T1B

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/ ... ortCat=ncb" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=3389049" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Two words: Death Penalty.

Discuss...

the_ouskull

Alway nice to have a reset.

ttb: NCAA, U$C violations

the_ouskull wrote:Two words: Death Penalty.

No. Fucking. Chance.

BTW: Could someone explain to me how OJ Mayo getting money from an agent gives USC an unfair competitive advantage? I could see if the school, or boosters were making the payments as a quid pro quo for playing at USC. But Mayo getting money from a bunch of agents? Where's the fucking harm?

It harms every team that ISN'T doing the same thing. If he attended USC based on that agent's relationship with the school (which was firmly established during the Jeff Trepagnier era, apparently) then every single play he made all year long is tainted with dirty money.

Just because you don't get caught doesn't mean that you didn't break the law. Just because "nobody gets hurts" by his taking money from a booster doesn't make it any less of an NCAA violation. If he took money because of who he is, then he forfeits his amateur status, making him an ineligible player, making his team responsible for playing said player. Yeah, that IS an unfair competitive advantage.

the_ouskull

I believe BSmack must have been trolling. No one is that naïve/stupid.

BSmack wrote:BTW: Could someone explain to me how OJ Mayo getting money from an agent gives USC an unfair competitive advantage?

WHOA!

Weird.


You don't by chance coach a Pony League team and beat your charges into compliance sould they fail to perform well?


But since you're kind of an "outsider" to this whole college athletics thing, I'll let you in on a little internet secret...


Your words read "Where's the fucking harm?



Anyone with more than a minimum of passing interest in collegiate athletics reads them as "I'm so fucking clueless about NCAA sports, I probably should have kept a lid on it, since the entire WWW is now laughing at me."


This debate has been hashed out literally millions times, and dozens of times on this very site. Of those millions of dicussions, they all had one common trait -- the "where's the harm" crowd ended up looking fucking foolish.


I'm not trying to bust your chops here B (actually I am, but I just felt like using "bust your chops" in a sentence), but I'm going to tell you all you need to know about the subject, and hopefully can lend some insight into your soul-searching on the topic...


On this board, the "where's the harm" crowd consists of...


SoCalTrojan...


And now you.


Before we get into the ins and outs of D1 cheating, let's just take a little pause so you can think this through more clearly, and give you a little Monday morning leeway...


Forget the details. Forget what you see on the surface of the situation. Instead, focus on the idea that you're about to toss your hat into the ring of a slippery slope where SoCalFuckingTrojan is your lone ally.


I don't care if the subject is NCAA violations, exploitation of pubescent boys for personal egotistical gains, or whether or not water is wet...

If ToeJam is your lone support, one thing can be taken for granted as FACT...

you're in the wrong.


Or in math terms, if X + SHIT = YOU, then you should probably reconfigure some of the variables.


But after you've downed another cup of coffee and tought this through more thoroughly, if you need an explaination (which any person sporting an IQ over 60 shouldn't), I'll provide a brief one...


And sign the bottom with the name Marcus Allen.



But before we travel down that road, I implore you to do a search for "all posts by SoCalTrojan," and see if you want to spend your remaining time on the board barraged by lame resets that conclude with "Sin, ToeJam and BSmack."


I'm sure if you think it over, you'll drop the contrarian stupidity and come correct.


Consider this both sincere friendly advice and a warning. Because to be quite frank (Ty... whatever), a large chuck of the posters in the various college sports forums are going to have a field day at your expense. Actually, more like a "field year."

Don't say I never did anything for you.

well not too mention this would be the 2nd high profile USC athlete to potentially get extra benefits...

It was an honest question Dins. I'm not here comporting myself as an expert in all things NCAA related. I'm just trying to get an honest answer as to why, when an aspiring lawyer gets a job with a law firm while in college he's a go-getter but when a kid who aspires to play basketball for money takes money from an agent for playing basketball he's somehow corrupting the process. Spare me the hyperbole and just answer the question Claire.

