Jump to content

USC will lose a NC and schollies!!!!


Guest chrislw35

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest chrislw35

No problem. I was wandering if anything was going to come of all that mess. It looks like it is going to bite USC bad. Wonder what M. Smith's mom thinks of USC now? Go Irish!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest fighton2007

nothing is going to happen to SC unless they can show that the USC coaches knew about it... which i guarantee they didnt

 

this situation is different from bama, etc... b/c those were school-affiliated boosters. in this case, we have the word and 'alleged' tape of a guy finishing a 1-year prison sentence who is under investigation for extortion... so the tape, if anything, proves the extortion... hmm??

 

worst case scenario, reggie bush loses his heisman (oh well...)

 

worst worst case scenario (which wont happen anyways), the NCAA decides to forfeit all of SC's 2004 games... so SC is the AP and BCS champion w/ a record of 0-12 b/c the NCAA doesn't recognize CFB championships....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just curious, I hear things like Bush could lose Heisman trophy, USC would lose the NC trophy, etc... Would the NCAA really force USC to lose scholarships? If Carroll or USC didn't know about the money can they be penalized for something a player did on his own? In order for USC to lose scholarships or get penalized wouldn't their have to be institutional neglect or lack of overshight? If Carroll didn't know about it could USC be penalized harsly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest chrislw35
nothing is going to happen to SC unless they can show that the USC coaches knew about it... which i guarantee they didnt

 

this situation is different from bama, etc... b/c those were school-affiliated boosters. in this case, we have the word and 'alleged' tape of a guy finishing a 1-year prison sentence who is under investigation for extortion... so the tape, if anything, proves the extortion... hmm??

 

worst case scenario, reggie bush loses his heisman (oh well...)

 

worst worst case scenario (which wont happen anyways), the NCAA decides to forfeit all of SC's 2004 games... so SC is the AP and BCS champion w/ a record of 0-12 b/c the NCAA doesn't recognize CFB championships....

 

Your wrong. The term the NCAA uses is LACK OF INSTITUTIONAL CONTROL. The university doesnt have to have direct knowlegde. Make no mistake USC is going to take hits to schollies and lose a NC. This will happen no ifs buts etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest chrislw35
Just curious, I hear things like Bush could lose Heisman trophy, USC would lose the NC trophy, etc... Would the NCAA really force USC to lose scholarships? If Carroll or USC didn't know about the money can they be penalized for something a player did on his own? In order for USC to lose scholarships or get penalized wouldn't their have to be institutional neglect or lack of overshight? If Carroll didn't know about it could USC be penalized harsly.

 

A coach/staff doesnt have to have direct knowlegde. The rule is generalized for these cases exactly. The infraction will be labeled as Lack of Institutional Contol. They (USC) will definetly lose schollies for this infraction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You....guarantee!!???!!! the SC coach's knew nothing about their STAR player or Pete Carroll didnt have any contact with Bush or his parentS!!!???!!!! Your living in fantasy land! How can you make a guarantee like that? Pete didnt wonder where Bush got the supposed car? Come on dude,come out of the clouds. USC is tarnished bad! I hope they strip them of everything and they get what they deserve! Its one thing to win legit its another to cheat and win! If by some slim chance and im talking razorbalde thin chance Carroll didnt know about any of this he would have to be the dumbest son of a bitch alive! Way to keep your players in check! Anyone seen bluechips lately!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, I hope USC gets nailed to the wall and loses scholarships. However, no one is going to walk up to the NCAA investigators and say we knew about it. I am sure the USC coaches can see Bush's brand new car before and after practice, but I am not sure if they can make the leap to Carroll had direct and initimate knowledge of it.

 

On ESPN and Yahoo their is talk about a tape between an agent and Bush. I don't hear stuff about Carroll saying, "Gee, Reggie that really sounds like a great deal, go for it!". In the past, I have heard of stuff where assistant coaches pay under the table to players and the school got nailed. I have also heard of boosters who belong to a university booster club getting out of hand and the school got nailed.

 

To nail a school like USC would require an assistant coach or Carroll literally introducing the agent to Bush, etc...

 

Who knows, maybe more will come out?

 

I saw the earlier post about "Lack Of Institutional Control" which can be a broad interpretation so maybe it will be possible. Finally, I have heard of schools pre-empting the NCAA with scholarships limits before the NCAA makes a decision. So maybe, not likely that USC may penalize itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm torn on what I think will happen with this. Part of me says they'll skate free because USC is such a big program.

 

But at the same time, because it's such a high-profile program and Reggie Bush is such a high-profile player, I wonder if the NCAA will set an example with the Trojans.

 

My personal thought is that with all the people Carroll apparently had walking through that locker room according to Wetzel's first article, he knew something was going on. He's way to hands on to not know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest fighton2007

i'm sorry if the word "guarantee" offends you so much... all i'm trying to say is that the coaches make an effort to warn players (holding seminars / presentations in the beginning of the year, etc) from this type of stuff... i know a few players on the team and i believe them when they say that there is no way the coaches knew about this, if it indeed is true...

 

as for the "lack of institutional control", there is no way any program is expected to police the family of every player on the team... let's be realistic...

