Morning Buzz
As the NCAA Committee on Infractions decides USC's punishment, will it continue its recent trend of ``vacating'' victories as its primary form of penalty? The idea behind vacating wins is that it punishes those involved in the infractions (i.e. Reggie Bush) instead of hurting athletes like Matt Barkley who were not around during the violations.
Sounds logical. Alabama lost 21 victories between 2005-07 for using ineligible athletes as the penalty for major violations. But the Bush case received much more publicity than Alabama. So the question is whether vacating records would be enough? It's considered a progressive form of punishment, so will the NCAA ``go regressive'' when it decides USC's case? That's the key question right now.
Wolfie and many others are making the assumption that more publicity equals larger penalties. I do not buy that argument. The NCAA is more likely to punish based on the infractions. Publicity should not play a role. The Alabama case would appear to be much more significant because it involved multiple athletes. I think there were 30+ athletes involved. The SC case is at the individual level. It is a much different case.
Well, even if the famous "Bush push" photo will no longer remind USC fans of a dramatic victory over the Irish, we can always reminisce about the jersey Scott was rocking that day.
DallasTrojan is right. The penalties will be based on the infractions, which will be plainly listed for all to see. The "publicity" cuts both ways, and the NCAA's ruling will be heavily scrutinized. It will not serve their agenda to hand down penaltes which are on an extreme side of precedent.
Although your average redneck in Oklahoma, Alabama, and Louisianna isn't going to be satisfied with anything less than the death penalty, the overall audience is diverse and educated. Currently, USC's case is not well understood because the NCAA and USC are prohibited from discussing it, and unfounded speculation and accusations go unanswered. However, once the NCAA's report is released, the scale of the violations will be evident. The NCAA could face a backlash of criticism if it is determined that severity of USC's punishment is not justified by the nature of the violations. I understand that there is little sympathy for a school like USC, but people despise arbitrary justice and abuse of power. There is no tangible gain for the NCAA risk such a backlash...or a law suit from USC. "Middle of the road" penalties will best achieve the closure they seek.
That said, the basketball violations do open the door for "institutional control" and will provide the NCAA some wiggleroom to deal with the football program more harshly than they could justify based on Bush alone. This could bring scholarship limitations and bowl ban into play. From what I've read, the NCAA would need to find more than what has been alleged so far to issue a bowl ban (based on precedent). JMO.
Before all of you go off on your tangents, the question here first is whether Reggie or his family were guilty of any NCAA rules. We haven't gotten a decision on that yet. If, after all this hoopla they are infractions I hope the NCAA will not overuse it's power to make a point, realizing this was not a university infraction but a personal one. I agree with JAG, the NCAA will have to face a backlash.
Bottom line, the NCAA doesn't have a way to punish Reggie Bush. Vacating victories doesn't really affect him. About the only thing they can do is make a big stink about it and hope the Downtown Athletic Club takes his Heisman away from him.
Cue Charlie Bucket in 3... 2... 1...
"blah blah blah Southern Cal.... blah blah blah cheating, death penalty, Southern Cal, blah blah blah"...
Time to take your AZT and get ready to watch LOGO, Bucket...
Kool-Aid anyone?
talk about spaced-out Kool-Aiders in denial. do Southern Cal fans actually believe the NCAA is afraid of penalizing Southern Cal?
1) NCAA is much more concerned with preserving their image.
2) they smell blood in the water: Southern Cal coaches have bailed, the president is leaving and the AD is as good as gone...if they actually were "afraid of Southern Cal" then the time to strike is now more than ever while the rats are jumping ship. yeah.
the real issues is LOIC plain and simple and the two day grilling of McNair says it all. there will be loss of schollies, 1 yr bowl ban, and the Baby QB gets no TV for 1 week.
None of you know shit re what is going to happen. NCAA will do what it wants and then work backwards to justify it.
Paul,
With all due respect, nobody but Charlie is claiming to know what is going to happen. Wolf asked if "publicity" would be an important factor in determining the penalties. soem of us offered an opinion.
To your point, the NCAA can "do what it wants" within the confines of: 1. the facts, 2. it's bylaws and previously expressed policies, and 3. precedent rulings...which basically means it can't just do whatever it wants to and work backwards. If USC is denied due process or unjustifiably penalized, it has legal recourse. The NCAA cannot just make up infractions, bylaws, and precedent rulings. You should read a Committee on Infractions Report:
http://www.bhamweekly.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/alabamancaaprobationrelease.pdf
There is no mention of "publicity" factoring into the penalties.
Paul is right on target. Nobody knows what will happen. NCAA will do what it does and justify its actions. Give Paul a medal for being the only one bright enough to hit the nail on the head.
Interesting reading the Alabama infractions report. It's my understanding that the report was made public since UofA is a public institution, but USC won't have to make their report public so we may not get to see it. Hopefully it will leak out. Some things that jump out:
1) These violations at UofA were pretty minor to me. Sounds like some people at the bookstore screwed up and the athletes took advantage. I don't see how the athletic dept. could have "reasonably" know about it or spotted it without going through records with a fine toothed comb. By that measure I'm sure every school would be violating somewhere.
2) That the $ of the violation seemed to be relevant. If that's tru and RB benefited by as much as reported, that can't be good.
3) That the committee explicitly says that self-reporting and cooperation lessen the penalty. I don't think it can be said that USC did either.
i happen to enjoy LOGO. how can that be wrong, when it feels so right?
Nobody quit their day job... USC has been policing itself since the issues of Bush arose - and before... Carroll ran a clean program, and bottom line is - so does USC... Their is a lot to prove here - and foremost is "Did USC have knowledge of...."
Dream on Chum Bucket - you can't change history... Reggie lived in L.A. during his career at USC...
BTW who is UCLA's QB this year?
uscharry,
You are incorrect about the NCAA report. ALL infraction committee reports are available on line in their infractions database.
https://web1.ncaa.org/LSDBi/exec/miSearch