Garry P's take on Appeal Time
http://wearesc.com/news/story.php?article=4030
http://wearesc.com/news/story.php?article=4030
To briefly recap, the NCAA Committee on Infractions handed down some extremely strong penalties to USC including a two year bowl ban, the loss of ten football scholarships a year for three years and restricted access to USC practices and sidelines at games.
It’s important to remember that when the ruling came down the issue of agents and their involvement in college sports was somewhat of a hidden problem. USC fans cried foul at the excessive penalties but the majority of college football fans around the country had the perception of an outlaw program that had been caught and they felt the Trojans got the penalties they deserved. In the time since then, however, the agent issue (along with other examples of wrongdoing in college sports) has exploded in a big way with incidents at schools such as North Carolina, Alabama, Georgia, Auburn and Ohio State.
USC has also seen some major changes in that time including a new university president, a new athletic director and a revamped compliance office created with the help of a group headed by a former head of the FBI. The new president Max Nikias wasted no time in setting a new course of action, even removing Mike Garrett as athletic director before he officially started his job and hiring Pat Haden as his replacement. In the eyes of many, including this writer, there could not have been a better choice to lead the athletic department forward and Haden instantly set about making clear that compliance was going to be a huge part of his new job efforts.
Even though the NCAA penalties were stayed until the appeal could be ruled on, it didn’t take long in the 2010 season for the negative effects of the sanctions to be felt. USC had self-imposed a bowl ban for 2010 and was not eligible for the Pac-10 title. Several players and recruits were allowed to leave USC without penalty which put a dent in our depth chart and resulted in a lack of tackling during practices. Boosters and former players who had once been a part of the fabric of the Trojan football program were no longer allowed to be around practices or the sidelines at games.
Nikias and Haden introduced themselves to NCAA reps in early fall and began the dialogue necessary for the appeals process. Haden has maintained a public stance of cooperation with the NCAA and he indicated last week that the university would not be looking to go beyond the conclusions of the NCAA appeals committee. There have been some who have been critical of his conciliatory tone but it’s the proper tone to take right now for someone in his position (and a significant change in approach from his predecessor). You can be sure Haden has USC well prepared for this appeal, he has been watching the actions of the NCAA in their dealings with other universities and he even commented about how there seemed to be inconsistencies in the methodologies used to judge the Cam Newton case versus how logic was applied to USC.
Will any of the recent decisions at other schools or the changes in the USC hierarchy have any impact on how the NCAA treats the USC appeal? On the surface the answer is probably no. The NCAA says they do not consider any new information as part of an appeal and the track record of successful appeals (about 1 in 10) would indicate that Trojan fans should not be getting their hopes up for any kind of drastic reductions.
There is a school of thought, however, that says there is a chance for something good to come out of the appeal. The reality is that the NCAA overreached with the penalties they put on USC in relation to the violations that occurred. This is especially true when you compare how they punished USC and how they punished some of the other schools. We’re not crying over spilled milk here and we’re not trying to maintain any kind of absolute innocence (we recognize that certain elements of the violations did occur) but there’s no way a rational person can look at the situation and say that USC got treated fairly. This appeal is the chance for the NCAA, including a new NCAA president, to create a situation where all parties can accept the result and move on.
We’re not saying that USC would take any action such as a lawsuit if the university doesn’t get what they want. Haden has already publicly stated that the appeal is the final step but this is a fluid process and you never know what the university mindset might be at a later date. There is also a serious groundswell of criticism surrounding the NCAA these days including talk of lawyers asking Congress to get involved when it comes to the NCAA tax exempt status. This is a slippery slope for the NCAA. They have been pretty much bulletproof to outside challenges but at some point enough is enough and you get the sense that a growing number of people across the country are seriously questioning their actions.
The ideal scenario, in my opinion, is for the penalties to be reduced to a one year bowl ban (which has already been served), a loss of five scholarships a year for three years and the removal of the restrictions against boosters and former players at practices and games. The football coaches are already juggling the scholarship situation with this recruiting class and the fact that nobody seems to know exactly how many players we will sign in two weeks just confirms that it is a sensitive and critical topic. The issue with boosters strikes at the very heart of our fund-raising efforts and with a new athletics facility and other initiatives underway you can be sure the athletic department doesn’t want any roadblocks which would prevent boosters from opening their wallets in the future. As far as the former players, that just strikes at the spirit of the program, there is something wrong when a Rey Maualuga travels to LA on his bye week to talk to the team and is turned away at the gates of Brian Kennedy Field. Hopefully that is a situation which gets rectified quickly.
How is all of this going to turn out? I don’t know but it certainly makes for a dramatic time. I honestly don’t think anything the NCAA does would surprise anybody at this point and most Trojan fans seem pessimistic about the chances for any real relief from the penalties. I certainly can’t blame anybody for thinking that way. I remain hopeful, however. I just think that the changes we made in personnel and in our compliance department are so overwhelming that they have to count for something but I also understand that the NCAA may simply look at that and say they don’t give a damn. I’m very much prepared for the possibility of that reaction from them.
We wish all the best to Max Nikias, Pat Haden and the other members of the Trojan party who will be making our presentation to the appeals committee. Haden has said he likes our arguments and he thinks we raise some good points, the one issue he has mentioned before is the convenient inclusion of the “high profile” athlete designation which was used in the USC case despite not being part of other cases. Haden is an intelligent man and I will take my chances with him making our case in a thoughtful and blunt manner.
In the meantime, I will sit back and enjoy following the recruiting efforts being displayed by the football coaches these days as they push forward in bringing in the best class possible. The latest ESPN team rankings which came out this week show USC as having the #4 class in the country, a pretty impressive feat when you consider the reality of the NCAA sanctions. If we can get any kind of positive outcome from the appeal it will be some welcome news to the USC football program in terms of the outlook for the future.
