some usc documents revealed

[snap infraction]

it seems usc was punished severely by the ncaa not b/c of their transgressions but rather b/c of their choice of hiring lane kiffin to succeed peter carroll.  

""Paul Dee was brought in at Miami to clean up a program with serious problems. USC has responded to its problems by bringing in Lane Kiffin," committee member Rodney Uphoff wrote in an undated memo to other members of the group. "They need a wake-up call that doing things the wrong way will have serious consequences."

"Lack of institutional control … (and do we add the hiring of Lane Kiffin?), is a very easy call for me," Howard wrote."


The irony of course being that hiring Kiffin should have been a punishment in itself, not the reason for punishment.  

there's other good nuggets too....like comparing the usc investigation to the oklahoma city bombing and an ncaa official admitting they use a guilty until proven innocent standard against USC.  

also, 200 more pages haven't been released yet.  it is expected that these contain even more damaging documents.  


www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/25121727/ncaa-overstepped-in-usc-case-unsealed-documents-seem-to-show

wonder how USC is going to respond?  Will they now launch a lawsuit against the NCAA?

[oujour76]

Mar 25, 2015 7:24:25 GMT -5 snap infraction said:

it seems usc was punished severely by the ncaa not b/c of their transgressions but rather b/c of their choice of hiring lane kiffin to succeed peter carroll.  

""Paul Dee was brought in at Miami to clean up a program with serious problems. USC has responded to its problems by bringing in Lane Kiffin," committee member Rodney Uphoff wrote in an undated memo to other members of the group. "They need a wake-up call that doing things the wrong way will have serious consequences."

"Lack of institutional control … (and do we add the hiring of Lane Kiffin?), is a very easy call for me," Howard wrote."


The irony of course being that hiring Kiffin should have been a punishment in itself, not the reason for punishment.  

there's other good nuggets too....like comparing the usc investigation to the oklahoma city bombing and an ncaa official admitting they use a guilty until proven innocent standard against USC.  

also, 200 more pages haven't been released yet.  it is expected that these contain even more damaging documents.  


www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/25121727/ncaa-overstepped-in-usc-case-unsealed-documents-seem-to-show

wonder how USC is going to respond?  Will they now launch a lawsuit against the NCAA?

I doubt if USC sues the NCAA. In any event, don't think this suit involves USC, it was filed by Todd McNair.

[mscott59]

Mar 25, 2015 8:34:23 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Mar 25, 2015 7:24:25 GMT -5 snap infraction said:

it seems usc was punished severely by the ncaa not b/c of their transgressions but rather b/c of their choice of hiring lane kiffin to succeed peter carroll.  

""Paul Dee was brought in at Miami to clean up a program with serious problems. USC has responded to its problems by bringing in Lane Kiffin," committee member Rodney Uphoff wrote in an undated memo to other members of the group. "They need a wake-up call that doing things the wrong way will have serious consequences."

"Lack of institutional control … (and do we add the hiring of Lane Kiffin?), is a very easy call for me," Howard wrote."


The irony of course being that hiring Kiffin should have been a punishment in itself, not the reason for punishment.  

there's other good nuggets too....like comparing the usc investigation to the oklahoma city bombing and an ncaa official admitting they use a guilty until proven innocent standard against USC.  

also, 200 more pages haven't been released yet.  it is expected that these contain even more damaging documents.  


www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/25121727/ncaa-overstepped-in-usc-case-unsealed-documents-seem-to-show

wonder how USC is going to respond?  Will they now launch a lawsuit against the NCAA?

I doubt if USC sues the NCAA. In any event, don't think this suit involves USC, it was filed by Todd McNair.

i'm not sure how the note by uphoff equals equals usc being punished severely just because they hired kiffin. certainly doesn't cast uphoff in a good light, that's for sure, but it's pretty clear how the committee members felt about usc in general, and the principals involved in particular, as to their perceived 'cooperation' in that investigation. akin to saying that missouri is a tougher opponent than florida these days.

[mscott59]

Mar 25, 2015 8:52:32 GMT -5 mscott59 said:

Mar 25, 2015 8:34:23 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

I doubt if USC sues the NCAA. In any event, don't think this suit involves USC, it was filed by Todd McNair.

i'm not sure how the note by uphoff equals equals usc being punished severely just because they hired kiffin. certainly doesn't cast uphoff in a good light, that's for sure, but it's pretty clear how the committee members felt about usc in general, and the principals involved in particular, as to their perceived 'cooperation' in that investigation. akin to saying that missouri is a tougher opponent than florida these days.

better provide some context here... uphoff is a mizzou professor. his comments were directed at usc and mcnair, not uf.

[oujour76]

Mar 25, 2015 8:52:32 GMT -5 mscott59 said:

Mar 25, 2015 8:34:23 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

I doubt if USC sues the NCAA. In any event, don't think this suit involves USC, it was filed by Todd McNair.

i'm not sure how the note by uphoff equals equals usc being punished severely just because they hired kiffin. certainly doesn't cast uphoff in a good light, that's for sure, but it's pretty clear how the committee members felt about usc in general, and the principals involved in particular, as to their perceived 'cooperation' in that investigation. akin to saying that missouri is a tougher opponent than florida these days.

