USC penalties - 2 yr post-season ban

Home ▸ Archive ▸ College Sports ▸ USC penalties - 2 yr post-season ban
Writerbuckeye's avatar

Writerbuckeye

Senior Member

4,745 posts
Jun 11, 2010 11:46 AM
Back on topic...

Even though it wasn't mentioned in the report, there were other "perks" that came out during this time related to USC players that caused minor ripples. While they may not have been major violations, I'm sure the NCAA was aware of them and all of this contributed to a culture of excess -- and no doubt factored into the NCAA mindset when determining penalties.

Some of those things were the alleged meals at The Greek restaurant, the apartment for Duane Jarrett by someone who meets the definition of a booster, free drinks and VIP treatment for Leinart at LA clubs, pro bono criminal defense for players from a bigtime LA lawyer who happens to be an alumnus (not sure if that's a violation, but it sure has a lot of value and is directly related to whether a player is eligible to play).

Several of these were dismissed or treated as minor, but the NCAA is not prohibited from seeing the pattern.
Jun 11, 2010 11:46am
krambman's avatar

krambman

Senior Member

3,606 posts
Jun 11, 2010 12:01 PM
dwccrew;386701 wrote:I don't see it as current players being punished, but it's the program being punished. Current players are just unfortunetly caught in the crossfire.

That's a good point. I guess you could call them innocent bystanders or innocent casualties. The fact remains that they choose USC under the assumption that they would have the same ability as any other school to play in a bowl game. Now that isn't the case, so in the sense, they are being punished for the sins of those who came before. This is why I think the bowl ban should be delayed so that 17 and 18 year old kids can make fully informed decisions.
Jun 11, 2010 12:01pm
M

mella

Senior Member

647 posts
Jun 11, 2010 12:10 PM
The USC Programs that broke rules are being punished. The school is at fault for a lack of control/oversight. If the school did not want the current players to be the ones suffering then it should have done a better job monitoring its programs years ago. All of these schools are aware of the rules and USC got caught. Man up, take the punishment and move on.

On a side note, the ridiculous claim is the women's tennis team that is being punished for unauthorizeed use of a phone or something equally stupid.
Jun 11, 2010 12:10pm
thedynasty1998's avatar

thedynasty1998

Senior Member

6,844 posts
Jun 11, 2010 12:37 PM
Read that all juniors and seniors are able to transfer without sitting a year, I wonder if the floodgates open up for a mass exodus? I'm sure some of the guys on the depth chart like Mustain are leaving now. And I also said that schools can basically recruit these juniors and seniors. Makes things even more interesting.
Jun 11, 2010 12:37pm
Scarlet_Buckeye's avatar

Scarlet_Buckeye

Senior Member

5,264 posts
Jun 11, 2010 12:40 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/los-angeles/ncf/news/story?id=5275644

"Among juniors and seniors whom the transfer rule applies to are quarterback Mitch Mustain, running backs C.J. Gable and Marc Tyler, receiver David Ausberry, cornerback T.J. Bryant, tight end Blake Ayles, safety Drew McAllister and center Michael Reardon."

I wouldn't mind landing any of these guys, especially David Ausberry since we have a need at WR. I think we have a real chance at landing him too because OSU was one of his top choices coming out of h.s. What do you think? Think any of them will transfer (not necessarily to OSU, but in general)?
Jun 11, 2010 12:40pm
jordo212000's avatar

jordo212000

Senior Member

10,664 posts
Jun 11, 2010 12:41 PM
Man the transferring thing is huge. I think USC is going to be really hurting this coming season.
Jun 11, 2010 12:41pm
j_crazy's avatar

j_crazy

7 gram rocks. how i roll.

8,372 posts
Jun 11, 2010 12:43 PM
they're eligible, but will any of them do it? IMO the kids that go to USC don't care about winning, they care about going pro. Not playing in a bowl game will have little effect on that.
Jun 11, 2010 12:43pm
V

vball10set

paying it forward

24,795 posts
Jun 11, 2010 12:45 PM
thedynasty1998;386774 wrote:Read that all juniors and seniors are able to transfer without sitting a year, I wonder if the floodgates open up for a mass exodus? I'm sure some of the guys on the depth chart like Mustain are leaving now. And I also said that schools can basically recruit these juniors and seniors. Makes things even more interesting.

sorry if this has already been addressed,but how about incoming recruits who signed LOI's ?
Jun 11, 2010 12:45pm
Emmett Brown's avatar

Emmett Brown

Senior Member

478 posts
Jun 11, 2010 12:48 PM
Scarlet_Buckeye;386778 wrote:http://sports.espn.go.com/los-angeles/ncf/news/story?id=5275644

"Among juniors and seniors whom the transfer rule applies to are quarterback Mitch Mustain, running backs C.J. Gable and Marc Tyler, receiver David Ausberry, cornerback T.J. Bryant, tight end Blake Ayles, safety Drew McAllister and center Michael Reardon."

I wouldn't mind landing any of these guys, especially David Ausberry since we have a need at WR. I think we have a real chance at landing him too because OSU was one of his top choices coming out of h.s. What do you think? Think any of them will transfer (not necessarily to OSU, but in general)?


