spoiler alert: i linked this
OSU isn't a death penalty case. It's serious, serious stuff, but the only time death penalties can even be given out is a repeated lack of institutional control and, in SMU's case, involved high ranking University officials getting caught and then cheating again.
Auburn might be, depending on whether the rumors about a regent rigging slot machines is true.
I think if the crux of that famous message board thread on Auburn's cheating ways is even remotely true, the NCAA would give them the death penalty.
Absolutely. Rigged slot machines paid for by the Board of Regents? Coaches brought in because they'd turn a blind eye?
Auburn won't even be a school, let alone field a competitive football team.
Is Auburn a school now?
I'm leaning towards yes because my favorite think-tank is based in Auburn and I don't want to see them harmed if Auburn goes down in flames.
I was just making a (bad?) joke...My uncle taught at LSU, so I know that SEC schools aren't just hosts to rogue athletic programs.
Oh, I was totally kidding. I didn't go to Auburn, just playing along with the joke.
Big East and Big Ten here, no SEC (though if Vandy wanted to throw a scholarship my way I definitely would have).
my favorite think-tank is based in Auburn
My brother-in-law can see it out his office window. To be fair, I do think the school gets a bum rap because of the sports programs, but it doesn't do anything to change the perception either.
I think if they get whacked it's gonna be brutal since they have a long and well documented history.
Um, I think being in Alabama gives the school a bum rap. Being an in-state school in a state where a quarter of the citizens can't read doesn't scream "elite institution." And it's not even the best school in that state.
+100 for Von Mises
-180,000 for cheating
Is that in gold or fiat currency?
Dues paying member.
How awesome is that? I made that reference and had no idea we had at least three or four others. Good day on the board, just because of that.
I had never taken the quiz before. I found out today I'm only 89% Austrian (on the 25 question quiz). Apparently the other 11% is Chicago, although question 24 kind of threw me a bit. What exactly would one consider an "offensive war?"
The usual caveat of "not to make this political"...an Austrian would call a war defensive only in the case of attack or imminent attack.
Where is the quiz? I haven't seen it. Were your Chicago tendancies related to currency manipulation, or are they using "Chicago" as "conservative"?
I wish this board had private messaging. Anyway:
The quiz is on the LvMI website:
My Chicago tendencies were basically a code for "conservative" as two of them were military questions, and I honestly debated the Austrian answer for both. But seeing as I was in the military, I went with what I went with.
Without risking a banhammer here, I hope to be in the military after graduation and have a more liberal definition of "defensive" than the staff at the Von Mises Institute.
Hans Herman Hoppe was at Michigan for a time, although I"m not 100% on board with some of his stuff it's just one of the six-degrees-of-seperation things.
Personally I'm much more familiar with the younger writers. Although you have to use younger as a loose term. I'm more familiar with Block than I am with Hoppe or Von Mises himself.
Auburn is not only a school, but it's a good one. Athletic department? Fuck 'em. The school itself going down is in no way a good thing, though. That will fuck a lot of people's lives up, and destroy a legitimately good institution.
Well the things that would bring the school down would show it's no good as an institution (not that there aren't good professors, academics and students), but I don't see how a school that big would actually get its accreditation revoked.
It'd probably be more along the lines of getting rid of the athletic department and replacing every key position in the high level administration (I have no experience with this, but you've gotta think something like this is more logical than having Auburn cease to exist).
I don't think anyone was really saying that something could or should happen to the school itself. There's no way it would.
They're on probation from the SACS (their accrediting body) for shady stuff involving a particular regent. If he's found to be paying certain students (football players) Auburn is in deep shit because Auburn knew he was trouble and never had him removed.
They almost lost their accreditation the first time around; an Auburn alum Governor had to step in and personally guarantee that the shadiness would stop.
Auburn's SACS probation ended in late 2004. However, if the worst of the rumors swirling around that program prove to be true, Auburn would certainly be looking at another accreditation issue. They'd be facing another potential probationary period from the SACS, at the very least.
