Gamecocks cut 6 scholies for Major Violations

[sd'sker]

hey nuance and badgerfan, GET A ROOM!

Can it be yours?

i'm not going to say 'no'.

[Muck]

@muck....you are a typical bitter buckeye fan.

 

What is there to be bitter about? Outside of a wonderful summer vacation at a lovely island just south of Beaufort I've never had the misfortune of being stuck in South Carolina for long periods of time.

 

I'm mostly bemused by the reaction of the college football world over the past year and a half. If you haven't noticed most Buckeye fans are primarily the ones laughing at the bitter reaction of everyone else right now as they try to rationalize away the Meyer hiring.

 

Despite a season in hell Buckeye fans are giddy not bitter.

 

2 words for you - outback bowl

 

Yes yes South Carolina's proudest moment came during the last period when the Buckeyes were in disarray during a coaching transition. Huzzah for you.

 

Independence, Liberty, PapaJohns & Chick-Fil-A. It's been quite a run for you fellas since hasn't it?

 

To keep things on topic let's just recap...

 

Ohio State self imposed a loss of 5 scholarships (among other penalties) over a scandal that revolved around $2,500 in impermissible benefits.

 

Boise State lost 9 scholarships over impermissible sleeping arrangements (essentially someone's couch) that totaled around $5,000.

 

South Carolina has decided that 6 scholarships is an appropriate punishment for impermissible sleeping arrangements that come out to $47,000.

 

A bit apples to oranges? Sure (especially the Ohio State case as the scholarship reductions are more about Coach Tressel's failure than that of the players) but it still is an interesting illustration as one of the decimal points seem to be in the wrong place.

[garnetgoggles08]

This is an argument against the accusations that I thought made alot of sense. I'm sure that NUisance will just read "blah blah blah" (if he even bothers to read it before running his mouth).

 

I can't speak for Holtz or what occured during his tenure. I followed USC football back then, but not to the extent that I do now. But after reading the allegations set forth, and the subsequent responses given by our administrators, my view on 80% of this is pure hogwash.

 

I will acknowledge that there were a few violations - that is, the four athletes that rented a two-bedroom unit but only stayed there alone. They were paying $450 per month, instead of the $900 being paid by the others that roomed together. I can see where that could be considered as a improper benefit (although, in the documentation Jamie Blevins did present an example of a non-USC related elderly woman staying there while her house was being remodeled, and only paying $450 per month as well).

 

When these allegations first surfaced, the common belief was that the NCAA was accusing the Whitney of offering accommodations at a price that was considered below fair-market value. However, after reading the report, it was determined that while the $900 may have been equal to what other students were paying for off-campus housing, the issue was that other USC-affiliated people had stayed there previously to when the athletes did, and paid a higher rate (determined to be an average of around $57).

 

So what? Prices go up and down all the time. Maybe the folks at the Whitney were tired of sitting at 40% occupancy while watching a significant amount of potential guests from USC using the Inn at USC instead, so they decided to lower their rate. You know, I ate at Subway last week, and paid $5.00 for a footlong BMT. Two months ago, a friend of mine ate at Subway, and paid $6.99 for the same sandwich. I guess they lowered their price. It's a good thing that we're both not athletes, or Subway could be accused of being a booster by giving me a better deal on a sandwich than what others paid prior to me.

 

Not only that, but those that stayed prior to the athletes didn't stay for nearly the time that our players did. It's no secret that longer stays can equal lower rates. The issue here would be that the same rate would be offered to any non-USC athlete, which according to Blevins, and documentation that he presented, it was. As I've stated in other posts on this subject, I am a former hotel manager, and it was no issue at all for me to sell a room during the daytime at $119, and then sell one at 10pm at night for $49, because my job was to rent rooms, and even a room at $49 is better than sitting empty. In addition, when I worked in Myrtle Beach, a two-room oceanfront suite that sold for $229 per night in July was sold for $800 per month in December. If you do the math, that's around $26 per night, which is a 90% discount. Why? Because the hotel was full in the summer and could command such a high rate, while in December they might be at 30% occupancy, and again, $800 is better than the room sitting empty. One more example: I would have construction workers and others looking for long-term stays come in to the hotel, and we would discount them if they were willing to stay for an extended time. It wasn't uncommon to let a $119 per night room go for around $59 per night if someone was committing to staying for a few weeks, as that was guaranteed occupancy and revenue.

 

One more thing: the allegation that the players received impermissable loans from the Whitney because they made arrangements to pay their bills when their grant money came in is also hogwash. Let's use another example: Bruce Ellington lives off-campus in a two-bedroom apartment. He is late on his water bill, and doesn't have the money to pay it. So, he calls City of Columbia and asks to pay his bill the following month, and they agree. Is that not a violation, giving someone extended time to pay their bill? Not if they do it for others besides just USC athletes, which of course they do. So now the NCAA is going to police our debt deliquency? What if an player is late on his car payment? Does he have to sit out a game? Is that where we're headed now?