BSmack wrote:It was an honest question Dins. I'm not here comporting myself as an expert in all things NCAA related. I'm just trying to get an honest answer as to why, when an aspiring lawyer gets a job with a law firm while in college he's a go-getter but when a kid who aspires to play basketball for money takes money from an agent for playing basketball he's somehow corrupting the process. Spare me the hyperbole and just answer the question Claire.

Is there an NCAA lawyer tournament I've been missing out on?

DUDE... I was sooooooo being cool. The "hyperbole" you speak of was sound advice, and your offense was so egregious, I just couldn't let you do it... you may suck donkey dick, but you're a solid solid golf guy, so I figured I owed you something.


And I'll reiterate -- If an issue, any issue, comes down to you and ToeJam on one side, and everybody else on the other, you've made a profound error in judgement and should rethink your mistake immediately.



But anyhoo... there's rules. The rules of Institutional Control was defined slightly better a few years ago. The rules are the rules, same for everybody (in theory, not in practice).

But to adress "where's the harm?" -- So, if USC turns a blind eye (AGAIN), and let agents ply the kids with money, cars, and bennies, allowing them to live large in an ameteur setting...

This doesn't create a recruiting advantage for USC?

Hello?

Does this even merit further discussion? The problem is pretty freaking obvious.

Dinsdale wrote:But to adress "where's the harm?" -- So, if USC turns a blind eye (AGAIN), and let agents ply the kids with money, cars, and bennies, allowing them to live large in an ameteur setting...

This doesn't create a recruiting advantage for USC?

It might were USC the only school turning a blind eye. Do you seriously think that's the case?

BSmack wrote:It might were USC the only school turning a blind eye. Do you seriously think that's the case?

It might when $C is the only school doing it, getting caught doing so, and nothing fucking happening to them.

Hey DeAndreshon, come play for us. You can get played, get paid and get laid. We are $C.

So, let's see...


You've tossed your hat in the ring with ToeJam


You've attempted to validate your SoCalTrojan-take with the venerable "Two wrongs make a right" defense.


Puh-leez.


But if anyone else not named BToeJamSmack wants to hash out possibly the most played-out discussion in the history of college sports internet boards, I'm game. We usually get some good jokes out of the deal.

http://www.sportsline.com/columns/story ... titialskip" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Article from 2006 on OJ, USC and Guillory.

'SC knew about this shit before he ever signed with them.

BSmack wrote:

Dinsdale wrote:But to adress "where's the harm?" -- So, if USC turns a blind eye (AGAIN), and let agents ply the kids with money, cars, and bennies, allowing them to live large in an ameteur setting...

This doesn't create a recruiting advantage for USC?

It might were USC the only school turning a blind eye. Do you seriously think that's the case?

I think it should be identified and prosecuted wherever it's found. And we've seen that happen at numerous other schools. Why should USC skate? Again.

Goober McTuber wrote:I think it should be identified and prosecuted wherever it's found. And we've seen that happen at numerous other schools. Why should USC skate? Again.

So what? Every school has the opportunity to turn the blind eye! Just because they choose not to do it does not mean $C should be punished for it!

Sin,
BSchmuck

JayDuck wrote:http://www.sportsline.com/columns/story ... titialskip

Article from 2006 on OJ, USC and Guillory.

'SC knew about this shit before he ever signed with them.

So what would have happened were SC to have passed on Mayo? Would he have been forced to play pickup ball for a year? Or would some other school have signed him?

Be real.

Goober McTuber wrote:Again.

That is the key word in the whole discussion.

"Again."

USC is in the midst of a shitstorm from Reggie Bush being involved in the EXACT SAME THING.

If USC didn't have a problem with it at tat time, you'd think they might impliment some institutional control after they were made aware of the problem to such a severe degree.

But the school as embraced a lack of institutional contorl as normal policy, even during an investigation into their lack of institutional control.


