Subject: CU's NCAA violations announced
Posted by: BuffsIn2007 on Thu Jun 21 2007 3:13:08 PM
Message:
They have to do with CU "undercharging" walk-ons for eating at the
training table. It happened over a period of five years. The NCAA
ruled it was "inadvertant." CU self-reported the problem.
Football had the most walk-ons, but other sports were involved, too.
The walk-ons ate at the training table for the same rate as regular
students, rather than the "accelerated" rate for athletes.
NCAA penalty: $100,000, payable by CU over two years to charity
related to hunger or homeless. And there is a "two-year probation"
that goes with it, with one scholarship lost for football for each
of the next three years.
I guess if it has to do with food the NCAA is all over it but houses and money aren't a big deal.
Colorado gets probation for this??
Moderators: 88BuckeyeGrad, Left Seater, buckeye_in_sc
-
Frank Beamer's growth
- Elwood
- Posts: 221
- Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 6:17 pm
- Location: Frankie's Face
- Contact:
so you have proof that USC was aware?
When Reggie was in 9th grade the NCAA changed their own rules taking the schools responsibility away if a player is given preferecial benefits from a professional scout who is not affiliated with the school. Its pretty black and white in the NCAA rulebook and has been since well before Reggie came to USC.
Now if the Administration or school affiliated Boosters gave Reggie a house and money to come to USC or play at USC, then hold USC responsible. If someone not affiliated with the school gives Reggie a house and money to leave USC and be represented by that person, the school is not responsible
When Reggie was in 9th grade the NCAA changed their own rules taking the schools responsibility away if a player is given preferecial benefits from a professional scout who is not affiliated with the school. Its pretty black and white in the NCAA rulebook and has been since well before Reggie came to USC.
Now if the Administration or school affiliated Boosters gave Reggie a house and money to come to USC or play at USC, then hold USC responsible. If someone not affiliated with the school gives Reggie a house and money to leave USC and be represented by that person, the school is not responsible
-
indyfrisco
- Pro Bonfire
- Posts: 11683
- Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 1:15 pm
Re: Colorado gets probation for this??
Better to get probation than having a glass dick up their ass.Frank Beamer's growth wrote:Colorado gets probation for this??
Goober McTuber wrote:One last post...
-
SunCoastSooner
- Reported Bible Thumper
- Posts: 6318
- Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 1:07 am
- Location: Destin, Florida
You have to be on drugs....SoCalTrjn wrote:The administration of USC gave Reggie Bush money and a house?
BSmack wrote:I can certainly infer from that blurb alone that you are self righteous, bible believing, likely a Baptist or Presbyterian...
Miryam wrote:but other than that, it's cool, man. you're a christer.
LTS TRN 2 wrote:Okay, Sunny, yer cards are on table as a flat-out Christer.
Did the NCAA change their rules regarding boosters and agents or not?Sudden Sam wrote:SoCal,
A major part of Alabama's being nailed was due to a booster (who didn't even attend Alabama) giving money to a high school coach to influence a player's decision on where to attend college.
Tell me the Reggie Bush mess ain't worse.
If youre not smart enough to realize that influencing a kid on where to go to school is much worse for a competitive balance among programs than influencing a player to leave school and go pro, theres no point in discussing it.
In Bamas case every other school that may have been recruiting that player was cheated by Bama boosters paying for him to be directed to Alabama.
In the alleged Bush "mess", Reggie was already at USC and the money was used by a scout to get him to leave USC, the only affect that had on other schools programs was that they wouldnt have to face Reggie his senior year
As for Colorados case, it is stupid for the NCAA to hurt an athletic department for feeding its athletes but the Pac 10 did not have training tables outside of that sports season until 5 or 6 years ago which meant that until football season started, players lived on Top Ramen and once the season ended they were back on the noodle diet while all the other conferences had training tables all year long. It wasnt until myles Brand left Oregon that the Pac schools started to ask for the training table change. I guess Brand is against food for athletes
the kid was already at the school and the money influenced him to leaveDinsdale wrote:If you're not smart enough to realize that ANY extra benefits from ANY source can influence that decision, then...SoCalTrjn wrote:[
If youre not smart enough to realize that influencing a kid on where to go to school
well, then you're Toejam.
OK Toejam... read carefully, since you're fucking stupid --
Bush recieved extra benefits while playing at USC.
Does it still escape you how that could influence recruiting? That a player scored extra cash/benefits because he played for USC?
Is this concept sinking in yet?
Is it sinking in that since the USC Athletic Department intentionally turned a blind eye to the situation, it stands to reason that potential recruits would expect the same "blind eye" treatment?
Are you really this fucking stupid, or are you trolling?
Wait... don't answer that.
Bush recieved extra benefits while playing at USC.
Does it still escape you how that could influence recruiting? That a player scored extra cash/benefits because he played for USC?
Is this concept sinking in yet?