I would say Mustain is gone for sure, just don't know were to. Ausberry is from Columbus but went to school in CA.
Jun 11, 2010 12:48pm
SportsAndLady's avatar

SportsAndLady

Senior Member

35,632 posts
Jun 11, 2010 1:01 PM
I hope OSU lands Ausberry.
Jun 11, 2010 1:01pm
LJ's avatar

LJ

Senior Member

16,351 posts
Jun 11, 2010 1:01 PM
Yeah, the only one I would put cash on transferring is Mustain.
Jun 11, 2010 1:01pm
jordo212000's avatar

jordo212000

Senior Member

10,664 posts
Jun 11, 2010 1:06 PM
vball10set;386787 wrote:sorry if this has already been addressed,but how about incoming recruits who signed LOI's ?

Just applies to juniors and seniors
Jun 11, 2010 1:06pm
Leonardo's avatar

Leonardo

Senior Member

4,986 posts
Jun 11, 2010 1:17 PM
vball10set;386787 wrote:sorry if this has already been addressed,but how about incoming recruits who signed LOI's ?

As far as I understand it, they (along with sophomores) are allowed to apply for transfer and it's at USC's discretion if they can transfer. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
Jun 11, 2010 1:17pm
SportsAndLady's avatar

SportsAndLady

Senior Member

35,632 posts
Jun 11, 2010 1:20 PM
Leonardo;386831 wrote:As far as I understand it, they (along with sophomores) are allowed to apply for transfer and it's at USC's discretion if they can transfer. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

Well that's the rule, regardless of what is happening with the penalties going on. A player CAN get out of his LOI, but it is up to the university to relieve them of their contract...which happens less than 1% of the time.

I could see an institution letting a recruit out of their LOI if they were dealing with all these penalties, but I doubt USC actually does something nice like that...
Jun 11, 2010 1:20pm
thedynasty1998's avatar

thedynasty1998

Senior Member

6,844 posts
Jun 11, 2010 1:43 PM
Another thing to factor into the transfers is the fact that USC has to cut their scholarships by 10. I would imagine that Kiffin is scrapping the next two years, so he would want to bring in as many freshman as he can so that when they are bowl eligible again, he has plenty of guys with experience returning. Plus, he didn't necessarily recruit these junior and seniors, so he probably doesn't feel any loyalty towards them. I look for at least around 12-15 guys to transfer out.
Jun 11, 2010 1:43pm
S

sjmvsfscs08

Senior Member

2,963 posts
Jun 11, 2010 1:51 PM
12-15?!

I'll believe it when I see it.
Jun 11, 2010 1:51pm
E

enigmaax

Senior Member

4,511 posts
Jun 11, 2010 5:20 PM
Writerbuckeye;386667 wrote:I'll do better than that. Here's a running review for Alabama, including names of players who have been "let go" because the school was over the number and had to pare it down by the time the fall deadline arrived.

http://oversigning.com/testing/index.php/tag/alabama/

So according to this list, there were two scholarships that were not renewed but those players had graduated? Everyone else transferred (their decision), didn't qualify (academics), received some other type of scholarship, or were in trouble. Am I missing something?
Jun 11, 2010 5:20pm
C

centralbucksfan

Senior Member

5,111 posts
Jun 11, 2010 5:29 PM
Lack of instituational control. The worst the NCAA can slap on you. Whats ironic, is they found out what many common fans thought...it was as bad as it looked from the outside, maybe worse.

And NO, I don't feel for those players caught in the middle of this. They CHOSE to BUY into Petes bullshit, and Kiffin BS as well (Henderson!). They made a choice to go along on the ride. Like it or out, I have no reason but to believe its was very clear what these players were seeing and subjected to. I have no doubt things were done in the recruiting process as well.
Jun 11, 2010 5:29pm
dwccrew's avatar

dwccrew

Not Banned

7,817 posts
Jun 11, 2010 9:17 PM
j_crazy;386784 wrote:they're eligible, but will any of them do it? IMO the kids that go to USC don't care about winning, they care about going pro. Not playing in a bowl game will have little effect on that.

Playing in a bowl game has little effect? Playing in a bowl game you are guaranteed to be viewed nationwide. That is one of the few games that you gain national exposure on. It is important to where a player will end up in the draft. Some players could improve their draft stock significantly (or hurt it) by doing well in a bowl game.
Jun 11, 2010 9:17pm
Emmett Brown's avatar

Emmett Brown

Senior Member

478 posts
Jun 11, 2010 9:32 PM
dwccrew;387344 wrote:Playing in a bowl game has little effect? Playing in a bowl game you are guaranteed to be viewed nationwide. That is one of the few games that you gain national exposure on. It is important to where a player will end up in the draft. Some players could improve their draft stock significantly (or hurt it) by doing well in a bowl game.


Don't forget about the extra 15 or so practices that will be missed each year.
Jun 11, 2010 9:32pm
krambman's avatar

krambman

Senior Member

3,606 posts
Jun 11, 2010 9:35 PM
Leonardo;386831 wrote:As far as I understand it, they (along with sophomores) are allowed to apply for transfer and it's at USC's discretion if they can transfer. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

My understanding is than any player, whether a sophomore or senior still has to be released from their scholarship by the school. The only difference in this situation is that juniors and seniors won't have to sit out a year like they normally would (freshman and sophomores who transfer still would). Those seniors and juniors would still need to be released, and I've never heard of a player asking for a transfer and being denied.

Any player who has signed a letter of intent could ask to be released from their LOI and sign with another school without penalty. However, anyone who enrolled in the spring or who enrolled in summer classes would have to sit out a year if released. If they haven't enrolled yet then they could be released from their letter, sign with someone else, and play this year. Typically when a school receives sanctions like this they will let players out of the LOI.
Jun 11, 2010 9:35pm