USC Not Likely To Win Appeal of NCAA Sanctions

USC on Thursday submitted its appeal to the NCAA Infractions Appeal Committee.  Unfortunately, I feel USC will lose that appeal but will not see any great diminishment in the fortunes of its historic football program.

Let’s take these two points one at a time.

First, why is the university likely to get very little if any relief from their appeal?

What we have here is the classic case of closing the barn doors long after the horse has escaped.

Now finally after four years, according to Todd Dickey, USC senior vice president for administration, “The University recognizes that violations of NCAA rules did occur, especially involving impermissible benefits going to student athletes as well as their friends and families, from unscrupulous sports agents and sports marketers.  And we take full responsibility for those violations given that they happened on our watch.”

Oh, really?  If that is the case, then why was the university in denial these four long years?  Why didn’t USC impose its own sanctions soon after Yahoo Sports broke the story on the Reggie Bush situation?

After the ESPN Outside the Lines report on O.J. Mayo, the school dismissed head basketball coach Tim Floyd and imposed a one year post-season ban and scholarship reductions on the basketball program.

After a newspaper report revealed that Joe McKnight was seen driving an SUV that was given to his girlfriend and the mother of his child received by her employer, McKnight was suspended for the Rose Bowl and eventually opted for the NFL Draft.

Why didn’t USC bite the bullet when the Reggie Bush situation was brought to light?  If it had, those other two damaging incidents may never have occurred.

The answer is simple.  Pete Carroll.  I’m not saying Pete Carroll knew anything of the situation between Bush, his family and wannabe sports agents Lloyd Lake and Michael Michaels.

However, every year since the 2005 Orange Bowl, NFL teams had tried to lure Carroll away from USC.  No doubt Athletic Director Mike Garrett and USC President Steven Sample feared Carroll would leave if they imposed serious sanctions on his program.

The majority of the USC appeal hinges on the discrepancies in Lloyd Lake’s testimony against USC assistant coach Todd McNair on whether McNair knew of the Bush situation or not.

But that has little to do with the sanctions against the football program as such only on the personal sanctions placed on McNair.

The two year bowl ban and the loss of thirty scholarships have been imposed for one reason: compliance or the lack thereof.

  “The real issue here is, if you have high-profile players, your enforcement staff has to monitor those students at a higher level,” said Paul Dee, chairman of the NCAA’s Committee on Infractions. “High-profile players demand high-profile compliance.”

That is the major reason for the sanctions, not what McNair knew or did not know. However, the USC appeal addresses only what will be done in the future but not why compliance wasn’t properly maintained in the past.

My own argument would have stressed the NCAA’s lack of institutional guidance on the matter of high-profile investigation. 

The NCAA needs to institute proper guidelines that spell out what a member school must investigate with regard to all high-profile athletes in order to be in compliance.

It would be illegal, let’s say, for a state university to check only the housing, employment and bank records of certain families of high-profile athletes from lesser economic areas and not those of wealthier ones or of certain racial backgrounds and not others.

We get into a very, very gray area here.  It may be easy to spot an irregularity in a poorer family’s financial condition but not in a wealthier one.

  A Christian pastor, for example, could have boosters contribute to his church’s building fund.  A car dealer could have a booster with a large business give him a fleet order.  The possibilities of how richer parents can avoid detection are endless.

Paul Dee’s other point was this:

“The sanctions that were put in place we believe most properly respond to the benefits gained by the institution through the notoriety that occurred during these periods of times that led to enhanced recruiting and the ability to recruit other athletes.

 “Consequently, we thought, at least in the area of the scholarship limitations, that would be an appropriate penalty.”

Whether you agree with Dee’s assessment or not, it should have been fairly easy for the legal minds at USC to counter.  How they missed this one, I will never know.

Yes, the name of Reggie Bush, a Heisman Trophy winner, brought a great deal of additional recognition to USC, not that USC’s historic football program with six other Heisman winners needed any further recognition.

But by the same token, the fact that the NCAA’s Committee on Infractions dragged its feet over a four-year period before finally dealing out sanctions caused more problems for USC recruiters than any possible gains realized from Reggie Bush’s association with the university.

The Committee had enough facts within their first year of investigation to prove that Bush and his family benefitted from his achievements at USC. 

But they exhausted another three years attempting to prove that Pete Carroll and his assistant coach, Todd McNair, knew of the situation and willfully chose not to disclose any wrongdoing.

In the end, the committee found nothing on Pete Carroll and were rather equivocal on Todd McNair’s part, stating that he either “knew or should have known” of Bush’s involvement with Lake and Michaels.  But even that much was the result of inaccuracies in testimonies and questioning.

Meanwhile, USC’s recruiters had to deal with pending sanctions hanging over the program for the past four years. Recruiters from rival programs constantly used this to entice prospects away from USC.

That alone would have been enough to severely damage most college football programs.  Yet, USC thrived, not because of any association with Reggie Bush, who has not lived up to expectations in the NFL. 

Instead, the fact that incoming recruits are given the opportunity to compete for a starting position from the first day they step onto the practice field has made USC a haven for top college prospects.

Players like Brian Cushing, Rey Maualuga, Dwayne Jarrett, Kris O’Dowd, Jeff Byers, Ryan Kalil, Everson Griffen, Sam Baker and Stanley Havili to name a few either started or saw significant playing time as freshmen.  Did I miss anyone?  Oh, yeah, a guy by the name of Barkley, Matt Barkley.

This is the reason USC is being excessively punished, not because of Reggie Bush’s accomplishments or reputation, but because the staff is able to find, recruit and coach up so many prep school stars who can immediately win a starting position – and have fun doing it.

That was the approach the legal minds aiding USC’s appeal should have taken.  But the administration dropped the ball way back in 2006 by not imposing its own sanctions, and now the legal types fumbled deep in their own territory with time running out.

They spent most of their energy delving into the many inaccuracies surrounding Todd McNair, which won’t help at all with scholarship reductions or bowl bans, and they failed to attack the most important points of all. 

A classic case of not recognizing the forest for the trees.  Or, in this case, the tree.

But, fear not, my Trojan faithful.  Even if there isn’t any relief coming from the Appeals committee, the USC football program will continue to thrive.  I will tell you why in my next report.