 

As for the Byrd situation, this one even further angers me. For those who don't know, Byrd's dad Adrian was the V.P. of the SAM Foundation. He took many trips as part of his job, and often times brought Damiere along with him. So, if Adrian were to host a dinner party, and brought Damiere with him, at the end of the night, he would I assume pay for his son's meal, then when he returned home, submit that receipt for reimbursement. According to the NCAA, that is a violation, because in the end, SAM is the one paying for the meal. What I don't get is how does the father/son relationship not take precedent over the booster/recruit role in this situation? Damiere never attended any SAM function without his father present, and it was always as his father's guest, not as a potential recruit. Sure, his airfare and meals were taken care of BY HIS DAD, who later got reimbursed, but that should not be considered a violation. Let me put it to you this way, hypothetically: Rush's is a USC booster. Let's say my dad worked for Rush's, and I'm a high school running back. My dad and a few other Rush's execs decide to attend a Gamecock Club meeting in Greenville, and he asks me to tag along. On the trip, I get to meet Spurrier and a few other coaches, and maybe a couple of players in attendance. My dad pays for my meal, and for the gas to drive up there. The next day, my dad turns that receipt in to his HR office, and gets a check reimbursing him for our meals and gas money. According to NCAA rules, that would be a violation, because in a round-about way, Rush's paid for my trip, not my dad, even though he works there and I am his son. Again, should not the father/son relationship outweigh anything else?

 

Here's an even better example: let's think big in terms of USC boosters. Let's use Bank of America (I'm not sure if they're a sponsor or not, but we'll say they are for the sake of this argument). My mom works for BOA in Charlotte, and again, I'm a high school player, but not really highly recruited. She is told that she has to attend a BOA seminar in Tampa, so she says to me that while we're down there, why don't we go by and check out USF? So on our trip, we swing by the campus, take a little tour, and run in to Skip Holtz by accident and speak with him for a moment. We get home, and my mom expenses her BOA trip and is reimbursed on her next check for airline costs, meals, and a rental car. Guess what? If the NCAA doesn't recognize this as a mother/son trip, then it's now a violation, because BOA is a booster, and in effect, they paid for my trip to USF to see the campus, even though they are not recruiting me. While the actual circumstances were a little different, this is very similar to what has happened with Byrd and his dad. If Adrian was not a member of the SAM Board of directors, then I would agree 100% that it would be a violation if they paid for it, but because he works for them, and because Damiere is his son, that should take precedent over the idea of this being a recruiting trip.

 

I don't claim to be smarter than the USC attorneys that were on this case, but it just seems to me that a lot of common sense got left out in the cold in terms of these allegations. Were there some violations? Sure there were, but not nearly the volume that were issued, and for not nearly the costs that were inferred. Compliance thought that they were on top of this, and basically goofed, but it was an honest mistake. To me, the easiest way to monitor whether students are getting too good of a deal, or paying their rent, is to require them to submit monthly receipts showing that it has been paid. This way, compliance can keep up with who is behind, and also see the amount being paid and know if it's too high, too low, or if it doesn't match the negotiated rate. If a player doesn't submit a receipt for two consecutive months, you pull him aside and find out why, and suspend him until it is resolved. Sound simple enough to me, but what do I know?

 

Or, as I suggested a few years ago, build a new dorm for athletes and students to share 50/50. House all of the athletes there, and house an equal amount of non-athletic students as well, so that while it's not an "athletic" dorm, it still houses all athletes in one big place to keep an eye on them. Problem solved.

[garnetgoggles08]

What is there to be bitter about? Outside of a wonderful summer vacation at a lovely island just south of Beaufort I've never had the misfortune of being stuck in South Carolina for long periods of time.

 

Right, because Ohio is chock full of South Carolina transplants, not the other way around. What a joke. There's a reason half of your miserable residents move down South, big guy. And how can you call Fripp Island lovely and then act like South Carolina is a terrible place? Makes 0 sense.

[The Dude]

I'm sorry, so was Nebraska CHEATING or not?

 

Well, there are different degrees of ncaa infractions. It’s not a digital function—ON or OFF. “1” or “0”. You could say there’s “cheating”, “Cheating” and then “CHEATING”. NU’s textbook deal was minor. But sure. I guess you could characterize it as “cheating.” South Carolina, not so minor. In fact, multiple Major NCAA Infractions. By a repeat offender. Which is CHEATING. By a big fat-walleted booster CHEATERS.

