Cheatin' in Recruiting

[King Crimson]

as i mentioned in the other thread, keep in mind this board is a spinoff of longtime hornfans.com posters. i've seen all this "the book about marcus dupree proves x and y and z" about "our rivals" in the guise of a honest self-admission, though a bit painful assessment that UT was "a little dirty". Passing here as the "objective fan's" answer to the perennially revisited hornfans.com historical view that "every one else cheats to keep up with Texas".

one could cite an even less obviously motivated and less sensational book (than the courtship of marcus dupree) to demonstrate the lack of institutional control at UT under Royal--Meat on the Hoof by former UT player Gary Shaw--though the author at bc.com is "certain" Royal was clean. so, take it for what it's worth.

the site is pretty humorous though, especially during the season.

[Left Seater]

A fan claiming their schools innocence?


There is little doubt in my mind though that Texas was much cleaner than those others in the SWC and throw OU in there too. Also don't forget that the SWC schools had academic standards that the Big 8 and SEC didn't have so certain players were off limits for them.

[King Crimson]

A fan claiming their schools innocence?


There is little doubt in my mind though that Texas was much cleaner than those others in the SWC and throw OU in there too. Also don't forget that the SWC schools had academic standards that the Big 8 and SEC didn't have so certain players were off limits for them.

if you mean me, i'm not claiming innocence just saying that citing one sensationalist piece of motivated print is hardly a "proof" in these matters. So, i offered another that says that Royal wasn't as "clean" as the original author wants to believe. i'm just saying that, no matter how entertaining it is (and a great bookmark for the season), this still a homer site at the end of the day. so to generalize about "cheating" from the particular perspective of a UT fan is a slippery slope.

Earl Campbell almost went to Oklahoma, does that necessarily mean that UT outbid him? No.

i knew Merv Johnson's son (longtime Switzer assistant and OU director of Football Ops) and Switzer's oldest son growing up...i'm fully aware of some of the stuff went down.

if anything, that's kind of a SWC homer post right there Lefty. So, we should all raise a beer to the mighty SWC. the academic meatgrinder! :D

my general perspective on all this is recruiting (and academic admissions for that matter) are *qualitatively different* than in the 60's, 70's, or 80's....that comparisons based on today's criteria is pretty hard to do.

[King Crimson]

[quote="Left Seater]so certain players were off limits for them.[/quote]

like black players. i'm not the one to write that chapter in CFB history but there is certainly an argument that can be made....i think that's more part of players who were "off-limits" than Billy Joe couldn't crank up that ACT to get into Texas or SMU so he went to LSU or Oklahoma. and that the two demographics coincide is part of the equation.

[Left Seater]

My roll eyes was in reference to the blog author. Of course most fans think their program is cleaner than most.

My point was that Texas was busted far less than their peers in the 60s and 70s. Doesn't mean they weren't cheating, but those who were busted we know for a facct were cheating. Huge difference between having penaties handed down and fans of a rival claiming someone else cheated.

As for the academic requirements of the SWC vs others I think it is very short sided to bring race into play. There were and still are plenty of kids from west Texas and East Texas that were white and good football players. They didn't know crap about school though as they were spending their time away from the football field working in the oil fields. The hard work made them better football players, but horrible students.

[TheJON]

[quote="Left Seater"]My roll eyes was in reference to the blog author. Of course most fans think their program is cleaner than most.quote]

I dunno about that. You'd have to be pretty stupid to be a USC fan and think your program is clean. Or a Tennessee fan, FSU fan, Miami fan, etc.....

[Left Seater]

Jon,

Are you charging FSU and Bowden rent? If you should cause they are in yoiur head 24/7. Hell, you mention them as much as Iowa.

[Killian]

I dunno about that. You'd have to be pretty stupid to be a USC fan and think your program is clean. Or a Tennessee fan, FSU fan, Miami fan, etc.....

Or an Iowa fan, Michigan fan, Notre Dame fan, etc....

Everyone cheats. Don't think indeference for your program on a national level means that your coaches don't cheat. They cheat more than some, less than others, but they cheat. It's like calling someone else a sinner.

[TheJON]

Lefty,

Come on, it's been like 2 years since I got over my obsession with Bowden. I've moved on to USC and Notre Dame now (though, i've always had a disturbing obsession with ND).

Killian,

Everyone cheats, but many do it in such minor ways that it really doesn't impact much. The difference between USC and others like them is their cheating actually impacts their program and gives them an unfair advantage. If you're going to use that sinner analogy than are you trying to tell me that it's no less wrong for someone to commit murder than say, steal a few pieces of Tear Jerkers from a candy store? Because when I was a kid I used to do that (not the murder part!). You're trying to tell me that I'm just as much of a sinner as OJ Simpson because, afterall, a sin is a sin, right??

[King Crimson]

As for the academic requirements of the SWC vs others I think it is very short sided to bring race into play.

i don't think it's short-sighted to consider race in terms of the composition of the SWC teams if the issue is 1. football in the southwest/mid-south and SWC in the 60's and into the 70's. and 2. how SWC fans try and account for the success of a team like Oklahoma or SEC teams poaching Texas blue chips preferring cheating or academics apparently. Switzer actively and successfully used the "race card" to recruit against the SWC and you never hear his former players say "i wanted to go to UT but i couldn't get in...so i went to OU". they say, "i felt really comfortable with Coach Switzer"--who had grown up with a black nanny/step-mother in a largely black community. I'm also not arguing that Switzer was any kind of real civil rights crusader...he just wanted to win football games.

i also don't think you can effectively sever the issue of "academic requirements" from one of race given the political/social climate of say, the late 60's. in fact, you could argue that "academic requirements" as such were a means whereby certain policies (or standing public opinion about race) were institutionalized and thereby made to appear legitimate.

i'm just playing devil's advocate some, Lefty. In truth, i've never seen anyone argue the academic stringency of the SWC before in terms of recruiting. and, as i mention above, i don't really see that as the same issue then as it is today.

[Left Seater]

So on the flip side then we could say that OU and other Big 8 teams were using "black" athletes to win games in the 60's when they might not otherwise make it into school without athletics?

Clearly OU changed their mind on this sometime after Barra left as OU sided with the Texas schools on the Prop 48 issue in the formation of the Big XII. That one issue almost prevented the Big XII from happening, but by OU going with the Texas schools and OSU following along with OU the power was shifted to the South.

All that said because I do think there was a difference between the SWC and Big 8 back then. I am always in favor of having academic standards for athletes and I think the NCAA should raise the requirements for D 1A today. Playing D1 football isn't a right, rather it should be a reward.

[TheJON]

Oops, I wasn't even thinking when I said that. Wasn't tying USC to murder just making a point. I would like to strike OJ Simpson's name from the record and replace it with Charles Manson.