Thanks for clearing that up, I saw the dates from articles and that it was a while but I wasn't sure how long probation was.
If it's for the same thing, I think they'll have to come down harder. Revoking accreditation doesn't seem to do anyone any good, but I'm sure they can do other things.
are you talking about? I didn't hear any of this.
All rumor at this point but check out the post two down, I link to the thread here and to TigerDroppings, where this got started.
It apparently is fact that Lowder is under federal investigation, though.
What's this about rigged slot machines? I'm out of the loop apparently.
One of the regents, a Mr. Lowder, is under federal investigation for gaming fraud at one of his casinos. Rumor is that the FBI has discovered that there are slots rigged to pay players. There was a thread posted on this a while back, though it was all conjecture and was from an Alabama site. I'll find it if you give me a second.
the death penalty is too harsh; but life in prison will do.
Perhaps you're confusing them with...
In determining whether there has been a lack of institutional control when a violation of NCAA rules has been found it is necessary to ascertain what formal institutional policies and procedures were in place at the time the violation of NCAA rules occurred and whether those policies and procedures, if adequate, were being monitored and enforced. It is important that policies and procedures be established so as to deter violations and not merely to discover their existence after they have taken place. In a case where proper procedures exist and are appropriately enforced, especially when they result in the prompt detection, investigation and reporting of the violations in question, there may be no lack of institutional control although the individual or individuals directly involved may be held responsible
Auburn - Probably not.
OSU - Definitely not. Hard to lack institutional control when you self report, though I'm sure people here will disagree.
If anybody deserved it recently, Alabama did and they didn't even get close to the Death Penalty. SMU's hubris (arrogance+ignorance+stupidity) was so over the line that the NCAA had no choice. SMU basically dared them to pull the trigger and they did.
If the allegations about Auburn are true, I don't think the death penalty is enough. As i said in the Patrick Peterson thread, I think Auburn can recover from one season without football, Maybe allow them to play and take away 20 or so scollie's a year.
I believe the NCAA has to do something harsh that scares people from doing this again. Even get the SEC involved and kick Auburn out. That would hurt their TV exposure.
A season without football is worse than lost scholarships. All of their starters would transfer, probably without penalty, to other schools. At least one recruiting class would completely fall apart. So, imagine losing 15-20 seniors to eligibility, another 20ish to transfers, then losing a recruiting class so you can't even replenish. They probably can't practice without the possibility of other ramifications from the NCAA, so even the players who stay aren't at the top of their game when the program comes back. So, now you're at about half of your scholarships and your first recruiting class looks like a Purdue recruiting class. How well do you think they are going to do that year? How well do you think they are going to be able to recruit after that? They wouldn't even be able to make it back to 20-below the regular limit in terms of scholarships.
If the rumors are remotely true though, they deserve it. If you have regents systemically paying players by violating about a dozen federal and state laws and profit to the extent of a national championship, they deserve to go back to the stone age and not come back.
I'd be all for the NCAA coming out and saying that their goal with the sanctions was to remove Auburn from national and SEC title discussion for a decade.
I'm not saying they don't deserve it. I'm saying that losing 20 scholarships is not even comparable to not being able to play football for a year.
No argument there joeyb. Just adding...I'm a fan of most of your posts.
Kangaroo taint has a way of making even the weakest rationalization into MGoGold.
Thanks. Same to you.
JoeyB, you are probably right, I was just thinking you lose one season and lose your guys, but after that season you start over again and the first couple of seasons may be really tough getting guys and depth. But, you can recover after the first round, as in after 5 years. If Auburn is guilty, I would want them to take 20 schollies for like 10 years or so and put them on probation for a long period. I am rpobably just too harsh and not thinking about this in the right way.
It seems like most schools do not care about the sanctions. The schools have to police themselves because the NCAA is just not big enough. Right now, it seems like a joke. What are your thoughts?
