ESPN- USC hit with two year ban

[Cedric]

http://sports.espn.go.com/los-angeles/ncf/news/story?id=5267933


"The USC football program will receive two-year postseason ban, a reduction in scholarships and a forfeiture of wins from at least the 2004 season when the NCAA releases it sanctions on Thursday, a source told ESPN's Shelley Smith.

ESPN the Magazine's Bruce Feldman confirmed the two-year postseason ban and a reduction in scholarships from a second USC source.

USC will respond Thursday to the NCAA's findings following its investigation into possible violations by the Trojans' football and men's basketball programs, a source with direct knowledge of the situation told ESPN's Joe Schad.

There is no press conference scheduled for Thursday. According to an SID at USC, the school would issue a statement in response to any NCAA announcement addressing penalties. A different source had said earlier in the day that the school would have a press conference following the NCAA announcement.

The NCAA infractions committee held a hearing in February in which USC presented its responses to allegations of NCAA violations. Results of the report have been expected for several weeks.

USC football players will be informed about the sanctions at a mandatory meeting Thursday morning, a source told Feldman.

Once released, USC would have a chance to appeal.

USC already admitted wrongdoing with the basketball program and sanctioned itself, including a ban on postseason participation, a reduction of scholarships and vacating all of its wins from 2007-08.

The school's football team is under investigation for its dealing with Heisman Trophy-winning running back Reggie Bush, who played at the school from 2003-05. If Bush is found retroactively ineligible, the Heisman Trust could strip him of his 2005 award.

The NCAA and investigators from the Pac-10 Conference have tried to determine whether Bush and his parents took improper benefits, including an alleged rent-free residence provided by a sports marketer. Bush has not met with NCAA and Pac-10 investigators and has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing.

USC chose to contest the allegation against the football program, hoping to overcome the perception of a lack of institutional control, which could result in significant sanctions, including scholarship reductions, TV and postseason bans, recruiting restrictions and probation.

If USC is found guilty of major violations, the NCAA also could rule that the Trojans are "repeat violators." Per NCAA rules, "An institution shall be considered a 'repeat' violator if the Committee on Infractions finds that a major violation has occurred within five years of the starting date of a major penalty."

The athletic program was last sanctioned in August of 2001."

[Slyder]

Wow Im somewhat surprised that one of the golden gooses of college football got hit with a post season ban.

[reds1869]

It should have been more severe, but at least they got something.

[WVRed]

YouTube - Nelson (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX7wtNOkuHo)

Should have been worse though. In the midst of everything, they turn around and hire one of the most obnoxious coaches in the NCAA in Lane Kiffin. Might as well have just given the NCAA the finger.

[WMR]

I wonder if Kiffin will be on his toes and walk the line from now on or if he'll use this as an excuse to go hog wild figuring that the NCAA won't come back anytime soon.

[WVRed]

I wonder if Kiffin will be on his toes and walk the line from now on or if he'll use this as an excuse to go hog wild figuring that the NCAA won't come back anytime soon.

If he does, USC is going to be staring at the death penalty, SMU style.

[jredmo2]

No, no, seriously, Pete Carrol had always been dying to coach the Seahwaks...

[cincrazy]

USC is in major trouble. I don't think we can minimize this penalty. I don't know how much stiffer the NCAA could have been, truthfully. I wasn't expecting them to come down this hard on them, even.

If you couple with the two year ban and the loss of scholarships with the fact that Oklahoma, Texas, and others appear to be moving to the Pac 10... the Trojans may be down on the mat for a while.

[MrMcConnell]

The only difference between USC and every other major program is that they got caught. People bathing in USC's demise, for now, are the folks who were beaten by them because they 'cheated.'

While it's a stiff penalty, Kiffin, much to what a lot people think about him, is a good coach. Look at what he did with Tennessee last year with a lot less talent than he has at USC and with a tougher schedule. I think they'll be fine because the talent in Southern California is good enough to keep them propped up for a few years and then it's business as usual in about 5 years.

[WVRed]

USC is in major trouble. I don't think we can minimize this penalty. I don't know how much stiffer the NCAA could have been, truthfully. I wasn't expecting them to come down this hard on them, even.

If you couple with the two year ban and the loss of scholarships with the fact that Oklahoma, Texas, and others appear to be moving to the Pac 10... the Trojans may be down on the mat for a while.

What I just bolded is pretty much what ESPN has said. I think they are in shock.

I hate bringing this up, but it will get brought up sooner or later:

You have two programs with probation and sanctions looming by the NCAA. One of the programs (A) could potentially face the death penalty, while the other (B) has committed serious infractions but not as bad as the first offender:

Offender A forces both the AD and head coach to resign and hires somebody thoroughly respected throughout the collegiate circles as Athletic Director.

