facts!

          • Juice Deuce
            Juice Deuce says:

            No, I don’t work for the NCAA, conspiracy theorist (your tin-foil hat seems to be cutting off circulation to your brain). Based on your response, you are CLEARLY Joey Kaufman’s dad! Great logic…

            A simple Google search will show you that the trOJans were indeed on probation during these ADDITIONAL violations. And your attempt to discredit the NCAA’s findings because of the amount of time it took to come to light doesn’t invalidate what was proven. Your attempt at spin, deflection, scapegoating, and fingerpointing is SO classic trOJan. ZERO accountability, one HUNDRED percent misplaced pride.

            Man up, and accept your penance. Quit whining.

            P.S. Did you seriously just say that the NCAA can’t punish other sports due to lack of Institutional Control? The violations were spread amongst several sports, and the respective sports get their just desserts. Try again.

          • Fight On!
            Fight On! says:

            Juice Deuce,
            No conspiracy theory at all. Just calling you out on your lack of knowledge. USC Football was not on active sanctions when the Bush judgement came down. Furthermore, the amount of time it took does matter. The NCAA took less than two weeks to close the allegations against Florida. Less than 48 Hours to drop the allegations against Cam and Auburn. This after trying to cover up the allegations for 9 months. And less than two months to pass their judgement on Ohio State. All 3 judgements completely contradicted their judgement against USC. Yet it took 4 years for them to investigate allegations against USC which were made by a former convicted felon. These are the facts, something you’re clearly are unable to refute. Lastly, where in my response did you see me mention lack of institutional control. I clearly pointed out that violations and sanctions by the Basketball program have nothing to do with the Football team. Clearly, you UCLA boys need to man up and beat USC on the field and stop asking for the NCAA to help you out.

          • Juice Deuce
            Juice Deuce says:

            Look, you can’t be convinced that a history of cheating, malfeasance, violations, and probation had ANYthing to do with $c’s most recent punishment, so we’ll have to agree to disagree.

            Please let me know about the next Dee, Conboy, and Ahmedinejad plot to take down the choir boys on Figueroa…won’t ya?
            Morons, while fun to play with for a while, quickly exhaust my patience.

            Cheat on for ol’ $c!

          • Fight On!
            Fight On! says:

            You lose the argument and then resort to name calling. Earlier you called out bRuined for the same thing. You should learn to take your own advice.

          • Juice Deuce
            Juice Deuce says:

            I spoke too soon. I had NO idea of the level of idiocy that I’d be dealing with, when responding to n’er do-well “Trogans” on this site….a thousand apologies. It’s people like YOU who vindicated OJ–I bet you could make excuses for Hitler, too (and how would your son Joey feel about that?)…what an unconscionable fool. Goodbye, good riddance, and enjoy your fanboy status, loser.

        • Juice Duece is an oral phallic pleaser
          Juice Duece is an oral phallic pleaser says:

          I feel so belittled *gasp.* Go back, start writing your argumentative theses, for your EASY and worthless major–poli-sci, identity-politics–or whatever ucl-gay is putative for. You nor 99% or bRuins aren’t a direct reflection of the Nobel laureates nor the bio-med research. No, dumb dumb, the smart people do that; and yes, I’ll admit that a paucity of bRuins are smart albeit there are far more at SC relative to your glorified, super-community-college.

          So before you go around saying Trojans are crass/ghetto, stop calling USC “Figueroa Tech.”

          Un
          Challenging
          Lax
          Academics

          Un
          Challenging
          Liberal
          Arts

          Ugly
          Cocky
          Losers
          Abound

          Ugly
          Chicks &
          Losers
          Around

          *big middle finger (your IQ count bRuins, collectively) ;)

          • Juice Deuce
            Juice Deuce says:

            You know Juice Deuce was a slight at OJ 2 (aka OJ Payo), right? You’re right, your “school” is clearly superior…we’re all blessed by your linguistic sophistication and grace.

            Go whine to your Daddy for more tuition money, my poet laureate friend.

      • jj
        jj says:

        Really?? “Your coddled bubble in Westwood”??? would that be the same place that essentially ALL of the SC players rent tony condos? Do you not remember Leinart’s dad funding such a residence? Why not live near your beloved campus? Oh right, no answer needed. You all live in this so-called “bubble” because you p*$#%s can’t handle your own neighborhood. And that’s really the gist of it…calling everyone out because you can’t man up and take your biscuits like any other tainted program. Dee was after SC to redeem his MIami program of twenty-odd years ago??? Please! And Melissa Conboy of ND is out to avenge her fball program? ND beat your ass twelve years straight! Get over yourselves and quit your clown-ass whining. Take it and shut the *&$#@ up.

