Answer Saturday! (Part 2)

Q: CVjuan said:
Scott, How is Mike Garrett avoiding any of the fallout on this mess? As AD, he by definition "lost institutional control". How can the NCAA take anything SC does or say seriously so long as he still has his job. Seems to me he has to go, but where is the outrage from the rest of the Trojan administration...

A: Right now, it seems like USC's atttitude is that aspects of the case involving individuals not named Reggie Bush or O.J. Mayo are not valid and there are no punishments to be meted out. Maybe that changes later, say after the appeal process. Maybe the presidential change in August will cause something. But that remains to be seen.

Q: jm95 said:
Scott,

I know that there is a 75-scholarship total, and a 15-a year scholarship limit. USC loses about 25 players a year to graduation, early entry, medical retirement, transfer and other reasons. Wouldn't this lead to USC having only 50-60 scholarship football players in 3 years? Are there exceptions where USC can add more than 15 players a year?

A: Much depends on the number of transfers and medical redshirts (career is finished) during the penalty period, whether it is what the NCAA wants (30 scholarship reduction) or USC's appeal (15 scholarship reduction).
If USC can sign more mid-year players this year (and this year only), it will also give them a few scholarships more than the NCAA planned under its original penalty. And then another key issue will be walk-ons and whether USC can be creative with financial aid packages to lure some players for a couple years who could then be awarded scholarships.