Offender B's coach sees the writing on the wall, bolts for another job, and the college replaces him with one of his assistants who has made an even worse name for himself with the NCAA.

Offender A escapes the death penalty, while Offender B gets a harsher punishment.

If you want to put the pieces together, Offender A is Kentucky during the end of the Eddie Sutton era, while Offender B is obviously USC.

I know I said it should have been worse earlier in this thread, but when you look at precedent, it really doesn't match up with other programs.

[ochre]

I know I said it should have been worse earlier in this thread, but when you look at precedent, it really doesn't match up with other programs.
USC was sanctioned in 2001; due to these latest events occurring within a 5 year window, the NCAA views them as repeat offenders.

[Roy Tucker]

No, no, seriously, Pete Carrol had always been dying to coach the Seahwaks...

:laugh:

:beerme:

[KronoRed]

If he does, USC is going to be staring at the death penalty, SMU style.

Kiffin also has his built in excuse for his inevitable failure now.

Wonder what job he will get next ;)

[WMR]

Does Auburn now become the 2004 National Champion?

[BuckeyeRed27]

Does Auburn now become the 2004 National Champion?

I think Oklahoma might have a problem with that.

The real answer is there would be no BCS champ that year.

[IslandRed]

USC is in major trouble. I don't think we can minimize this penalty. I don't know how much stiffer the NCAA could have been, truthfully. I wasn't expecting them to come down this hard on them, even.

If you couple with the two year ban and the loss of scholarships with the fact that Oklahoma, Texas, and others appear to be moving to the Pac 10... the Trojans may be down on the mat for a while.

Yep. A two-year bowl ban and making them play ten scholarships short each of the next three years? That's as harsh as the NCAA's ever going to get short of shutting a program down entirely. The deep scholarship cuts are a killer -- it's not only going to hurt them for the next three years, but for two or three years after that.

[reds1869]

Yep. A two-year bowl ban and making them play ten scholarships short each of the next three years? That's as harsh as the NCAA's ever going to get short of shutting a program down entirely. The deep scholarship cuts are a killer -- it's not only going to hurt them for the next three years, but for two or three years after that.

Scholarship reductions are killer. Soon after I graduated from Marshall we were hit with a much smaller scholarship reduction, and the program is still reeling from it. Only last year did the Herd make it back to a bowl game. Scholarship reductions rip the heart out of a program.

[Revering4Blue]

Video: Pete Carroll responds to USC sanctions

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/06/10/video-pete-carroll-responds-to-usc-sanctions/

[WVRed]

Scholarship reductions are killer. Soon after I graduated from Marshall we were hit with a much smaller scholarship reduction, and the program is still reeling from it. Only last year did the Herd make it back to a bowl game. Scholarship reductions rip the heart out of a program.

Depends on the program though. Comparing a small college in Huntington to a massive west coast attraction is apples and oranges.

I think what will sting USC the worst is the expansion of the Pac 10. Any other year USC would be right back in the mix but I don't think it will be the case if Texas and Oklahoma enter the conference.

[cumberlandreds]

Kiffin also has his built in excuse for his inevitable failure now.

Wonder what job he will get next ;)

Wherever daddy goes that's where Laney will be.

[Sea Ray]

Not to defend USC, but I guess I will. They are getting these penalties because of one player, Reggie Bush and it has to do with "improper benefits" given him --not by the university--but from "sports marketers" trying to sign him. This wasn't something USC did in order to recruit him. How is this Pete Carroll's fault? I doubt he was included in these phone calls.

Is there more to it than this? Maybe I'm missing something

[Cedric]

Not to defend USC, but I guess I will. They are getting these penalties because of one player, Reggie Bush and it has to do with "improper benefits" given him --not by the university--but from "sports marketers" trying to sign him. This wasn't something USC did in order to recruit him. How is this Pete Carroll's fault? I doubt he was included in these phone calls.

Is there more to it than this? Maybe I'm missing something

Way more to this. Do you forget Will Ferrell/Snoop Dog/Nick Lachey/Flea?

All the hype and all the access they allowed was over the top.

Pat Forde for once said it best, IMO:

"Save some calumny for Carroll. One of his catch phrases is "Win Forever." Today the operative phrase for two of his greatest teams is "Vacated Forever."

Not that Coach Cut and Run was around to feel the sting of it. He followed the example set by Dennis Franchione and other college coaches who skip town when the NCAA is making life difficult. Carroll turned down pro jobs year after year -- until he couldn't pass up the mediocre Seattle Seahawks.

