SMU was soooooooooooo ahead of the curve on this one. If we had just waited another 30 years - everything we did would have been okay!

Pay da man his money!

(09-11-2013 08:19 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 07:40 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 07:28 PM)orangefan Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 05:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 04:29 PM)BewareThePhog Wrote:  There's a distinction between recruiting players to agents and recruiting players to schools. Nevertheless, I'm sure that the folks in Stillwater will appreciate even a little attention going elsewhere.

You beat me to it Phog. The maneuvers by agents have always been done behind the supervision of head coaches, assistants, and school officials. Alabama, Mississippi State, and Tennessee are guilty of nothing here. It's their players and the agent who are dirty. The Oklahoma State issue however is totally on the doorstep of the school and its officials. But so then was Ohio State's mess under Tressel, and Miami's under several coaches, (Golden withheld from Blame). In my opinion if the other two weren't hammered Oklahoma State won't be either.

The school gets hammered for lack of institutional control. Reggie Bush's money was from an agent, similar situation. The NCAA holds the school accountable for not keeping these guys away from their players.

No it's still a bit different. U.S.C. had knowledge of Bush's perks. I'm not sure that institutional knowledge is clear here. There are no parents in a swank apartment, no car, etc. So far it just appears to be money wired to personal accounts.

Yeah, I doubt anything happens as the $EC has mastered the nuances around subverting the NCAA rules.

OK. So a player calls an agent off campus on a cell phone and meets him for payment off campus. How in the hell is the university supposed to monitor this? Your statement is ridiculous. This is not like the OSU issue, where the school may be directly involved.

Actually SMU was the canary that said you can't take this stuff too seriously. Major programs looked at the results of the death penalty and tacitly eliminated that particular punishment from the NCAA rulebook.

(09-12-2013 11:00 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  The USC case showed that a school doesn't necessarily have to know what is going on for there to be a violation. The SA allegedly took money from an agent or an agent's representative while still being an SA, which is a violation of bylaw 12.3.1.2, meaning the SA is ineligible.

The mitigating factor for any other school is that you won't be hit as hard as USC unless you're a group of arrogant jerks in your dealings with the NCAA.

(09-12-2013 12:44 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  Actually SMU was the canary that said you can't take this stuff too seriously. Major programs looked at the results of the death penalty and tacitly eliminated that particular punishment from the NCAA rulebook.

Since the death penalty and TV bans (too much money involved in the TV contracts and you penalize the opponent) are off the table, I think the following would be effective and should be added to the arsenal for big offenders.

A ban on home or neutral site OOC games

-because these big schools can make $5mm+ in revenue just for the ticket sales for a home game, it would be a huge fine to miss 3 OOC home games and would make the people running these universities pay more attention to what their athletic departments are doing.

-It would also, in effect, be a big financial hit to the economy where the university is located if they lost home games, so it would give the fans, local law enforcement, etc. reason to stop looking the other way and condoning their school's cheating.

-Since conference are so big that schedules are unbalanced, unlike other penalties this would not affect conference races (for example, if PSU tanks because of their scholarship limits, the B1G West division teams that have PSU on the schedule have an advantage over the B1G West teams that don't).