It’s important to remember that when the ruling came down the issue of agents and their involvement in college sports was somewhat of a hidden problem. USC fans cried foul at the excessive penalties but the majority of college football fans around the country had the perception of an outlaw program that had been caught and they felt the Trojans got the penalties they deserved. In the time since then, however, the agent issue (along with other examples of wrongdoing in college sports) has exploded in a big way with incidents at schools such as North Carolina, Alabama, Georgia, Auburn and Ohio State.
USC has also seen some major changes in that time including a new university president, a new athletic director and a revamped compliance office created with the help of a group headed by a former head of the FBI. The new president Max Nikias wasted no time in setting a new course of action, even removing Mike Garrett as athletic director before he officially started his job and hiring Pat Haden as his replacement. In the eyes of many, including this writer, there could not have been a better choice to lead the athletic department forward and Haden instantly set about making clear that compliance was going to be a huge part of his new job efforts.
Even though the NCAA penalties were stayed until the appeal could be ruled on, it didn’t take long in the 2010 season for the negative effects of the sanctions to be felt. USC had self-imposed a bowl ban for 2010 and was not eligible for the Pac-10 title. Several players and recruits were allowed to leave USC without penalty which put a dent in our depth chart and resulted in a lack of tackling during practices. Boosters and former players who had once been a part of the fabric of the Trojan football program were no longer allowed to be around practices or the sidelines at games.
Nikias and Haden introduced themselves to NCAA reps in early fall and began the dialogue necessary for the appeals process. Haden has maintained a public stance of cooperation with the NCAA and he indicated last week that the university would not be looking to go beyond the conclusions of the NCAA appeals committee. There have been some who have been critical of his conciliatory tone but it’s the proper tone to take right now for someone in his position (and a significant change in approach from his predecessor). You can be sure Haden has USC well prepared for this appeal, he has been watching the actions of the NCAA in their dealings with other universities and he even commented about how there seemed to be inconsistencies in the methodologies used to judge the Cam Newton case versus how logic was applied to USC.
Will any of the recent decisions at other schools or the changes in the USC hierarchy have any impact on how the NCAA treats the USC appeal? On the surface the answer is probably no. The NCAA says they do not consider any new information as part of an appeal and the track record of successful appeals (about 1 in 10) would indicate that Trojan fans should not be getting their hopes up for any kind of drastic reductions.
There is a school of thought, however, that says there is a chance for something good to come out of the appeal. The reality is that the NCAA overreached with the penalties they put on USC in relation to the violations that occurred. This is especially true when you compare how they punished USC and how they punished some of the other schools. We’re not crying over spilled milk here and we’re not trying to maintain any kind of absolute innocence (we recognize that certain elements of the violations did occur) but there’s no way a rational person can look at the situation and say that USC got treated fairly. This appeal is the chance for the NCAA, including a new NCAA president, to create a situation where all parties can accept the result and move on.
We’re not saying that USC would take any action such as a lawsuit if the university doesn’t get what they want. Haden has already publicly stated that the appeal is the final step but this is a fluid process and you never know what the university mindset might be at a later date. There is also a serious groundswell of criticism surrounding the NCAA these days including talk of lawyers asking Congress to get involved when it comes to the NCAA tax exempt status. This is a slippery slope for the NCAA. They have been pretty much bulletproof to outside challenges but at some point enough is enough and you get the sense that a growing number of people across the country are seriously questioning their actions.
The ideal scenario, in my opinion, is for the penalties to be reduced to a one year bowl ban (which has already been served), a loss of five scholarships a year for three years and the removal of the restrictions against boosters and former players at practices and games. The football coaches are already juggling the scholarship situation with this recruiting class and the fact that nobody seems to know exactly how many players we will sign in two weeks just confirms that it is a sensitive and critical topic. The issue with boosters strikes at the very heart of our fund-raising efforts and with a new athletics facility and other initiatives underway you can be sure the athletic department doesn’t want any roadblocks which would prevent boosters from opening their wallets in the future. As far as the former players, that just strikes at the spirit of the program, there is something wrong when a Rey Maualuga travels to LA on his bye week to talk to the team and is turned away at the gates of Brian Kennedy Field. Hopefully that is a situation which gets rectified quickly.
How is all of this going to turn out? I don’t know but it certainly makes for a dramatic time. I honestly don’t think anything the NCAA does would surprise anybody at this point and most Trojan fans seem pessimistic about the chances for any real relief from the penalties. I certainly can’t blame anybody for thinking that way. I remain hopeful, however. I just think that the changes we made in personnel and in our compliance department are so overwhelming that they have to count for something but I also understand that the NCAA may simply look at that and say they don’t give a damn. I’m very much prepared for the possibility of that reaction from them.
We wish all the best to Max Nikias, Pat Haden and the other members of the Trojan party who will be making our presentation to the appeals committee. Haden has said he likes our arguments and he thinks we raise some good points, the one issue he has mentioned before is the convenient inclusion of the “high profile” athlete designation which was used in the USC case despite not being part of other cases. Haden is an intelligent man and I will take my chances with him making our case in a thoughtful and blunt manner.
In the meantime, I will sit back and enjoy following the recruiting efforts being displayed by the football coaches these days as they push forward in bringing in the best class possible. The latest ESPN team rankings which came out this week show USC as having the #4 class in the country, a pretty impressive feat when you consider the reality of the NCAA sanctions. If we can get any kind of positive outcome from the appeal it will be some welcome news to the USC football program in terms of the outlook for the future.
Comment