Is it sinking in that since the USC Athletic Department intentionally turned a blind eye to the situation, it stands to reason that potential recruits would expect the same "blind eye" treatment?
Are you really this fucking stupid, or are you trolling?
Wait... don't answer that.
I got 99 problems but the 'vid ain't one
SoCalTrjn wrote:million dollar home?
757K, plus one year's worth of appreciation.
Close enough.
And there's that pesky little deal where they also gave Reggie's parents $100K. But Reggie knew nothing about where or why his parents were suddenly coming up with a bunch of money, right?
you have a link to the terms of their lease?
Uhm...they didn't pay any rent, you flaming fucking idiot...hence, the NCAA violation.
His POS parents told the homeowner they would pay him back when Reggie turned pro... pretty bold of them to speak for money that Reggie hadn't yet earned, WITHOUT EVEN TALKING TO HIM ABOUT IT FIRST.
Does that story sound just a wee bit fishy, moron?
I got 99 problems but the 'vid ain't one
was the owner of the house tied to USC?
was the Bushs lease reilant on Reggie going to or staying at USC?
do you have a link that shows what the terms of the lease were?
its all a moot point since the NCAA ammended their rules taking the responsibility for what agents not actying on behalf of the school do away from the school. USC did not benefit from the alleged balloon payment lease as Reggie was already at USC and had been for 2 years prior to his parents moving in to that house. If anything, USC can argue that they were hurt by the incident as they lost Reggies services for his senior year.
Now if you can prove that somebody had given the Bush's money while Reggie was still at Spring Valley and that money influenced reggie in to going to USC to play football, then there would be a violation on USC, an agent not acting on USCs behalf and allegedly giving a player who was already at USC money to leave USC, thats not a school violation according to the NCAAs own rules.
was the Bushs lease reilant on Reggie going to or staying at USC?
do you have a link that shows what the terms of the lease were?
its all a moot point since the NCAA ammended their rules taking the responsibility for what agents not actying on behalf of the school do away from the school. USC did not benefit from the alleged balloon payment lease as Reggie was already at USC and had been for 2 years prior to his parents moving in to that house. If anything, USC can argue that they were hurt by the incident as they lost Reggies services for his senior year.
Now if you can prove that somebody had given the Bush's money while Reggie was still at Spring Valley and that money influenced reggie in to going to USC to play football, then there would be a violation on USC, an agent not acting on USCs behalf and allegedly giving a player who was already at USC money to leave USC, thats not a school violation according to the NCAAs own rules.
I guess I'll accept your answer... since it's pretty well covered ground that you're a complete fucking idiot.
So, Reggie sporting extra "bling" in whatever form doesn't have any potential impact on recruiting?
That a USC player was offered extra financial benefits doesn't have potential to æffect recruiting?
Are you really this fucking stupid? Really?
And there's a NCAA rule specifically prohibiting what Reggie and family did...period. And while the investigations will get buried in he said/she said bullshit, and the NCAA/PAC won't persue it too far, since it would be a complete embarressment to have to retroactively forfiet all their games, it doesn't mean they aren't guilty.
"Institutional Control" involves activities of outside entities that provide benefits to the athletes that representatives of the school should have known about. "Should have known" is obviously subjective, but can be boiled down to whether the athletic department engaged in "due dilligence" to ensure no outside entities were providing extra benefits. Since there's quite a few eyewitness reports of Reggie pulling up to practice in a pimped-out new ride, any reasonable member of the staff should have further inquired as to where it came from.
They didn't.
USC didn't exercise a reasonable amount of "due dilligence," which constitutes a "lack of institutional control."
In case you're wondering, it's covered in the NCAA Constitution, Article 6, Section 4.
They're fucking guilty... but the NCAA has to much at stake financially to do anything about it.
USC gets to trash the NCAA rules and get away with it.
So, Reggie sporting extra "bling" in whatever form doesn't have any potential impact on recruiting?
That a USC player was offered extra financial benefits doesn't have potential to æffect recruiting?
Are you really this fucking stupid? Really?
And there's a NCAA rule specifically prohibiting what Reggie and family did...period. And while the investigations will get buried in he said/she said bullshit, and the NCAA/PAC won't persue it too far, since it would be a complete embarressment to have to retroactively forfiet all their games, it doesn't mean they aren't guilty.
"Institutional Control" involves activities of outside entities that provide benefits to the athletes that representatives of the school should have known about. "Should have known" is obviously subjective, but can be boiled down to whether the athletic department engaged in "due dilligence" to ensure no outside entities were providing extra benefits. Since there's quite a few eyewitness reports of Reggie pulling up to practice in a pimped-out new ride, any reasonable member of the staff should have further inquired as to where it came from.
They didn't.
USC didn't exercise a reasonable amount of "due dilligence," which constitutes a "lack of institutional control."
In case you're wondering, it's covered in the NCAA Constitution, Article 6, Section 4.
They're fucking guilty... but the NCAA has to much at stake financially to do anything about it.
USC gets to trash the NCAA rules and get away with it.
