Answer Tuesday! (Part 7)

Scott

I don't think you have ANY understanding whatsoeever about the NCAA and how a school is punished or not punished. Why people ask you about this is beyond me.

Lets review:

Rhett Bomar was paid for work he did not do at a car dealership owned by a major Oklahoma DONOR.

Bush or his family were (allegedly) paid by an agent with NO connection to the university - this is a BIG difference between the two cases and would suggest that the punishment to USC would be LESS, nor more severe. In addition, they would have to be able to prove that USC knew about any wrongdoings and played Bush anyway, which will be exceedingly difficult to prove

The fact that the investigation has taken 5 years probably means that they don't have alot of damaging information. otherwise, why would it take 5 years.

And the NCAA, will not "make an example" out of SC by punishing them harsher than another school in the same situation

Why, you ask? because college football is a huge money maker and the NCAA would expect an appeal and probably a huge lawsuit from USC if they tried to "send a message" and sanction them above and beyond what would be handed down to another school. They are not dumb enough nor do they have the stomach for that type of fight

pdxtrojan20,
You are on point about SW and subject. Thank you. Absolutely lucid, lucid!!!!.

The agents had "no connection", I guess, so long as you don't include:

Hanging out in the locker room;

Hanging out on the sidelines during games;

Hanging out at practices.

It's also believed that Mcnair and Carroll knew about the relationship between Bush and New Era.

Maybe the NCAA will lower the boom, and maybe it won't. But don't pretend like the staff did not know what was going on.

The list of wrong doings is a lot longer than you think. The small amout of moneys SUC contributes to The NCAA is nothing. Thier moneys come from Basketball.

It's coming and it won't be pretty. There will not be any sueing. That's all talk. The apeal will be fruitless. They know it's going to be harsh and they will cry a little then move on.

@ Stu: alot of people have hung out at practice or have access to sidelines/locker room

But, thre question is, are they Donors to the school or acting in their own self-interests? And did USC KNOW about benefits Bush may have received?

You could argue that USC "should have known" about said benefits but might not be able to PROVE that they knew

Regardless, the punishment for something they "should have known" would be less severe than a punishment for something that can be proven they knew. hard to hammer a program for something as subjective as "should have known"

sanctions are coming, I don't think they will be severe, but even if they are, big deal. $c will be down for a year or two and then be right back in the mix again, as long as the coaches are able to get them there.

bottom line is the sanctions will have a short term negative effect

It is amazing what haters U¢LA fans are! Can't win at football, basketball team sucks, hmmmm what else can I cheer for?

pdx:

What USC is selling to its recruits is access to NFL riches. Other PAC 10 schools are selling their recruits on a mix of education and football. Hence the agents, extra NFL coaches, et al, surrounding the SC program. I doubt that any other program in the country has agents hanging out to the extent USC did.

I'm no NCCA rules lawyer, but I sincerely doubt that the a violation turns on proof of actual as opposed to constructive knowledge. In any case, I think there is substantial evidence of actual knowledge.

Its amazing to me when uninformed people like stu post as if they're talking facts. Lloyd lake or Michael Michaels have no record of ever being in usc's locker room or even at a practice. You are trying to use the mayo situation to argue against the bush case. The may situation was legit, and usc took action because guillory had access to the program. But the 2 fools that bush's stepdad was involved with worked out of SD and never even stepped foot on the usc campus. Lying about the situation doesn't accomplish anything.

Stew,

Let's just say we agree with the silly premise that Carroll and McNair knew Bush was involved with New Era and its con artists Lake and Michaels.

And let's say that they knew Bush's family was getting something they should not get. (I know this is sounding really stupid, but keep listening)

And let's say the Mike Garret and all the senior coaches at USC knew it too.

Here's the catch Stewie. It's stew isn't it?

WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD A COACH WITH A DREAM JOB AND A MULTI-MILLLION DOLLAR JOB RISK HIS BUTT TO HIDE THE DIRTY DEEDS?

If the NCAA had goods, they would have already nailed this shut. The only smoking gun will point to a stupid college kid and have-not parents who were duped by a couple con men.

Stew on that for a while stew. And let it simmer real good Stewie.

If SC is somehow punished for what Bush's parents did 200 miles away, Texas must be punished for allowing a functionally illiterate Vince Young to matriculate through school for four years. How many classes did he pass because someone wrote a paper for him or because a professor was asked to "let a playa play"? The NCAA needs to be even handed with any punishments they dish out, lest they be accused of being a bunch of schleprocks... oops, too late.

Stew - It is really clear that you are not an NCAA rules lawyer, or remotely anything like a lawyer.