        • Fight On!
          Fight On! says:

          JJ,

          Dee had no business being the man passing judgement on USC considering his past violations. Infact, he has no business working in this capacity for the NCAA under any circumstances. This is an obvious conflict of interest. Melissa Conboys conflict of interest is tied to the fact that ND is a long time rival of USC. And USC had beaten ND ass for 9 straight years when the judgement came down. Ms. Conboy clearly had an interest in the judgement against USC. Take your own advice and stop whining about the fact that USC has kicked UCLA’s ass for the last 11 of the past 12 years! As the Trojans proved on the field several months back the Trojans own LA.

          • jj
            jj says:

            Dear Fight On,
            I realize that I am wasting my time with these posts, but let’s just, for fun, point out a few problems with your witty response. Although I grew up and still spend lots of time in SoCal, I graduated from Dartmouth and live in New York. Perhaps you, a trueTrojan genius, could point out where, precisely, I whined about USC kicking UCLA’s ass? I did not attend nor graduate from UCLA, so your Bruin ass-beatings don’t mean much to me, you’ll have to broaden your horizons a bit and come up with something more clever. As for the assumption that Conboy cannot be impartial because ND and SC are football rivals is a joke, as is pointing out that SC beat ND nine years straight while ignoring the fact that the Irish beat the Trojans ten years in a row before that. (BTW, I’m sure that I don’t need to stipulate to the fact that all your ’05 victories were vacated, right?) So, yes, you have your (cyclical) highs and lows, like just about every other program out there. Obviously for the SC crowd, those fabulous highs (now having been tainted by its participants) must be defended in order for you to keep that license plate frame on your snazzy car, because we all know, of course, that during the lows, SC fans are nowhere to be found…all tumbleweeds and crickets. So cling, if you must, to the notion that you getting what’s due is some sort of injustice. It’s just pathetic…and, unfortunately for SC’s reputation, typical.

  7. Tom D
    Tom D says:

    DCTrojan,

    I’m afraid that USC did claim that it should be let off the hook. They proposed exactly zero penalties on the football program for the Reggie Bush mess, instead they threw the basketball team under the bus and hoped that would satisfy the NCAA. Then Pete Carroll bolted town just ahead of the posse, and USC was crazy or desperate enough to hire Lane F’ing Kiffin and Ed the Ogre, who were both there during the time the Reggie Bush stuff was going on. Kiffin was on a record pace of NCAA violations, in the SEC of all places, and his recruits at Tennessee were on a record run of arrests. Talk about waving a red cape in front of the NCAA. The punishment may have been more severe than was warranted, but the NCAA hates hubris, and by failing to admit to any culpability at all and by hiring some of the same people that were there during the time the violations occurred ,USC was basically daring them to drop the hammer. Mission accomplished. Nobody admitted that USC did anything wrong until they started acting all contrite in hopes of leniency. Good luck with that.

    • CaseJack
      CaseJack says:

      “Kiffin was on a record pace of NCAA violations, in the SEC of all places, and his recruits at Tennessee were on a record run of arrests. Talk about waving a red cape in front of the NCAA.”

      I’m sorry, you must be confused. Kiffin didn’t coach at Ohio State or Florida.

    • Fight On!
      Fight On! says:

      DCTrojan,

      The Basketball team was not thrown under the bus. There were actual violations that took place and the University reported them on their own. The hiring of Lane Kiffin had nothing to do with the sanctions that were dropped on the program. It had everything to do with the NCAA’s desire to bring down the Trojan Football program at any cost. There was absolutly no evidence to support the sanctions. It does not take 4 years to complete an investigation if the evidence is as solid as the NCAA claimed. I find your statement that the NCAA does not stand for hubris rather laughable when you consider how the NCAA has handled the allegations at Florida, Ohio State, Alabama, and Auburn. The NCAA has no credibility left. And neither do you.

      • Tom D
        Tom D says:

        Fight On!

        I think you were replying to me, not DCTrojan. Thank you for helping me make my point about many USC fans not admitting any fault by the football program. Just to be clear, USC has now, somewhat belatedly, admitted fault and has agreed to some, but not all, of the sanctions imposed. Clearly, there was evidence to support the sanctions or they would not have agreed to the year bowl ban and 5 scholarship reduction. Originally, USC denied any responsibility and self imposed no penalties on itself. I am aware that the basketball team was also actually guilty of violations, you don’t have to be innocent to be thrown under the bus. Your ex AD apparently thought that by admitting guilt and self imposing penalties for the basketball program, it would impress the NCAA and they would agree to accept no penalties for the football program. He was clearly mistaken. As for your contention that the NCAA desired to bring down the USC football program at all cost, why? Why would they arbitrarily decide to smack down an innocent USC? How does the NCAA benefit in any way? Don’t give me any of those silly SEC-ESPN-NCAA-BCS conspiracy theories, how do they benefit by tearing down USC, which is in one of the largest media markets in the United States?

