(09-17-2020 09:56 AM)bullet Wrote: (09-17-2020 09:36 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote: (09-16-2020 11:14 PM)jedclampett Wrote: (09-16-2020 09:26 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote: (09-16-2020 08:17 PM)jedclampett Wrote: What I would hope, in a world where everyday people want to discourage cheating of that magnitude, would be that their program would go through a decade without top notch recruiting. Truthfully, since they violated recruiting rules for a decade, I think that justice would have been served the NCAA should have put some sort of limits on their recruiting for another decade.
You seem to feel pretty strongly about UConn. What say you about being in a conference with SMU, the continued leader in NCAA All-Time in infractions? Or Memphis, a top-10 program in infractions? Both have those programs have had seasons eliminated, postseason bans, probation periods that have occurred across several decades.
What would have the AAC have received in TV money without UConn? Without UConn the (then) AAC was literally no different than C-USA with Temple. The $1.7 million received would have been like a pot of gold had they not been in that grouping. And, without UConn, the AAC doesn't get to say it has a $1 billion TV deal.
AAC fans holding a grudge against UConn is nothing more than sour grapes. The AAC programs increased their brand values and associations thanks to a relationship with UConn. Similarly, UConn used the war chest exit fess to temporarily sustain pre-AAC spending and costs as a power conference program. Both benefited from the other in the near and long run.
The point that was raised about Ohio State, Penn State, and UConn not receiving anything approaching sufficiently proportional sanctions to dissuade future violations would apply, equally to any of the other schools that have violated the NCAA rules and have gotten away with little more than a mild slap or "tap" on the wrist.
Indeed, their administrators might well have walked away from such absurdly mild sanctions, humming the tune "It hurts so good."
Data printed below illustrate that NCAA violations have been so rampant among the P5 universities that the sanctions applied with the intention of reducing the amount of violations in the future have been totally ineffective. At this point, the NCAA has been completely feckless in trying to rein in the recurrent violations by the P5 universities.
By wantonly flouting the NCAA rules, the P5 universities have made it clear that they are not only richer and more powerful, but that they are also shameless and indifferent about being caught, repeateadly for tolerating severe violations of rules developed to promote good sportsmanship and a level playing field for all teams.
Despite having all of the remarkable privileges that their A5 (autonomy) status provides, the P5 schools have been several times more likely than the non-P5 schools to commit verifiable NCAA rules violation in the past decade (see data below).
Although a much smaller percentage of non-P5 schools have committed such violations since 2000, perhaps the time has come to label the P5 as not only being the "autonomous" (A5) and the "powers" (P5), but also as the "cheaters" (C5).
According to a 2016 report published at insidehighered.com:
"More than half the members of the Power Five conferences committed major violations of National Collegiate Athletic Association rules in the last decade, an Inside Higher Ed analysis shows."
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016...ast-decade
Moreover, the data in the article indicate that more than 3/4 of the P5 schools were sanctioned for major NCAA rules violations between 2000 and 2016:
"Inside Higher Ed reviews of NCAA data found that 54 institutions in the FBS (or Division I-A, as it used to be called) were guilty of major violations in the 2000s..."
In percentage terms, 83% of the P5 schools were sanctioned/punished for major violations by the NCAA between 2000 and 2016.
Interestingly, only 19% of the non-P5 D1 Colleges and Universities were sanctioned by the NCAA between 2006 and 2016, according to data reported in the article.[/b]
The article reports that all 14 (100%) Big 10 schools and 8 (80%) of the Big 12 schools - - including Oklahoma and Ohio State (each sanctioned for three different sets or types of major violations) - - were found to have committed the most NCAA violations between 2006 and 2016.
Number of P5 schools punished by the NCAA by conference since 2006:
Big 10: 14 schools (100%; documented in NCAA database)
Big 12: 8 schools (80%; documented in NCAA database)
PAC 12: 6 schools (50%; documented in NCAA database)
SEC: 7 schools (50%; documented in NCAA database)
ACC: 7 schools (The conference total from 2006 to 2016 is not specified in the article, but ACC schools that been sanctioned since 2000 have included: FSU, GT, Louisville, Miami, Pitt, Syracuse, and UNC).
The sum total is 48 P5 schools, indicates that 73.8% of the P5 universities have been sanctioned/punished by the NCAA for violations by the NCAA since 2006.
The ratio of sanctioned P5 schools to sanctioned non-P5 D1 schools between 2006 and 2016 (including reports that there were 7 sanctioned AAC schools) is:
P5 schools: 83%
Non-P5 D1 schools: 19%
83%/19% = 4.37
Summary:
The percentage of P5 schools that were sanctioned for major NCAA rules violations was four times greater than the corresponding percentage of non-P5 D1 schools.