For all the 'ruin trolls and mouth breathers who hang on Scott's every word and think he knows what he's talking about regarding the NCAA, read this insightful piece by Ted Miller from ESPN:

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac10/post/_/id/7008/a-contrarian-view-on-usc-and-the-ncaa

Secondhand Wolf, Baby Journalist:

We really should stop calling you Journalist. Blogger cut & paste hack is a more appropriate moniker. I am astounded that anyone --other than sUCLA Klingons and other simian SC Haters-- asks you anything, believing that you may actually have an answer.

I love the week-old tidbits from other papers, your cut&paste jobs from other blogs and the desperate way in which you post mindless blather just so that accurate critiques of your work get buried deep into your lousy blog.

Keep up the nice work.

Your pal FreeThinker

pdx:

Great link. Secondhand Wolf, Baby Journalist would write like that, only he can't. It requires thinking and research. SWBJ employs no facts, misspells nationally known names (Payton (sic) Manning) and mostly posts cut & pastes from other sources.

How this dude ever graduated from SC is beyond me.

In the Charles Woodson case, there were no charges, let alone sanctions, because the school was not involved and did not know. The facts with Reggie Bush case is similar. If the NCAA follows precedent, the sanctions on the football team may be minimal to tolerable.

However, I also know that one can not predict what the NCAA will do. We just don't know what evidence, if any, the NCAA has uncovered regarding USC's knowledge of the Reggie Bush situation, or the underlying issue of institutional control. In this age of instant media, one would think that something would have come out by now if USC had some knowledge. Even Tarnished Heisman did not really link anyone from USC.

The NCAA is a private entity. It thus does not have to afford due process rights to the accused like a public entity (administrative proceedings, criminal cases, etc.) It can rely on hearsay, double hearsay, and so on. Bush and Mayo aren't talking to the NCAA. Those accusing of them taking extra benefits are, for the most part. It does not have to provide the right of witness confrontation. It can rely on uncorroborated evidence if it so chooses. The NCAA is the police, prosecutor, judge and jury all wrapped up into one. These issues were long ago resolved in the NCAA's favor by the US Supreme Court in the Tarkanian case. If you are within its' jurisdiction, you are subject its wrath. A state or federal court will not hear any writ of mandamus from the NCAA's final ruling, unless the ruling is based on fraud, or is arbitrary and capricious. So long as there is a rational basis for the NCAA's ruling, a court will not interfere with the NCAA's jurisdiction in disciplining its own members. If the NCAA wants to make an example out of USC, then it can do so.

It doesn't seem that having agents around the program is enough to show lack of institutional control. Talking to an agent is not prohibited. Working for an agent is probably okay so long as it is legitimate pay for legitimate work. It is taking extra benefits from, or signing a contract with, an agent that is prohibited.

Hopefully, there is nothing more to the Bush story, and any sanctions will be minimal. But, we are talking about the NCAA. Hope for the best, but brace yourself for the worst.

dodger:

We'll see (I hope) whether Lake turned over the photo he said he has of him posing with Carrol in the locker room after a game. Maybe the other persons claiming Lake and Michaels had routine access to the program are also lying. Maybe, maybe not.

freethinker:

your rhetorical question is so mind crushingly stupid, i cannot believe you put it in caps. you ask why would pete not voluntarily disclose the stench in his program? probably because he thought that the risk of anyone finding out was small when compared to the certain damage that disclosure would do to his program. how was he going to sell his NFL pipeline spiel to recruits if he was ratting out the participants? what was he supposed to do, abandon the pipeline angle and try to sell the value of a trogan education to people who probably don't give a rat's ass about an education in the first place -- if they did, they would be going to Stanford, Cal, or UCLA (in that order).

Whatever the NCAA decision, uscmike is correct, there will be no Appeal.

Never be overly confident when dealing with a jury. And the NCAA is the jury in this situation.

Evidence in this parochial NCAA system can be scant, faint, or even practically non-existent, and still tip the scales of a decision, one way or the other.

The NCAA has been "on" this case for 5-years, so I am afraid it does not wish to lose face with a no-decision.

And, more importantly, (wink, wink), the NCAA may be forced to sanction SC because to do otherwise would cause massive suicide attempts by our ucla friends.

Or, on the other hand, to play off an old lawyer joke, "What do you have when there are 1000 bruins buried at the bottom of the ocean?-- A good start."

This is the group that will be deciding USC's fate...

NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions:

(Chair) Paul T. Dee, AD - University of Miami (Florida)
Britton Banowsky, Commissioner - Conference USA
Melissa L. Conboy, Deputy AD - University of Notre Dame
James O'Fallon, University of Oregon
Eleanor W. Myers, Temple University
Rodney J. Uphoff, University of Missouri
Dennis E. Thomas, Commissioner - Mid-Eastern Athletic Conf.
Brian Halloran, Attorney, Independent
John Black, Attorney, Independent
Roscoe Howard, Independent

Finally some actual information! thank you, JDStar. I've been wondering when Wolfe and his fellow 'journalists' were going to get off their collective duffs and write a thoughtful analytical piece on who the commissioners are, what evidence they will see, what SC will present and how this is likely to go. I guess you can say having the ADs from other schools cuts both ways: perhaps they'd love to knock SC down a few pegs but do they want to throw stones from their glass houses and set a bad precedent that could bite them when their turn in the docket arrives? I'd be interested to know the background and specialties of the independents.

don't worry guys, i tracked down that miserable Domer on the infractions committee, Melissa "Missy" Conboy at the Notre Dame Athletics Dept. i am drafting a pointed email to her on our behalf, making sure she understands that any bias against Southern Cal will certainly NOT be tolerated. i will also advise that if she needs any help understanding football terms to consult with a man or possibly a lesbian. so take it easy boys, got it handled.

Such vitriol in here. And the spelling? My, my. I guess Spellcheck is beyond you geniuses. So relieved to see that "Bucket" is on top of this. You do that "lesbian" thing, boy, that'll clinch everything. Oh, and pdx, get ready to bend over. Keep the KY close.

Lawyer John - I disagree with the fact that there cannot be an appeal. Oklahoma had to vacate wins from 2005, appealed the decision and the wins were reinstated in 2008

Stu - even if Lake has a picture of himself with Carroll, that does not prove that Carroll KNEW that Lake was possibly paying Bush. In fact, you could argue the opposite: why would Carroll be dumb enough to pose for a picture with a guy he knew was paying his star running back?

Its a leap to say that just because Lake may have had access that the coaches definitively knew about wrongdoings, and it would be difficult to prove, if true

Question for fellow Trojans...........

If USC is penalized because of Bush and his parents, how should Bush be treated at SC? I want nothing to do with him. The sad fact is that he could have paid roughly $300K for this to go away a long time ago. I hope he loses his Heisman. I don't get how USC is responsible for knowing the housing arrangements of the parents of players? This would have a bigger impact if they took his Heisman away.

Thanks to all who have answered my question in absence of an answer from Wolf.

I ask Wolf not because I respect his answer (he rarely actually answers any of the questions asked, or if he does the answer is so biased as to be misleading), but because I hope those with some insight might provide meaningful information.

So inadvertently Wolf provides a service if you wade through the haters' drivel; one just has to ignore his answers.

It's hard for me to wish ill-will on Reggie, seeing as how fun it was to watch him all those years. Some of those plays he made (vs. Notre Dame, Fresno State, and UCLA in particular) were some of the greatest plays I've ever seen. Even if SC gets punished, it's hard for me to put the blame on his shoulders. I mean, who knows what kind of pressure his parents put on him to accept any deals with Lake, Michaels, et al. In fact, he was living in LA, so he didn't even benefit from the house - his parents did. If it comes out that he instigated or initiated the contact with those scoundrels I might have to change my mind, but the way I see it, his parents put undue pressure on him to "take care of his family" a year early and he was just trying not to let him down. I know that doesn't excuse his behavior, but if my parents would have put pressure on me like that when I was 20, I might have caved too. Remember, he was just a kid. You're supposed to look to your parents for guidance. You count on them to teach you right from wrong, and clearly they did a poor job of that. I think his mom and step dad should bear the brunt of Trojan anger, not necessarily Reggie.

But that's just my two cents.

PDX:

The Oklahoma appeal was internal to the NCAA. Whatever ruling is handed down by the infractions committee, the school has the right to appeal within the NCAA to the Infractions Appeal Committee. (USC will have the same option if it so chooses.) However, the ruling of the Infractions Appeal Committee is final within the NCAA. That is what occurred in the Oklahoma case. The Appeal Committee revoked the Infractions Committee's sanction of forfeiting wins in the 2005 season, but upheld the remainder of sanctions.

Once that final ruling is handed down, a court is not going to interfere without that ruling unless it is based on fraud, or is arbitrary or capricious.

TC: Forget the whole Lake-Michaels situation. How about the second biggest boneheaded play in Rose Bowl history, when he tried to pitch the ball in the Texas loss? (No. 1 is wrong-way Roy Regals of Cal.) I did find it interesting that Bush was kept on the sideline in the Super Bowl when the Saints were stopped on 3rd and 4th down near the goal line.

I look at Reggie Bush in a much different light than say Carson Palmer and Matt Leinart. You're right. Pay Lloyd Lake and be done with it. Bush has already paid Michaels. My hunch is that Lake is a convicted felon, and Reggie's legal team that they could defend the case on Lake's criminal record and, hence, supposed lack of credibility. Too much hubris, and not enough common sense. Bush should settle before undergoing his deposition. If he lies in his deposition, he is jeopardizing with his liberty. Pay the man!!