BSmack, if you're unfamiliar with the rules -- a school has to ake at least some resonable precautions to ensure their plaers aren't on the take, and meet eligibility requirements. This case is a slam dunk showing a complete disregard for the rules, to profit the university.


This second offense really does merit the Death Penalty, although it won't happen. And as a PAC10 honk, it pains me to say it.


And before you jump on me (or Jay, but he speaks for himself without my help)... yes, I realize an Oregon fan making such comments is standing in a glass house and throwing stones. Don't know if anyone else saw the article recently, and I don't even remember which media outlet it was, much less the columnist, but he listed Ohio State, USC, and Oregon as the "Big Three" cheaters... two with great success, the other with moderate success.

BSmack wrote:

JayDuck wrote:http://www.sportsline.com/columns/story ... titialskip

Article from 2006 on OJ, USC and Guillory.

'SC knew about this shit before he ever signed with them.

So what would have happened were SC to have passed on Mayo? Would he have been forced to play pickup ball for a year? Or would some other school have signed him?

Be real.

Oh, undoubtedly some other school would have signed him. And hopefully they would have gotten caught and made an example of.

I guess I was wrong. You weren’t trolling. You’re either naïve or stupid. Or both.

Goober McTuber wrote:Oh, undoubtedly some other school would have signed him.

BSmack just doesn't get it. And it's quite possible that you don't, either.

Welcome to the sad sad world of AAU hoops.


No, Goobs -- some other school wouldn't have signed him. They would never have that option.

Apparently, some people aren't familiar with th "runners" and other assorted sleazebags. They start buying off kids with athletic talent from bad homes as early as age 12.

Sounds like OJ was maybe 14 or 15 when he was purchased by USC's lackey. From that moment on, there was never a doubt where OJ was going to play college ball (if he played, which became inevitable a couple of years ago).


There's a wholelot more to it thn just a sleazy aent hangin around campus -- it's a massive, sleazy infrastructure. Those kids are sold into high-stakes prostitution at an early age.

1) Lend a sympathetic ear, and earn kid's trust

2) Earn his parents' trust

3) Talk him into attending the school whose boosters slide you cash under the table

4) Become his agent yourself, or steer him towards the agency that's reased you when he turns pro


It's a really scummy road to riches.

Dinsdale wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:Oh, undoubtedly some other school would have signed him.

BSmack just doesn't get it. And it's quite possible that you don't, either.

Welcome to the sad sad world of AAU hoops.


No, Goobs -- some other school wouldn't have signed him. They would never have that option.

Jesus Christ, Tediousdale, I was answering BSmack's hypothetical. You know, if USC collectively found God and turned away OJ MiracleWhip. Or if someone else came up with a lot more money. Yes I understand the whole sleazy world of boy wonders and leeches. For you to try lumping me in with BSmack, which in turn lumps me in with Toejam, is unconscionable.

Goober McTuber wrote:Jesus Christ, Tediousdale, I was answering BSmack's hypothetical. You know, if USC collectively found God and turned away OJ MiracleWhip. Or if someone else came up with a lot more money. Yes I understand the whole sleazy world of boy wonders and leeches. For you to try lumping me in with BSmack, which in turn lumps me in with Toejam, is unconscionable.

Would you rather be lumped in with Dinsdale?

I'm making no excuses for USC or anyone else involved in this affair. For all I care, they can all fall off the face of the earth. I just seems to me that if the NCAA were truly serious about promoting the concept of true student-athletes, they would have rules in place that would hinder schools from recruiting such obvious "one and done" players like Mayo AND they would ban schools from recruiting players with any ties to sneaker companies or the camps and leagues they sponsor. But we all know that's not the case. I mean Jesus H Christ, UK just extended a scholarship offer to a freakin EIGHTH GRADER. An eighth grader who was playing in a travel league game in Ohio. Now you tell me who's sponsoring a travel league that allows 8th grade kids the opportunity to play basketball all over the country? It sure as hell isn't the parents of these kids.

http://www.kentucky.com/276/story/401513.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Gullory had this kid under his belt before the 1 year rule came into effect. That's why they played it more cautiously by wiring money to Mayo's friends who in turn would get it to him somehow. It is practically slave trading except reparations get paid once kid goes pro.