Just couldn't let it go, could ya?

[oujour76]

Mar 25, 2015 7:24:25 GMT -5 snap infraction said:

it seems usc was punished severely by the ncaa not b/c of their transgressions but rather b/c of their choice of hiring lane kiffin to succeed peter carroll.  

""Paul Dee was brought in at Miami to clean up a program with serious problems. USC has responded to its problems by bringing in Lane Kiffin," committee member Rodney Uphoff wrote in an undated memo to other members of the group. "They need a wake-up call that doing things the wrong way will have serious consequences."

"Lack of institutional control … (and do we add the hiring of Lane Kiffin?), is a very easy call for me," Howard wrote."


The irony of course being that hiring Kiffin should have been a punishment in itself, not the reason for punishment.  

there's other good nuggets too....like comparing the usc investigation to the oklahoma city bombing and an ncaa official admitting they use a guilty until proven innocent standard against USC.  

also, 200 more pages haven't been released yet.  it is expected that these contain even more damaging documents.  


www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/25121727/ncaa-overstepped-in-usc-case-unsealed-documents-seem-to-show

wonder how USC is going to respond?  Will they now launch a lawsuit against the NCAA?

Here ya go.

documents.latimes.com/ncaa-mcnair-documents/

[snap infraction]

Mar 25, 2015 8:34:23 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Mar 25, 2015 7:24:25 GMT -5 snap infraction said:

it seems usc was punished severely by the ncaa not b/c of their transgressions but rather b/c of their choice of hiring lane kiffin to succeed peter carroll.  

""Paul Dee was brought in at Miami to clean up a program with serious problems. USC has responded to its problems by bringing in Lane Kiffin," committee member Rodney Uphoff wrote in an undated memo to other members of the group. "They need a wake-up call that doing things the wrong way will have serious consequences."

"Lack of institutional control … (and do we add the hiring of Lane Kiffin?), is a very easy call for me," Howard wrote."


The irony of course being that hiring Kiffin should have been a punishment in itself, not the reason for punishment.  

there's other good nuggets too....like comparing the usc investigation to the oklahoma city bombing and an ncaa official admitting they use a guilty until proven innocent standard against USC.  

also, 200 more pages haven't been released yet.  it is expected that these contain even more damaging documents.  


www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/25121727/ncaa-overstepped-in-usc-case-unsealed-documents-seem-to-show

wonder how USC is going to respond?  Will they now launch a lawsuit against the NCAA?

I doubt if USC sues the NCAA. In any event, don't think this suit involves USC, it was filed by Todd McNair.

it doesn't involved usc.  it's a defamation lawsuit filed by mcnair, whose reputation and ability to gain employment  took a huge hit in the reggie bush fallout.

many usc fans believe this lawsuit to be sort of their own de facto lawsuit against the ncaa b/c the punishment handed out by the ncaa was extremely unfair.  and the university never really fought back against the ncaa when nearly everyoone believed the ncaa was very shady with how they handled usc.  if documents prove their suspicion to be correct, there will be public pressure on usc to do something.  

[mscott59]

Mar 25, 2015 9:37:23 GMT -5 snap infraction said:

Mar 25, 2015 8:34:23 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

I doubt if USC sues the NCAA. In any event, don't think this suit involves USC, it was filed by Todd McNair.

it doesn't involved usc.  it's a defamation lawsuit filed by mcnair, whose reputation and ability to gain employment  took a huge hit in the reggie bush fallout.

many usc fans believe this lawsuit to be sort of their own de facto lawsuit against the ncaa b/c the punishment handed out by the ncaa was extremely unfair.  and the university never really fought back against the ncaa when nearly everyoone believed the ncaa was very shady with how they handled usc.  if documents prove their suspicion to be correct, there will be public pressure on usc to do something.  

i disagree that usc didn't fight back, or maybe more appropriately, fight on. they did, by refusing to cooperate fully, in many cases at all, with any ncaa investigation. that's part of what riled the infractions committee members.

[snap infraction]

Mar 25, 2015 9:46:36 GMT -5 mscott59 said:

Mar 25, 2015 9:37:23 GMT -5 snap infraction said:

it doesn't involved usc.  it's a defamation lawsuit filed by mcnair, whose reputation and ability to gain employment  took a huge hit in the reggie bush fallout.

many usc fans believe this lawsuit to be sort of their own de facto lawsuit against the ncaa b/c the punishment handed out by the ncaa was extremely unfair.  and the university never really fought back against the ncaa when nearly everyoone believed the ncaa was very shady with how they handled usc.  if documents prove their suspicion to be correct, there will be public pressure on usc to do something.  

i disagree that usc didn't fight back, or maybe more appropriately, fight on. they did, by refusing to cooperate fully, in many cases at all, with any ncaa investigation. that's part of what riled the infractions committee members.

so those infraction committee members were fully justified in punishing usc out of spite instead of for compliance violations?   