 

as far as "cheating"... reggie didnt come to USC b/c of these alleged payments, nor did the extra benefits make him any faster, stronger, etc...

if anything, it made reggie more inclined to leave early for the NFL draft.

 

FYI - reggie lived on campus and biked to practice every day.. the notion of these alleged benefits being obvious to coaches is wrong

Link to comment
Share on other sites

as far as "cheating"... reggie didnt come to USC b/c of these alleged payments, nor did the extra benefits make him any faster, stronger, etc...

 

FYI - reggie lived on campus and biked to practice every day, and that is a fact

 

You're right, and that is why I could see them getting off clean. Bush was already at USC and by all accounts so far he was the only player involved in this.

 

But you've got to believe Carroll had some knowledge of what was going on.

 

And it's not about where Reggie lived, it's about where his mom and step-dad lived.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest chrislw35
i'm sorry if the word "guarantee" offends you so much... all i'm trying to say is that the coaches make an effort to warn players (holding seminars / presentations in the beginning of the year, etc) from this type of stuff... i know a few players on the team and i believe them when they say that there is no way the coaches knew about this, if it indeed is true...

 

as for the "lack of institutional control", there is no way any program is expected to police the family of every player on the team... let's be realistic...

 

as far as "cheating"... reggie didnt come to USC b/c of these alleged payments, nor did the extra benefits make him any faster, stronger, etc...

 

FYI - reggie lived on campus and biked to practice every day, and that is a fact

 

see NCAA BYLAW12.1.1 It is general for this exact reason. It clearly states The president of the institution is responsible for conduct of any athlete(SEE Athletes family in bylaws, one in the same) or administrator. That is where the buck stops. If the pres. knows or doesnt know. IT doesnt matter. Especially after the Leinhart and Jarrett deal, they will definetly have a case for lack of institutional control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... this situation is different from bama, etc... b/c those were school-affiliated boosters. in this case, we have the word and 'alleged' tape of a guy finishing a 1-year prison sentence who is under investigation for extortion... so the tape, if anything, proves the extortion... hmm??

 

worst case scenario, reggie bush loses his heisman (oh well...)

 

worst worst case scenario (which wont happen anyways), the NCAA decides to forfeit all of SC's 2004 games... so SC is the AP and BCS champion w/ a record of 0-12 b/c the NCAA doesn't recognize CFB championships....

 

The Albert Means Incident with Bama did involve boosters. The previous incident involved the use of an ineligible player, one who had a "contractural" arrangement with a sports agent. Bama forfeited a season worth of wins for playing the ineligible player. They were punished further for a lack of institutional control over the University's investigation into that player's eligibility.

 

Alabama's football program was placed on three years' probation in 1995. All-America defensive back Antonio Langham admitted signing with a sports agent the morning after the Tide gained the national title with a Sugar Bowl win over Miami but returned to play his senior season.

 

Alabama would later win an appeal, getting one of the three years of probation lifted and nine of 26 scholarships restored.

 

 

Curiously wasn't USC found guilty of a lack of institutional control in 2001?

 

IF Bush loses his Heisman for being ineligible why would USC not have to forfeit games for using an ineligible player?

 

Sanctions for lack of institutional control if levied would be a further issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just finished reading the Yahoo Sports story about Bush and the allegations. Pretty serious stuff. In the article it talks about agents being in the lockerroom, practice, etc... One paragraph implies assistant coaches knew about agents, Bush, payoffs.... Finally, the article talks about the agent worked through the USC compliance office to get players internships as his company.

 

If any of these allegations are true then this indicates more direct involvement by coaches and the school itself. I can see more clearly "Lack Of Institutional Control".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest fighton2007

look.. i understand that this is a broad, discretionary provision, but do you really believe that the school is responsible for everything that happens to every single family member of every player?

 

if ND's 3rd string LBer receives a 50% discount on dinner at restaurant b/c the owner is a ND fan, that is an NCAA violation. the NCAA knows how slippery the slope is here and the only sanctions they have imposed in the past have been in situations where the school egregiously and evidently played a significant part (i.e. alabama, michigan bball, etc)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest chrislw35
i'm sorry if the word "guarantee" offends you so much... all i'm trying to say is that the coaches make an effort to warn players (holding seminars / presentations in the beginning of the year, etc) from this type of stuff... i know a few players on the team and i believe them when they say that there is no way the coaches knew about this, if it indeed is true...

 

as for the "lack of institutional control", there is no way any program is expected to police the family of every player on the team... let's be realistic...

 

as far as "cheating"... reggie didnt come to USC b/c of these alleged payments, nor did the extra benefits make him any faster, stronger, etc...

 

FYI - reggie lived on campus and biked to practice every day, and that is a fact

 

see NCAA BYLAW12.1.1 It is general for this exact reason. It clearly states The president of the institution is responsible for conduct of any athlete(SEE Athletes family in bylaws, one in the same) or administrator. That is where the buck stops. If the pres. knows or doesnt know. IT doesnt matter. Especially after the Leinhart and Jarrett deal, they will definetly have a case for lack of institutional control.

 

actually it is 2.1.2 i believe sorry i am getting tired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest fighton2007

yah.. i'm done too.. let's wait til all the facts surface.. i mean, the yahoo story uses a grand jury testimony as one of its sources, which is illegal in its own way

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...