Bush was in the same scenario and may have gotten away with it had he stuck with his runner up front. But no, he dumped the guy who staked him early on and got ratted out. Similar situation here with Mayo. Johnson was one of the posse and got shit on. Soon as he saw Mayo was going to cut him out, he blew the whistle.

Same story...hopefully different ending. With $C's basketball irrelevant, hopefully the fallout hits their football program too as it should. The NCAA can only look bad or really bad at this point. They look bad if they punish football and basketball because it should have been done sooner with the Bush case. They look really bad in any scenario where neither program gets busted, slap on the wrist or even worse if basketball gets sanctioned and football skates.

It's a no-win situation for the NCAA or $C. In just about any scenario, both have lost all credibility. They already did with Bush. It is only going to get worse with Mayo. Let's not forget the Jarrett shit too.

$C is running their program like UCLA did long ago. Difference being people are watching now, and the rules and penalties, should they be enforced, should fuck them up in the highest order.

BSmack wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:Jesus Christ, Tediousdale, I was answering BSmack's hypothetical. You know, if USC collectively found God and turned away OJ MiracleWhip. Or if someone else came up with a lot more money. Yes I understand the whole sleazy world of boy wonders and leeches. For you to try lumping me in with BSmack, which in turn lumps me in with Toejam, is unconscionable.

Would you rather be lumped in with Dinsdale?

I'm making no excuses for USC or anyone else involved in this affair. For all I care, they can all fall off the face of the earth. I just seems to me that if the NCAA were truly serious about promoting the concept of true student-athletes, they would have rules in place that would hinder schools from recruiting such obvious "one and done" players like Mayo

But you can’t ban players that you think are obviously one-and-done because that’s totally unfair and probably illegal. Look at the Florida kids that were obviously going pro after winning the championship. Oops, they decided to come back for another year.

The NCAA has plenty of rules. They just need to enforce them consistently. The original point you made was, “So what if an agent gave OJ Mayo a boatload of money.” There’s a violation of the rules there that needs to be addressed.

I'd rather not be lumped in with either of you.

Goober McTuber wrote:

BSmack wrote:
I'm making no excuses for USC or anyone else involved in this affair. For all I care, they can all fall off the face of the earth. I just seems to me that if the NCAA were truly serious about promoting the concept of true student-athletes, they would have rules in place that would hinder schools from recruiting such obvious "one and done" players like Mayo

But you can’t ban players that you think are obviously one-and-done because that’s totally unfair and probably illegal. Look at the Florida kids that were obviously going pro after winning the championship. Oops, they decided to come back for another year.

Yep, that could never possibly happen. Everybody was sure that Malik Hairston was a one and done player coming out of high school and he just graduated with a degree from Oregon. When the NCAA starts trying to actively prevent kids from getting an education we will see the NCAA quickly getting assfucked into oblivion.

There's no such thing as a sure thing. Mayo could have broken his leg off at the knee as a freshman and been "forced" to finish out his time at school, or like often happens, just shown up and realized he wasn't as good as he looked playing against high school kids.

If a school is going to knowingly take a chance on a high risk kid, the school should be punished when it blows up in their face.

Goober McTuber wrote:But you can’t ban players that you think are obviously one-and-done because that’s totally unfair and probably illegal. Look at the Florida kids that were obviously going pro after winning the championship. Oops, they decided to come back for another year.

What if the NCAA makes it so that when a player goes "one and done", his school loses that scholarship for the balance of the 4 years that said scholarship was intended? Or at least a couple of years. Maybe go back to the old rules where freshmen don't play? That way, a player who is all about the NBA and nothing else will either expose himself as an academic fraud and be booted or maybe decides to play a year in Europe instead of wasting the time of the American university system.

My point is that if the NCAA gave a rats ass about doing anything more than covering their hides, they could limit (note I said limit, not end) the the recruiting of "one and done" players.