I have neither 14,000+ points nor a kangaroo avatar, but I somewhat agree. The death penalty for a school like Auburn would probably mean about a .250 winning percentage for 5-6 years after, and then they would be rolling again.
I honestly don't know what else can be done though, as the penalties you suggested have never been tried. I'm sure the NCAA could put a school on probation for a decade, or take away massive scholarships for 5-7 years, but they haven't ever seemed to have the inclination.
The most effective thing that could happen, IMO, would be for the SEC to ban Auburn for a few years. No SEC, no anything for Auburn. They would be playing tiny schedules and lose their recruiting battles for a few years, and this would extend the pain, so to speak.
That was what I was thinking with the SEC kicking them out. Tough for the commissioners to do though. There are schools that don't take the rules seriously. Something has to be done but there is too much money involved for anything to be done. Auburn problems seem to ongoing and it's like the wild wild west down there where anything goes.
NCAA is already looked upon as a joke. They have to do something or it will get worse. If they don't make an example, more and more schools will test the limits and something bad is going to happen and heaven forbid that congress would get involved.
I think the only way to control boosters is for the school to do it. Schools have to police themselves and there is no incentive for most to do it unless the punishment is so severe.
SMU was the Al Capone of college football. The institution itself facilitated and organized cheating. The violation that happened with O'Brien and the current Tressel situation do not show that level of disregard for the rules by Ohio State.
Too much money in it now. Having someone like tOSU get the death penalty would screw up the revenue structure for the entire conference. Heck even Indiana getting it would mess up the cash flow for the B10. We're all dependent on each other being televised, exposed and getting bowl payouts. So if tOSU was up for the deaht penalty I'd expect the entire conference to push against it, the BTN to push against it. Even government officials would push against it. Imagine the loss of tourism revenue if tOSU gets the death penalty and attendance at Columbus home games fall (plus of course being removed from TV).
There would be massive pressure by so many groups I just can't see it happening. The only way I see it occuring is a case where the FBI gets involved and criminal charges hit. I could see the NCAA slamming a school after that school ends up in serious legal trouble. Your regular old pay for play type of things are likely to get USC levels of penalties.
If that's the case (and I agree) then USC was light. There need to be multi-year bowl bans on the table, as well as severe scholarship restrictions. And by that I don't mean making USC worried about not having a third string running back who was a high four star, I mean docking huge percentages of scholarships.
It is incredibly unlikely that we will see another death penalty. The thing is analagous to the nuclear bomb: once we saw the results of one/two, we definately don't want to do it again.
The SMU case was the most blatant and systematic disregard of the rules perhaps in history. We're talking written contracts to pay the players here.
Even THAT didn't get them the death penalty. They got the death penalty because they were caught doing it and proceeded to keep doing it anyway.
I don't think it would ever be used against a program of Auburn or Ohio State's caliber. SMU didn't just have shady boosters or coaches who looked the other way; that scandal involved a pay-for-play scheme that was approved at the highest levels of the university. And they were already on probation for prior violations when they got caught. What's worse is that SMU's success was wholly the product of their cheating. SMU is a small school perpetually overshadowed by Texas and Texas A&M; they wanted to compete with the higher-profile schools in the SWC and cheating was the only way they could do it.
I agree that we're probably due for a program to get hit with unprecedented sanctions, like a 5-year bowl ban, a no-TV penalty, and/or a drastic reduction in scholarships. But death penalty? I just don't see it happening again. Not just because the NCAA wouldn't want to go that route, but because the SMU case had a chilling effect on that kind of blatant, over-the-top, in-your-face cheating.
1) The NCAA actually has handed down the death penalty twice since 1987-- they just haven't imposed that penalty on a major program. Morehouse College soccer and MacMurray College tennis got "executed" by the Committee on Infractions, and neither was even a repeat offender. These were just cases of blatant major rules violations coming at the institutional level-- Morehouse's AD didn't even know that a professor with virtually no grasp of NCAA rules was running a soccer program, and MacMurray violated the most basic tenet of Division III competition(no direct athletic scholarships) by giving its entire tennis team full rides.