I got 99 problems but the 'vid ain't one
Article 12.1.1 -- An institution is responsible for notifying the NCAA when it receives additional
information, or otherwise has cause to believe, that a prospective or transfer student-athlete’s amateur
status that has been previously certified has been jeopardized.
When a kid comes rolling into practice suddenly sporting a ride that he can't afford, the institution has an obligation to at least ask around about it. USC didn't. If they had, they would have had to report it to the NCAA. And if they had met the standard of due dilligence, they would have known.
Guilty.
Actually, Bush pretty much trashes much of Article 12.
And as much as Trojanfan wishes it were true, the Athletic Department can't put on blinders, and say ":we didn't know, so we're off the hook." Doesn't work that way. When they open practice doors to agents, anyone with enough brains to start their car and get to work in the morning would have reason to believe that agents were going to try and entice their star players...
And then lo and behold, one of those star players suddenly pulls up in a new vehicle.
Blind eye = lack of institutional control. Period.
Fuck, USC...if you're going to run your program in such a crooked manner, at least take a hint from tOSU's business model, and offer classes on how not to get caught.
information, or otherwise has cause to believe, that a prospective or transfer student-athlete’s amateur
status that has been previously certified has been jeopardized.
When a kid comes rolling into practice suddenly sporting a ride that he can't afford, the institution has an obligation to at least ask around about it. USC didn't. If they had, they would have had to report it to the NCAA. And if they had met the standard of due dilligence, they would have known.
Guilty.
Actually, Bush pretty much trashes much of Article 12.
And as much as Trojanfan wishes it were true, the Athletic Department can't put on blinders, and say ":we didn't know, so we're off the hook." Doesn't work that way. When they open practice doors to agents, anyone with enough brains to start their car and get to work in the morning would have reason to believe that agents were going to try and entice their star players...
And then lo and behold, one of those star players suddenly pulls up in a new vehicle.
Blind eye = lack of institutional control. Period.
Fuck, USC...if you're going to run your program in such a crooked manner, at least take a hint from tOSU's business model, and offer classes on how not to get caught.
I got 99 problems but the 'vid ain't one
13.2.1 General Regulation. An institution’s staff member or any representative of its athletics interests
shall not be involved, directly or indirectly, in making arrangements for or giving or offering to give
any financial aid or other benefits to the prospective student-athlete or the prospective student-athlete’s
relatives or friends, other than expressly permitted by NCAA regulations.
Once Michaels provided Bush with a vehicle, the USC athletic staff "should have known." When you let agents hang around your practice facility, it's due-dilligence to keep an eye out for any changes in your stars financial status...ohhhh, say a new ride, for example. If a star suddenly shows up sporting new bling, the institution "should have known."
Since USC "should have known" that Michaels was responsible for Reggie's new car(or they should have known someone was), Michaels then became a "representative of USC's athletic department," according to NCAA rules. This "representative" gave illegal financial compensation to the student-athlete's family.
Pretty fucking cut-and-dried, really. But again, the NCAA has too much to lose by enforcing their own rules, so don't hold your breath. It's humiliating to the NCAA that they let certain schools go this far outside of the rules, and it took media sources to bring it to light.
They'll probably skate on this one, but USC better have their head on a swivel for the next few years. USC isn't fooling anyone(except myopic USC fans) with their utter bullshit. The public wants blood, and they're eventually going to get it... not from this incident, but the NCAA will find one to give them a slap on the wrist for, just to say "see, we don't give the big money-making schools preferential treatment...SO THERE!"
It's really quite predictable.
shall not be involved, directly or indirectly, in making arrangements for or giving or offering to give
any financial aid or other benefits to the prospective student-athlete or the prospective student-athlete’s
relatives or friends, other than expressly permitted by NCAA regulations.
Once Michaels provided Bush with a vehicle, the USC athletic staff "should have known." When you let agents hang around your practice facility, it's due-dilligence to keep an eye out for any changes in your stars financial status...ohhhh, say a new ride, for example. If a star suddenly shows up sporting new bling, the institution "should have known."
Since USC "should have known" that Michaels was responsible for Reggie's new car(or they should have known someone was), Michaels then became a "representative of USC's athletic department," according to NCAA rules. This "representative" gave illegal financial compensation to the student-athlete's family.
Pretty fucking cut-and-dried, really. But again, the NCAA has too much to lose by enforcing their own rules, so don't hold your breath. It's humiliating to the NCAA that they let certain schools go this far outside of the rules, and it took media sources to bring it to light.
They'll probably skate on this one, but USC better have their head on a swivel for the next few years. USC isn't fooling anyone(except myopic USC fans) with their utter bullshit. The public wants blood, and they're eventually going to get it... not from this incident, but the NCAA will find one to give them a slap on the wrist for, just to say "see, we don't give the big money-making schools preferential treatment...SO THERE!"
It's really quite predictable.
I got 99 problems but the 'vid ain't one