The NCAA has plenty of rules. They just need to enforce them consistently. The original point you made was, “So what if an agent gave OJ Mayo a boatload of money.” There’s a violation of the rules there that needs to be addressed.

And I still don't think that a player getting money from an agent for future considerations is not in and of itself a really big issue. Now, if said agent, or his rep is in Tim Floyd's office when Mayo's letter of intent is faxed over, that's a whole different kettle of fish. At least for USC. And I still think it is the height of hypocrisy in this capitalistic society of ours to frown on athletes who want even a little taste of the millions of dollars they are generating.

I'd rather not be lumped in with either of you.

Even if we use square headed deck screws?

B,

To defend your position, you start with never gonna happen what-if scenarios. Then you go back to trying to defend your original position alongside schmuck. Then, to top it off, you try to take a shot at the only person in this thread who attempted, in a smackful way, to let you backpedal out of the shit stance you took?

I KNOW you are the last one on this board to just eat crow and walk away. Umpteen thousand posts+ and then some says so. This is one of those rare times you back away from the keyboard and just admit you got in over your head by being the contrarian. Just isn't gonna work in this case.

Here's an opportunity for you. In fact, I can give it to you in an example you may relate to. You can "stay the course" in your stance just as you view Dubya is "staying the course." Liken your stance to that in this situation. Whether you embrace that or not is up to you.

Once again, just trying to help.

IndyFrisco wrote:B,

To defend your position...

My position was a question. Maybe you noticed?

BSmack wrote:What if the NCAA makes it so that when a player goes "one and done", his school loses that scholarship for the balance of the 4 years that said scholarship was intended?

That makes a hell of a lot of sense, seeing as scholarships are a year-to-year proposition that the school can pull at any point. RACK Indy Fellatio for hitting the nail on the head.

Goober McTuber wrote:

BSmack wrote:What if the NCAA makes it so that when a player goes "one and done", his school loses that scholarship for the balance of the 4 years that said scholarship was intended?

That makes a hell of a lot of sense, seeing as scholarships are a year-to-year proposition that the school can pull at any point. RACK Indy Fellatio for hitting the nail on the head.

Yea, God forbid anyone ever bring up the idea of changing the way the NCAA does business.

BSmack wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:

BSmack wrote:What if the NCAA makes it so that when a player goes "one and done", his school loses that scholarship for the balance of the 4 years that said scholarship was intended?

That makes a hell of a lot of sense, seeing as scholarships are a year-to-year proposition that the school can pull at any point. RACK Indy Fellatio for hitting the nail on the head.

Yea, God forbid anyone ever bring up the idea of changing the way the NCAA does business.

Yeah, like letting agents funnel money to the players. That’s the ticket.

Goober McTuber wrote:Yeah, like letting agents funnel money to the players. That’s the ticket.

It's what you get when you have a system in place that artificially denies players compensation commensurate with the dollars their work returns. Tell me you knew?

So now your argument is that if the NCAA was properly compensating their players, it wouldn’t be necessary for agents to be handing them bags of money. If you had offered that line of reasoning in your initial post in this thread rather than your ninth post in, you might have a shred of credibility.

Goober McTuber wrote:So now your argument is that if the NCAA was properly compensating their players, it wouldn’t be necessary for agents to be handing them bags of money. If you had offered that line of reasoning in your initial post in this thread rather than your ninth post in, you might have a shred of credibility.

I wasn't making an argument, I was asking a question. A question that so far remains unanswered.

BDisingenuous wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:So now your argument is that if the NCAA was properly compensating their players, it wouldn’t be necessary for agents to be handing them bags of money. If you had offered that line of reasoning in your initial post in this thread rather than your ninth post in, you might have a shred of credibility.

I wasn't making an argument, I was asking a question. A question that so far remains unanswered.

What a bunch of fucking horseshit. You may have phrased it as a question, but anyone can see that you were definitely posting it as a point of view. That there's nothing wrong with agents giving kids lots of money. Everything after that has been ducking and spinning.