2)If you'd asked me three years ago about the likelihood of a major program in a revenue sport getting the death penalty, I'd have said it's not going to happen again. Several administrators have expressed regret over what the death penalty did to SMU football(and by extension, the SWC), and in this era, such a penalty would have drastic consequences at the conference level. But recent developments have altered my thinking on this. SMU went down in large part because they deserved it, but also because the NCAA badly needed to make an example of somebody during a period when college football was awash in scandal-- this was the era that gave birth to the Knight Commission, which in turn brought about a major overhaul of NCAA structure. The current wave of scandals(Auburn, OSU, UNC, etc.) is once again feeding the perception that the NCAA is out of touch and unable to police its programs effectively. When an administrative bureaucracy is challenged in this way, it usually attempts to reassert its authority in the strongest possible terms. I think you saw a bit of that in the USC case-- after much public moaning that the NCAA wasn't going to do anything to USC in the Reggie Bush case, USC essentially got the same penalty Miami got in 1995, despite there being much less evidence of institutional wrongdoing in the USC case. In this environment, with the NCAA needing to make a stand to shore up its credibility as an enforcement agency, if the COI gets handed a case where a repeat offender has compromised its integrity at multiple institutional levels in order to field a winning team, they'd have a powerful incentive to bring back the death penalty. The only current case that I could see fitting that description is the one at Auburn, and then only if the worst rumors circulating about that program turn out to be true.
There's too much money involved now for the death penalty to be very likely. I think a very extreme case like Auburn (assuming everything is true) might result in a penalty that still allowed them to field a team, but made them a laughingstock for a long time. Maybe not allowing a school to have scholarship players for two years and giving everyone on the current team a free transfer or something like that.
Basically, they wouldn't be able to field an 80+ scholarship roster for at least six years with a penalty like that, which would seem like great incentive not to cheat to me.
I don't think the Auburn case will prove to be as dire as the worst reports have made it out to be, and none of the other cases, as best I can tell at this point, remotely rise to the level that they'd deserve that penalty. Having said that, there is a point in this calculus where the NCAA's ability to exert control over college sports in the long term is worth more, in financial terms and with respect to the credibility of competition, than the short-term hit the NCAA would take if a major program had to sit out a year or two. If it does indeed turn out that the Auburn Board of Trustees funded a payola scheme that helped win them a BCS title, micromanaging the entire university(which as previously mentioned, got the school put on accreditation probation in 2003) in order to ensure that violations could continue, that would be the most serious case of institutional wrongdoing since SMU. Given that USC lost 30 scholarship and got a two-year bowl ban for one player taking money from outside parties, I don't see how the NCAA could avoid imposing the death penalty in the worst-case scenario at Auburn.
Ultimately, the NCAA's authority is derived from the member schools, and I think their monetary incentive is such that completely eliminating opposing teams isn't a good option for them. Additionally, the NCAA is completely in bed with TV networks, and they probably don't want to see a school like Auburn totally disappear. I see where you're going, but I disagree.
Over a 1-2 year period, you don't think the NCAA/SEC/TV networks could survive without a traditional program? The NCAA could easily make a temporary rule allowing the SEC to have their championship game with only 11 schools. Then, during the regular season, it's only a matter of having an occasional worse game than normal on ESPN2.
The prohibition on TV appearances has gone by the wayside because now as it really does punish the opponent, but just eliminating one team would have no real effect on anyone but the school's bottom line.
If the Auburn rumors are true they would have a battle to keep accredidation. A death penalty would follow suit.
Anything that's isolated to the athletic department and boosters? No way.
I'm really, really hoping Yahoo breaks a story related to Auburn this summer. Robinson said he's got something that should break around then that is significantly bigger than this Tressel business.
I actually heard an interview with him on the Solid Verbal podcast, and he said he regretted saying that. He's confident a story will come out, but is not confident about timing.
I think the source he had at the NCAA (the one he got the OSU story from) was "taken care of". As a result, he's been backing away from the time table he stated earlier.