 

So Nebraska committed NCAA infractions? CHEATERS CHEATERS CHEATERS! According to the NCAA website NU provided almost $28,000 worth of texts book over a 3 year period. CHEATERS CHEATERS!

It would be a shame if we had too many smart kids out there playin' football with all their fancy book learnin'.

[sd'sker]

I'm sorry, so was Nebraska CHEATING or not?

 

Well, there are different degrees of ncaa infractions. It's not a digital function—ON or OFF. "1" or "0". You could say there's "cheating", "Cheating" and then "CHEATING". NU's textbook deal was minor. But sure. I guess you could characterize it as "cheating." South Carolina, not so minor. In fact, multiple Major NCAA Infractions. By a repeat offender. Which is CHEATING. By a big fat-walleted booster CHEATERS.

 

So Nebraska committed NCAA infractions? CHEATERS CHEATERS CHEATERS! According to the NCAA website NU provided almost $28,000 worth of texts book over a 3 year period. CHEATERS CHEATERS!

It would be a shame if we had too many smart kids out their playin' football with all their fancy book learnin'.

it is more embarrassing that they are not already given the recommended books. they are *student* athletes after all. but he is right, how embarrassing, football players given books! outrageous. the only reason most kids play college athletics is for the improper benefits regarding all that free book-swag.

[ensanehusker]

The players were "paying" $15 per night. Most of them had huge bills that were unpaid when they left. (2 and 3 months worth)

 

And you know this how? Link?

[Muck]

Right, because Ohio is chock full of South Carolina transplants, not the other way around. What a joke. There's a reason half of your miserable residents move down South, big guy.

 

And that reason is because the local colleges don't produce capable skilled labor.

 

 

And how can you call Fripp Island lovely and then act like South Carolina is a terrible place? Makes 0 sense.

 

 

 

it is more embarrassing that they are not already given the recommended books. they are *student* athletes after all. but he is right, how embarrassing, football players given books! outrageous. the only reason most kids play college athletics is for the improper benefits regarding all that free book-swag.

 

To be fair for most students book costs easily add up to 1 or 2 grand a year.

[sd'sker]

i love fripp island.

[Foppa]

I'm pretty sure if NU would've been convicted of giving Eric Crouch a sandwich, we'd not only still be on probation, but the NCAA would've turned the University into a traveling circus and had the U.S. government bomb Nebraska into the stone age and made it a crime to even mention the word 'Nebraska'. Well...if not the NCAA...ESPN would've tried.

[sd'sker]

Right, because Ohio is chock full of South Carolina transplants, not the other way around. What a joke. There's a reason half of your miserable residents move down South, big guy.

 

And that reason is because the local colleges don't produce capable skilled labor.

 

 

And how can you call Fripp Island lovely and then act like South Carolina is a terrible place? Makes 0 sense.

 

 

 

it is more embarrassing that they are not already given the recommended books. they are *student* athletes after all. but he is right, how embarrassing, football players given books! outrageous. the only reason most kids play college athletics is for the improper benefits regarding all that free book-swag.

 

To be fair for most students book costs easily add up to 1 or 2 grand a year.

i know, it is a lot of money, but still, if you can not pay them, at least help pad their bookshelves. (also, recommended books are pointless, but still).

[Muck]

i know, it is a lot of money, but still, if you can not pay them, at least help pad their bookshelves. (also, recommended books are pointless, but still).

 

My knowledge of the Nebraska situation is exactly zero...just wanted to remind people that it really can be a big deal.

 

I believe the Alabama textbook violations ended up totalling over $40K in benefits.

[sd'sker]

i know, it is a lot of money, but still, if you can not pay them, at least help pad their bookshelves. (also, recommended books are pointless, but still).

 

My knowledge of the Nebraska situation is exactly zero...just wanted to remind people that it really can be a big deal.

 

I believe the Alabama textbook violations ended up totalling over $40K in benefits.

i really don't even know what we are talking about. i just like books.

[Muck]

i really don't even know what we are talking about. i just like books.

 

For breakfast or dinner?

[NUance]

This is an argument against the accusations that I thought made alot of sense. I'm sure that NUisance will just read "blah blah blah" (if he even bothers to read it before running his mouth).

 

I can't speak for Holtz or what occured during his tenure. I followed USC football back then, but not to the extent that I do now. But after reading the allegations set forth, and the subsequent responses given by our administrators, my view on 80% of this is pure hogwash.

 

<snip/ blah blah blah /snip>

 

. . . houses all athletes in one big place to keep an eye on them. Problem solved.

Oh come on now. I’m not about to wade through this rambling diatribe by that Gamecocks apologist poster named Res Judicocka on Rivals. This is his work, right? Nobody there pays any attention to him. Why should I?