And don't think Carroll didn't foster the atmosphere that created the Bush fiasco. His best USC players got Hollywood star treatment, with celebrities circulating freely within the program. The practice field, the locker room, the sidelines during games -- they were open to stars and opportunists alike. And when the opportunists got hold of Bush, he was happy to take what they were offering, allegedly with the tacit knowledge of his position coach, Todd McNair."

[reds1869]

Not to defend USC, but I guess I will. They are getting these penalties because of one player, Reggie Bush and it has to do with "improper benefits" given him --not by the university--but from "sports marketers" trying to sign him. This wasn't something USC did in order to recruit him. How is this Pete Carroll's fault? I doubt he was included in these phone calls.

Is there more to it than this? Maybe I'm missing something

Doesn't matter. They are considered boosters and the university is responsible. Whether or not you agree that is the rule. It is in place to keep schools from backdooring benefits to a recruit.

[Unassisted]

Between this severe penalty and the addition of new teams to the conference, it looks like the next decade's list of football champions in the Pac 10 will be very different than the past decade's list.

[Sea Ray]

Doesn't matter. They are considered boosters and the university is responsible. Whether or not you agree that is the rule. It is in place to keep schools from backdooring benefits to a recruit.

I understand. It's a problem for college coaches especially ones who coach in S Cal. How can he monitor phone calls from sports marketers?

[Sea Ray]

Way more to this. Do you forget Will Ferrell/Snoop Dog/Nick Lachey/Flea?

All the hype and all the access they allowed was over the top.





Did these guys do anything improper? I hadn't heard that

[bucksfan2]

Way more to this. Do you forget Will Ferrell/Snoop Dog/Nick Lachey/Flea?

All the hype and all the access they allowed was over the top.

Pat Forde for once said it best, IMO:

"Save some calumny for Carroll. One of his catch phrases is "Win Forever." Today the operative phrase for two of his greatest teams is "Vacated Forever."

Not that Coach Cut and Run was around to feel the sting of it. He followed the example set by Dennis Franchione and other college coaches who skip town when the NCAA is making life difficult. Carroll turned down pro jobs year after year -- until he couldn't pass up the mediocre Seattle Seahawks.

And don't think Carroll didn't foster the atmosphere that created the Bush fiasco. His best USC players got Hollywood star treatment, with celebrities circulating freely within the program. The practice field, the locker room, the sidelines during games -- they were open to stars and opportunists alike. And when the opportunists got hold of Bush, he was happy to take what they were offering, allegedly with the tacit knowledge of his position coach, Todd McNair."

I have said it before but I believe that USC's infractions have are largely due to the absence of a NFL team in LA. You have the 2nd largest market in America without a NFL team but a very successful college team. The football fans in LA treated USC as their defacto NFL team. Carroll embraced that as well. It was only a matter of time before the hammer came down on USC and Carroll skipped town at the right time.

Pat Forde brought up a good point about OJ Mayo. Anyone who knew anything about his HS career path knew he was an NCAA violation waiting to happen. It would have been a shock to me if he hadn't received any money for going to USC. OJ Mayo was toxic and USC is paying for that.

[Jack Burton]

No, no, seriously, Pete Carrol had always been dying to coach the Seahwaks...

Lol. Seahawks just moved way up on my "teams I love to see lose" list.

[RBA]

More than ever now, LA needs a realPro Team. When you have 10 million people (#2 Los Angeles, CA 10,609,200) relying on USC to fill the Pro NFL void, it's too easy to fall prey to money, media, celebrity.

[IslandRed]

Depends on the program though. Comparing a small college in Huntington to a massive west coast attraction is apples and oranges.

I think what will sting USC the worst is the expansion of the Pac 10. Any other year USC would be right back in the mix but I don't think it will be the case if Texas and Oklahoma enter the conference.

If USC goes through scholarship cuts of this severity without having a significant dropoff in its talent level, it'll be the first school that ever did. It's not just about the ten players they won't have. The players they sign for the next few years won't be quite as good, either, because major probation has a way of being a buzzkill for recruiting. USC will get some stars, but not in the quantity they did last decade.

[IslandRed]

News that just came out -- because of the bowl ban, I presume, USC players who will be juniors or seniors will be allowed to transfer without having to sit out a season. And other schools are allowed to initiate contact. So their roster will be hit from both ends.

[jredmo2]

News that just came out -- because of the bowl ban, I presume, USC players who will be juniors or seniors will be allowed to transfer without having to sit out a season. And other schools are allowed to initiate contact. So their roster will be hit from both ends.