Temple was busted in 2007 for unethical conduct and impermissible financial aid. UCF has been busted twice violations in the past decade. In 2010, it was impermissible calls and text messaging. Then again, in 2012, it was lack of institutional control, failure to monitor and improper recruiting. In 2009, Memphis was busted for unethical conduct, improper recruiting and extra benefits (and this article was from 2016, so it doesn't even reference the entire Wiseman fiasco). SMU was busted twice in 2011 and 2015 for impermissible texts, academic fraud and unethical conduct. Cincinnati was busted in 2007 for impermissible recruiting calls. East Carolina was busted in 2011 for academic fraud. Last year, Houston had academic misconduct and was put on probation too. Over half of the AAC has been found with major violations in the past two decades (as referenced by this article). Beyond that, SMU had the death penalty, Tulane had a major point shaving scandal, Memphis had major violations in the 1980's.
Again, you seem to be selectively highlighting the P5, or A5, as you call it, while disregarding the known "cheating" occurrences from within your own conference.
If anything, the AAC programs, historically, cheat just as much as the P5, so they are - in this regard - very much a power conference.
SMU and Wichita St. are on the list of all time top cheaters. And when you talk about cheaters, most people think of Memphis, in fairness, maybe simply because their best moments have been tainted.
So, you accuse me of bloviating and then proceed to bloviate even more "eloquently" on the topic than I ! ? !
Note this - - I did not make any accusations about the teams that you root for. Even now, I neither care or know those details. You're the one who decided to take the low road by making it personal.
I only focused on the P5 teams because I was so astonished to learn that 80% of the P5 teams have committed major NCAA violations since 2000, while only 20% of the non-Pt teams have done so.
Perhaps you didn't notice the following paragraph, but I endorsed the idea that all schools that violate the NCAA rules should receive proportional punishment/sanctions, no matter which conference they're members of. I even included an AAC member, UConn, in that group.
The point that was raised about Ohio State, Penn State, and UConn not receiving anything approaching sufficiently proportional sanctions to dissuade future violations would apply, equally to any of the other schools that have violated the NCAA rules and have gotten away with little more than a mild slap or "tap" on the wrist.
I may be wrong, but you seem to have a vendetta out for the AAC, since you have argued that the percentage of AAC schools with major violations since 2000 is the same as the Big Ten's (100%). That wasn't my understanding, and the article that I cited seemed to suggest that the AAC might have been more similar to the SEC in that regard.
As a fan of an AAC team, I'm certainly not going to blindly take your word for it that every single AAC team has been punished for "major" NCAA violations since 2000. Some that you listed may be considered "secondary" violations, such as those that schools such as Duke and VT made and self-reported to the NCAA with no sanctions.
They say that the NCAA rules are complex enough, like golf, that it's easier than it should be to make unintentional or "secondary" violations. In such cases, when the school discovers and reports it, itself, or owns up to secondary violations quickly enough, the NCAA tends to accept self-imposed corrective actions. Although you implied that they were all major violations by using the term "busted" in every case, I gather that some of those AAC schools were on the list of schools (like Duke and VT) that committed secondary oversights, took corrective actions, and weren't depicted as having committed major NCAA violations.
While we're on the subject of the AAC, there were some apparent violations at Memphis when Calipari was coaching there, and SMU had some similar violations when Larry Brown was there. UConn's violations have already been dealt with at length. The rest, I am not familar with.
This is the first time that I've heard anyone accuse Wichita State of being "on the list of all time top cheaters." I've been following them since the 1970s, and have never heard anything about them committing "major NCAA violations." I hope it's not true, and since you didn't provide any links or citations to back up that claim, I won't take it at face value, for now.
By using a casual/slang term "busted" and not providing any supporting documentation or links to suggested that various AAC schools have committed major violations of the type that 80% of the P5 schools have been demonstrably punished for committing, you haven't made an even slightly convincing case. Documents, please. Links, please, if you expect people to believe these things, other than SMU, UConn, and Memphis, which are public knowledge.
BTW, wouldn't you agree that SMU's punishments have been "proportional?' Even you admit that they got the death penalty, which is about as severe a sanction as there is. I wouldn't have suggested that Ohio State had gotten away with multiple major offenses with just a tap on the wrist if the NCAA had instituted the death penalty against them, as they did to SMU.
When it comes to SMU, you kind of made my case for me. Just sayin'....
.
Having said these things, do you deny the point of the article, which is that - on average - the P5 conference schools have been four times as likely to have been punished for "major" NCAA rule violations as non-P5 schools have been?
If you are trying to deny that, you can look up the data source, which is linked in the article that I provided a link for. You, and anyone else who wants to, can check those numbers and see if they add up.
.
BTW, are you still trying to maintain that UConn should be on the list of NCAA "blue blood" BB schools?
.
This is an academic discussion, as far as I'm concerned. If your science is better than mine, I invite you to prove it.
Bye for now......
/
College Basketball Tiers
