USC Football Sanctions: Was the Death Penalty Deserved?

ESPN is reporting that the NCAA will hand out some serious sanctions towards USC after reviewing a series of violations over the past decade.  According to sources, the NCAA will be vacating past Trojan wins, banning future post season play for two years, and reducing scholarships by at least twenty. 

But does this even matter? 

Given USC’s national recognition and power within the sport of college football, it is unlikely these sanctions will have any greater effect on their program than their five-star recruits who are fourth string starters.

Although their image may be tarnished, the truth of the matter is that USC came out on top in all of this. 

Before Pete Carroll’s arrival, USC was on its way to becoming a thing of the past.  Over the course of five seasons from 1996 to 2000, the Trojans were only two games above .500 with an overall record of 31-29. 

But after Pete got on the scene, things began to change.  With the wins came recruits, and with the recruits came the wins.  From both of those came national prominence, to the point where people are now considering the Carroll dynasty as one of, if not the, most talented college football dynasties of all time. 

So how will these sanctions affect this continual powerhouse? 

Very little, if at all. 

What would have been justice and made things even once again?

It would have been fair if USC would have received the very rare, yet very deserved in this case, infamous “death penalty”—the right reserved by the NCAA infractions committee to completely limit a college athletics program from competing in the season. 

Such a punishment may at first seem outstanding for the Trojans, but when you look at the death penalty’s past uses, as well as the Trojans violations, the punishment fits the crime about as much as that money fit right into Reggie Bush’s pocket. 

The NCAA infractions committee has only handed out the death penalty a total of five times in its history.

1. Kentucky basketball for players accepting bribes to shave points.

2. Southern Louisiana basketball for numerous violations including academic fraud and financial contributions to players.

3. SMU football for improper financial benefits to players.

4. Morehouse soccer for allowing professional soccer players from Nigeria to play on their team.

5. MacMurray Tennis for giving scholarships to foreign born players when Div. III schools are not allowed to offer scholarships. 

In the case of USC, they have been found of committing similar violations to both Southern Louisiana Basketball and SMU football. 

I know what you’re thinking— but in 2002 Alabama football committed similar violations and didn’t receive the death penalty, and so did Kentucky basketball in 1988.

But the difference between USC’s violations, and perhaps the most important factor in this issue, is that those program’s weren’t considered repeat offenders, and USC’s violations occurred while the university was already in trouble from previous sanctions in 2001. 

What were those 2001 sanctions for?

Nothing big—just academic fraud. 

Meaning, in the past decade USC athletics has been sanctioned for academic fraud, with football and basketball players receiving payments—not only from boosters, but possibly from coaches. 

Although the NCAA did the university a favor by rolling up the latter two violations into one all-out investigation, if they hadn’t (and they shouldn’t have) USC would be a repeat, repeat offender— an offense, on top of an offense, on top of another.  All of them major, and all of them part of previous “death penalty” rulings at other universities. 

Instead, what is USC allegedly getting instead?

A two year post-season ban

This doesn’t really matter because, it’s one game that makes up less than 10% of the season, and it’s two years, so any recruit they lose because of this they can make up when their current freshman play outstanding as juniors. 

A reduction in scholarships

This for a team who’s third string starters wouldn’t just be first string anywhere else in the country, but would be first string All-American at most schools.

A forfeiture of wins

As though future players care at all about wins they wern't a part of. 

The NCAA may have come down on USC, but they definitely didn’t make things even.  USC gained more from this scandal in national recognition, money (T.V. revenue, jersey sales, booster support), and recruiting, than these sanctions could ever take away. 

Anywhere else, and these sanctions are a serious blow to the program.

At USC, they’re a private school nun’s slap to the knuckles with a ruler—knuckles that are covered with National Championship rings and won’t feel a thing.