Lastly, I recall that any extra benefits received by Reggie Bush did not take place until after the win against Oklahoma in the 2005 Orange Bowl (BCS title game). Tarnished Heisman said as much. Thus, the 2004 undefeated season and Nat'l championship is not likely at risk. The 2005 season might be, however.

bRuin Trolls: There will be no death penalty. The NCAA's own website indicates that USC is not currently on probation. A school can only get the death penalty if it is a repeat offender. Your Schadenfreude is showing.

sureshot........maybe wishful thinking? I'm sorry, there is no way he didn't know about what his parents were doing. I just have no simpathy for him. He couldn't wait ONE year before collecting millions? The problem I have is that the player has no consequenses but the school gets punished. He was an adult, why not sue him for damaging the school? I know this will never happen, but I wouldn't be opposed to his #5 being taken down if he loses the Heisman.

I'm not saying he didn't know about it. Of course he knew about it. But he wasn't even living in the house. How was he even benefiting from the house? It was his parents who benefited.

It would take a lot of balls to tell your mom to continue living in whatever crappy apartment or house she was living in if she had an opportunity to be "moving on up to the Eastside" (or Northside, or whatever). I'm just saying, if Reggie was the one who initiated the contact and asked for things - I'll blame him. But if it was his parents who started asking around, talking about, "What can you give us if our son promises to sign with you?" then I'll blame the parents. And since the parents were the ones who got to live in the nice house, that's where the vitriol should be directed.

Sureshot - the allegations against Bush are not limited to his parents living in a house without paying rent. Lake alleges that he also provided money directly to Bush, including $18,000 to fix up his car, and over $100,000 in cash payments to Bush and his family. Lake is suing for about $290,000, only $54,000 of which is attributable to unpaid rent. Lake was smart enough to keep receipts, and he recorded conversations when things started turning sour.

Reggie has to take responsibility for his own actions. He already settled with Michaels. At worst, he may have to pay Lake a settlement or judgment, and perhaps lose the Heisman trophy. USC stands to lose much more. By not settling, he exposes USC to a lot more harm than himself.

I just hope he doesn't take the arrogant Roger Clemens route and deny taking money under oath, if he did, in fact, receive such money or benefits. That will cause him problems that money may not be able to fix.

I too will remember his great play on the field (Rose Bowl notwithstanding), but depending on the NCAA sanctions, he may also be remembered for how he screwed USC by taking extra benefits, and his ailure since then to make it go away when he had a chance.

oops...failure

uscmike........great points.

Stew --

The rhetorical question was meant to be "mind-crushingly" stupid. It was aimed at your reasoning skills. As for what Pete Carroll thinks, only he knows that. Anyone arrogany enough to believe they know what another person thinks ought to be tortured or forced to endure life named Stew.

Thinker:

You're excuse for posting something stupid is even more transparently ridiculous than your initial stupidity. Perhaps you're just sort of stupid? I mean, you did go to SC. Flame on, Trogan.

pdx:

I agree that a photo (if it exists) of Pete smiling with an agent in the locker room does not suggest Pete knew the specifics. It would show the program was out of control, though, as would McNair partying with these fellows. I was just responding to dodger who somehow has absolute knowledge that Lane and Michaels never even set foot on campus.

uscmike,

have you actually seen the receipts or personally heard the recordings?

Or are you just repeating what's been reported in the media by people who have not seen any receipts or personally heard any recordings.

Just because Lake claims something, does not make it true or accurate depiction of the facts.

Reggie Bush was interviewed by the NCAA late last summer before the NFL season began, and he still maintains that he did nothing wrong. So if he's lying to them he's lied to USC.

JDStar:

In my prior post, I already hedged on whether Reggie, in fact, took extra benefits. ("I just hope he doesn't take the arrogant Roger Clemens route and deny taking money under oath, if he did, in fact, receive such money or benefits.")

I read Tarnished Heisman. It left me with the impression that Bush and his family took the money. The book included transcriptions of the taped recordings. Of course, I don't know for a fact whether Reggie took the money. The NCAA has to prove it. But, by what standard? If it is preponderance of the evidence, then that is a fairly easy standard to overcome. The NCAA would just have to show it was more likely than not that he took extra benefits. Further, the NCAA can take Lake's statement as being true. Not much more is needed for the NCAA to find he took extra benefits (regardless of whether he did, in fact, take them).

The bigger issue is whether USC knew or should have known. So far, nothing has indicated that USC had the requisite intent to be punished. So, did Reggie and his family take the money? I'd say yes. Did USC know about it? I'd say no, which would merit much less sanctions against the school.