[mscott59]

Mar 25, 2015 10:03:10 GMT -5 snap infraction said:

Mar 25, 2015 9:46:36 GMT -5 mscott59 said:

i disagree that usc didn't fight back, or maybe more appropriately, fight on. they did, by refusing to cooperate fully, in many cases at all, with any ncaa investigation. that's part of what riled the infractions committee members.

so those infraction committee members were fully justified in punishing usc out of spite instead of for compliance violations?   

now is that what i said? lol. i always get a kick when people put words/thoughts in my mouth/head. in theory, in the ncaa isn't supposed to be a police force. it's supposed to be a co-op, a member-driven institution where they're expected to monitor themselves. you know, like golfers on the pro tour are expected to do... calling penalties on themselves for infractions. ideally the schools are supposed to, if not take the lead on finding out problems and dealing with them, cooperate once they're discovered. pretty clear that the committee members felt usc wasn't doing that. was that the case? again on the surface it sure did appear that the university chose to do what the ncaa considered a bare minimum, if that. most thought sc did more stone-walling than cooperating.

does that alone justify higher penalties? when cooperation is expected? you tell me. seems pretty clear that, at least in the eyes of the committee, they felt usc had a laissez faire approach toward who had contact with their players on campus, at the practice facility, etc, and all the particulars w/the bush case that are already out there. have you ever seen a judge throw the book at a defendant who he/she thought showed no remorse, or worse was defiant before the court? that's a pretty human reaction. doesn't make it right, but it's understandable.

the ncaa is easy to criticize, and they bring a lot of it on themselves. but big time cfb today is becoming more and more unmanageable imho, especially within even a loosely-based concept of student-athletes. and as the $$$ continues to grow flowing into the sport, it's going to get messier.

[oujour76]

Mar 25, 2015 9:37:23 GMT -5 snap infraction said:

Mar 25, 2015 8:34:23 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

I doubt if USC sues the NCAA. In any event, don't think this suit involves USC, it was filed by Todd McNair.

it doesn't involved usc.  it's a defamation lawsuit filed by mcnair, whose reputation and ability to gain employment  took a huge hit in the reggie bush fallout.

many usc fans believe this lawsuit to be sort of their own de facto lawsuit against the ncaa b/c the punishment handed out by the ncaa was extremely unfair.  and the university never really fought back against the ncaa when nearly everyoone believed the ncaa was very shady with how they handled usc.  if documents prove their suspicion to be correct, there will be public pressure on usc to do something.  

McNair probably has as much of a beef against USC as he does the NCAA.

IMO, USC doesn't pursue the matter any further no matter what the documents show. At this point, which is 5 years after the fact, what is their upside?

[oujour76]

Mar 25, 2015 10:03:10 GMT -5 snap infraction said:

Mar 25, 2015 9:46:36 GMT -5 mscott59 said:

i disagree that usc didn't fight back, or maybe more appropriately, fight on. they did, by refusing to cooperate fully, in many cases at all, with any ncaa investigation. that's part of what riled the infractions committee members.

so those infraction committee members were fully justified in punishing usc out of spite instead of for compliance violations?   

That isn't at all what he said.

[mscott59]

Mar 25, 2015 10:47:14 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Mar 25, 2015 9:37:23 GMT -5 snap infraction said:

it doesn't involved usc.  it's a defamation lawsuit filed by mcnair, whose reputation and ability to gain employment  took a huge hit in the reggie bush fallout.

many usc fans believe this lawsuit to be sort of their own de facto lawsuit against the ncaa b/c the punishment handed out by the ncaa was extremely unfair.  and the university never really fought back against the ncaa when nearly everyoone believed the ncaa was very shady with how they handled usc.  if documents prove their suspicion to be correct, there will be public pressure on usc to do something.  

McNair probably has as much of a beef against USC as he does the NCAA.

IMO, USC doesn't pursue the matter any further no matter what the documents show. At this point, which is 5 years after the fact, what is their upside?

you would think that mcnair would have been picked up by a pro team by now if there wasn't something else under the surface beyond this long legal battle. the move from a program like usc to the nfl is not a big jump. makes you wonder

[oujour76]

Mar 25, 2015 10:53:06 GMT -5 mscott59 said:

Mar 25, 2015 10:47:14 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

McNair probably has as much of a beef against USC as he does the NCAA.

IMO, USC doesn't pursue the matter any further no matter what the documents show. At this point, which is 5 years after the fact, what is their upside?

you would think that mcnair would have been picked up by a pro team by now if there wasn't something else under the surface beyond this long legal battle. the move from a program like usc to the nfl is not a big jump. makes you wonder

McNair was USC's sacrificial lamb. It is strange that he hasn't landed anywhere since all of this crap went down.

[snap infraction]

Mar 25, 2015 10:52:05 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Mar 25, 2015 10:03:10 GMT -5 snap infraction said:

so those infraction committee members were fully justified in punishing usc out of spite instead of for compliance violations?   

That isn't at all what he said.

no but i inferred that he was justifying the way the ncaa acted.  perhaps i was a bit premature in doing so.