  8. Rich Salas
    Rich Salas says:

    “BOO HOO Cheaters!Excuses, excuses…perhaps if U$C or Reggie Bush were able to admit wrongdoings it would have been a slap on the wrist. Not seeing Carrol’s timing to leave Troy as another red flag is just delusional. It was apparent $C was a loose ship run by fools. Karma’s a horse!”

    The funniest thing about morons like scotty is that USC didnt gain ANYTHING from what Bush did. The whole Bush deal was for his NFL business, it had nothing to do with playing at USC. What an ignorant jealouse little bunch of fools. Doesnt matter what happens, in two years, USc will be back in teh business of kicking YOUR SCHOOLS BUTT again, and all you will be able to do is cry and pray for the NCAA to step in to help you beat us…lol!!! What a bunch of losers.

  9. Rich Salas
    Rich Salas says:

    This has to be one of the most ignorant and ridiculous statemets ever uttered, and the sad thing thing is someone is willing to tie their name to it. I see you have great respect for yourself Gary…lol!!!!!!

    “Was USC fair to the tams they played with CHEATING ineligible player?”

  10. Window
    Window says:

    Auburn pays it’s players through casinos and done in such a cryptic way the NCAA will never sort it out (at the rate they do things) Cam Newton was shopped by an agent and should have been ruled a professional and inelligible. Since he was a one man team that wasn’t going to happen. Too bad for teams that follow the rules.

    • AmyDee
      AmyDee says:

      Gary, how is the fact that USC unwittingly played an athlete, who was recruited legitimately and declared “ineligible” retroactively, considered “cheating”? It is astonishing to me that the NCAA can knowingly allow 5 ineligible athletes to play in the Sugar Bowl after punishing USC — past, present and future — for unknowingly playing one ineligible athlete.

  11. M
    M says:

    Don’t forget Alabama. Another case where improper benefits were being given by Bama staff to their players, and yet a more lenient penalty.

    Or even the Miami case. Despite the massive scandal involving over 70 players in 3 programs (vs. our 1, 2 if you count Mayo), over many seasons (vs. our 1), they got only one postseason ban and 31 scholarship cuts (vs. our 2 year postseason ban and 30 scholarship cuts).

    I don’t understand their reasoning for this. Anyone who knows NCAA rules knows that the max scholarships that should have been taken from USC should have been 4 per year for a total of 12, and one postseason ban.

    The NCAA clearly operated with an agenda in USC’s case. Whether it was to make an example, whether it was distaste of USC’s media friendly program, whether it was to eliminate USC’s recruiting empire…it was an agenda, and whenever you use an agenda, you throw out discretion.

    May the NCAA , for once, look at this in a fair and objective manner and decide what is right over what is convenient.

  12. Scotty88
    Scotty88 says:

    BOO HOO Cheaters!Excuses, excuses…perhaps if U$C or Reggie Bush were able to admit wrongdoings it would have been a slap on the wrist. Not seeing Carrol’s timing to leave Troy as another red flag is just delusional. It was apparent $C was a loose ship run by fools. Karma’s a horse!

    • DCTrojan
      DCTrojan says:

      Oh for heaven’s sake, Scotty88. It’s not excuses. No-one is claiming that SC should have been let off the hook. All the administration is asking for is that the NCAA stick to their published standards – instead of making up a higher compliance bar to justify stronger penalties, ignoring their own by-laws about COI composition, breaking their own rules about COI / investigator contact, and essentially manufacturing a narrative to support their claim that McNair knew what was happening from the beginning. Perhaps you think that the NCAA separated out the appeals process to have McNair address his punishment separately for convenience; I can’t help but wonder why they didn’t want to have that be part of the record for SC to appeal.

      All things being equal, I am willing to bet that the result of the appeals process will be BOHICA. If the NCAA was either straight or honest about being biased, I wouldn’t mind. But they are pissing on our shoes and telling us it’s raining, and no-one need be expected to take that in silence.

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] for Continued Sanctions. My new favorite young scribbler Joey Kaufman wrote THIS PIECE on how our sanctions hearing will not be fair and we shouldn’t expect it to be.  After […]

  2. […] expect rampant homerism regarding the NCAA's Committee of Infractions from a USC Trojan blog (H/T: ByLawBlog). But the post raises awareness to which schools have representation on the COI […]

Comments are closed.