Jeez, what a potential boon. Any team with open scholarships is going to be on these guys like raw meat. My understanding of the rule may be off though. I *think* that there is a rule against oversigning -- i.e. you can't sign more than the scholarships you have available, so you can't just drop some of the lesser players you have already on the roster if a better guy comes along. Anyone know for sure?

[bucksfan2]

If USC goes through scholarship cuts of this severity without having a significant dropoff in its talent level, it'll be the first school that ever did. It's not just about the ten players they won't have. The players they sign for the next few years won't be quite as good, either, because major probation has a way of being a buzzkill for recruiting. USC will get some stars, but not in the quantity they did last decade.

This. And don't forget the competition they will start getting from in city with UCLA and Neuheisel as well as up the coast at Stanford with Harbaugh. Don't think for a second that these coaches aren't going to leverage the upcoming 2 year bowl ban against USC.

[Chip R]

News that just came out -- because of the bowl ban, I presume, USC players who will be juniors or seniors will be allowed to transfer without having to sit out a season. And other schools are allowed to initiate contact. So their roster will be hit from both ends.


Shame that would happen to Lane Kiffin. ;)

Even though thry won't be playing in the postseason for 2 years and will lose 30 scholarships, USC has the potential to come back as strong as ever in, say, 5 years. They will still be on TV a lot, the weather is still great, the Song Girls will still be hot, and you're playing in L.A. Except for the TV part, not very many other schools have those built in advantages. It may take them a few years but the potential is there. Whether they can take advantage of it is another story.

[Slyder]

Shame that would happen to Lane Kiffin. ;)

Even though thry won't be playing in the postseason for 2 years and will lose 30 scholarships, USC has the potential to come back as strong as ever in, say, 5 years. They will still be on TV a lot, the weather is still great, the Song Girls will still be hot, and you're playing in L.A. Except for the TV part, not very many other schools have those built in advantages. It may take them a few years but the potential is there. Whether they can take advantage of it is another story.

Miami says Hello. Took em 6 years to just get back to 10 wins.

[bucksfan2]

Shame that would happen to Lane Kiffin. ;)

Even though thry won't be playing in the postseason for 2 years and will lose 30 scholarships, USC has the potential to come back as strong as ever in, say, 5 years. They will still be on TV a lot, the weather is still great, the Song Girls will still be hot, and you're playing in L.A. Except for the TV part, not very many other schools have those built in advantages. It may take them a few years but the potential is there. Whether they can take advantage of it is another story.

USC was down for years between the Robinson and Carroll eras. I think it may take a few years for them to return to relevancy after this big set back.

[15fan]

Shame that would happen to Lane Kiffin.

karma can be a youknowwhat, can't it?

[Chip R]

Miami says Hello. Took em 6 years to just get back to 10 wins.

There could have been any number of reasons why it took the U so long to get back. It could have been the probation but it also could have been coaching and perhaps a lack of emphasis on the football program that there once was. With USC's natural advantages, it's possible they won't be down for long.

[15fan]

There could have been any number of reasons why it took the U so long to get back. It could have been the probation but it also could have been coaching and perhaps a lack of emphasis on the football program that there once was. With USC's natural advantages, it's possible they won't be down for long.

Most of USC's natural advantages are similar to Miami's advantages.

Southern California vs. South Florida? Two very easy sells for 18-22 year olds. CA & FL are two of the top 3 states for top shelf HS football talent. Both schools have plenty of tradition & history to draw upon with national titles, NFL talents, All-Americans, etc.

You could burn the earth and salt the ground, but within a very short amount of time have each school return as a national power.

I think the big thing that held back Miami was that they lost scholarships over several years (a la Alabama?). They still got talent, but they didn't have the ability to redshirt kids and develop depth. If you are short on scholarships, a couple of injuries or academically ineligible kids is a much bigger hit than if you are at the scholarship max.

[IslandRed]

There could have been any number of reasons why it took the U so long to get back. It could have been the probation but it also could have been coaching and perhaps a lack of emphasis on the football program that there once was. With USC's natural advantages, it's possible they won't be down for long.

They'll probably bounce right back, but if history is any guide, we're still talking a minimum of two or three seasons beyond the end of the probation before they'll have a roster with the depth of talent and experience to compete for a national title.

[ochre]

I don't know. In the end, the 4 years probation, given Lane "minor infraction" Kiffen is the head coach, might be the toughest of the sanctions.

[15fan]

Good time to invest in billboard companies around the USC campus. ;)

[Kingspoint]

UCLA couldn't be happier.