Dinsdale answered the "question" at some length, and your response was "well everybody’s doing it."

IndyFrisco also addressed your position, and your response was "My position was a question."

Well, here's a question for you. Why don't you just go fuck yourself?

Goober McTuber wrote:What a bunch of fucking horseshit. You may have phrased it as a question, but anyone can see that you were definitely posting it as a point of view.

Of course you think it is a POV. It challenges orthodox opinion regarding "amateur athletics". Seems that every time someone offers even so much as an honest question that requires college sports fans to think outside the box a little, said college sports fans turn into a bunch of screaming little twats.

That there's nothing wrong with agents giving kids lots of money. Everything after that has been ducking and spinning.

No, the question was as follows...

Could someone explain to me how OJ Mayo getting money from an agent gives USC an unfair competitive advantage? I could see if the school, or boosters were making the payments as a quid pro quo for playing at USC. But Mayo getting money from a bunch of agents? Where's the fucking harm?

Still waiting for an answer.

Not that I'm holding my breath.

Dinsdale answered the "question" at some length, and your response was "well everybody’s doing it."

Oh, so the system is pure save for USC and whatever other schools you hate?

Pleeeese.

IndyFrisco also addressed your position, and your response was "My position was a question."

As it was. But you honks can't seem to answer that question without a boatload of bluster and posturing.

Well, here's a question for you. Why don't you just go fuck yourself?

And still I wait for an honest answer.

I believe Dins and I both touched on the recruiting aspect. That, alone, gives them a competitive advantage due to the players they pull in.

And if you want to fuck it all up even more, pay the kids a stipend. Course, you have to pay the girls on the water polo team the same amount you pay the starting running back. Oh, and this will make the money filtering from agents even more common. How can you tell if a kid is buyiing shit with his measly stipends that he saved up for for months or with the cayshe from the runners?

Brian,

If you’re going to allow agents to hand money to players, it’s only a matter of time before the deep-pocket boosters figure out that the agents are the way to funnel money to the players. It will just be a case of the rich getting richer. Strange position for someone with your socialistic tendencies to be advocating.

The NCAA has rules in place that they need to enforce. I really don’t understand why they are so hesitant to come down on USC. And I am not at all a USC hater. I was a closet fan of USC football during the McKay years, and this had to be my all-time favorite game:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owwLrK7r9Mk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Indy, Goobs,

Those were the well reasoned replies that I was looking for in the first place. Props.

I understand that if agents have contacts with boosters that it will inevitably corrupt the recruiting process. That it appears to have already happened with the Mayo case only underscores why I believe the current process and rules structure to be hopelessly flawed. I also don't think stipends are a good idea for the reasons Indy laid out.

I guess what bugs me the most is that it is against the rules for a player to seek professional career guidance. In no other endeavor save athletics is this the case. There just has to be a way to allow players with post collegiate earning potential to make a reasonable living while in college and obtain competent representation/guidance without utterly corrupting the process. Sadly, I don't know what that way is. And even if I did, I don't believe the people who run the NCAA would want anything to do with it.

BSmack wrote:There just has to be a way to allow players with post collegiate earning potential to make a reasonable living while in college and obtain competent representation/guidance without utterly corrupting the process.

Room, board and tuition for 4 years is compensation enough. If the STUDENT-athlete wants to skip out early for greener pastures in the NFL, NBA, MLB, etc., so be it.

If you want to complain about kids not getting the choice to go to the pros out of high school, blame the NFL or NBA just as much as the NCAA. The pro leagues view the NCAA as their minor leagues so to speak. It is an opportunity to see these kids who play against far interior talent to somewhat level the playing field at the collegiate level. You look at how many "high school phenoms" went directly to the NBA and fluttered. Many more than flourished.

Is there flaws in the current system? Sure. Name one organization as large without flaws. However, bringing in money to the conversation with student-athletes can only make it worse.