I don't want OSU to burn to the ground. I like it when they're good, but we're just better. I like beating them when they're at their best. Thats what fuels the rivalry. I do hope they have a few down years though so we can become dominant to them for a little bit as payback, but all in all I would like a competitive rivalry. The death penalty would destroy the greatest rivalry in sports.
You obviously have never lived in Columbus. OSU fans are the worst in the NCAA.
it would not be good for the game/product to actually lose a major player
a major player and college footbal survived.
It survived the 80's when half the SEC was on probation, it survived Oklahoma being on probation and nearly a dead program for a decade. It survived USC's 1990's sanctions and almost being dead for a decade.
the death penalty, cheating is wrong and the NCAA is the law enforcement Auburn shouldn't be able to pay twenty players and get away with it, players need to be held accountable, but coaches need to monitor their players and educate them about receiving gifts.
I thought Oklahoma deserved the death penalty back in the 80's. That program was way out of control. I don't even think OSU's allegations come close to that scenario......however if they were to dig into what most probably think is going on and it comes to light and is proven true then OSU could be in deep, deep $hit. To me they have looked, acted and smelled like a rogue program for some time now. To many incidents that are brushed off as 'minor' add up to one big problem.
Don't even get me started on steroids and college football.
I wish Miami would get the death penalty, but for no other reason than I just can't stand them.
NCAA needs to resurrect death penalty for Auburn, Ohio State, Tennessee, other rule-breakers
Threat of shutdown would stop rampant rule-breaking in college football, basketball, other sports
4:06 PM EDT, March 31, 2011
Death to Auburn.
Death to Ohio State.
Death to Tennessee.
Or, at the very least, the risk of death.
The death penalty.
Bring it back, NCAA, and threaten to use the death penalty against Auburn, Ohio State, Tennessee and any other school or coach that puts winning games over playing by the rules.
It is the only way.
Remember what Socrates once said: "Death may be the greatest of all human blessings."
If the NCAA is truly serious about cleaning up the rancid cesspool it governs, it needs to resurrect the death penalty and start handing it out to the brazen lawbreakers. You want to know why there is so much corruption in college sports? Because of the sissification of the NCAA investigative staff that used to wield the power of the death penalty but now threatens schools with namby-pamby scholarship sanctions. The NCAA has replaced the electric chair with the easy chair.
Is it really any surprise both teams – Auburn and Oregon – that played for the national title in college football are currently being investigated by the NCAA? And why do you think Auburn allowed star quarterback Cam Newton to continue playing last season even though the NCAA found that his father tried to sell his services to Mississippi State? Could it be the Tigers figured out that the school's first national championship in more than a half-century is worth the price of a few scholarship sanctions from the toothless NCAA?
Does anybody really think Newton did not get paid at Auburn, especially in the wake of the HBO report earlier this week in which several former players revealed receiving cash from Auburn boosters?
Leave it to HBO to uncover these potential violations. The NCAA cannot even conduct a decent investigation anymore. After all, it wasn't NCAA investigators but a couple of reporters from Yahoo.com who unearthed recent revelations that Ohio State football coach Jim Tressel failed to report NCAA violations among his players. Tressel not only covered up the violations; he apparently alerted the "advisor" of one of the players -- star quarterback Terrelle Pryor – presumably so the advisor would aid in the cover up.
Yet Tressel has somehow managed to keep his job at O-Lie-O State. Why? Because Tressel is a winner and the Buckeyes have absolutely no fear of the NCAA and its milquetoast penalties. If the Buckeyes were facing the possibility of a death penalty for keeping a proven liar and cheater on staff, Tressel would be out quicker than a Woody Hayes right hook.
Click here to read the rest of the column: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/college/os-bianchi-auburn-ncaa-dea...
No one in college football has deserved the death penalty except for SMU. Until we see a program run rampant like SMU did (and I don't think we ever will again), we won't, and shouldn't, see the death penalty.