Oklahoma's Summer "Vacation"
12 comments so far
July 12, 2007 by
The other shoe has fallen in the Oklahoma football fake-jobs-for-players investigation. The NCAA has ruled that OU must vacate its 2005 season, (erasing 8 wins, including a Holiday Bowl victory) and lose two scholarships for the next two seasons. Oklahoma is attempting to appeal the vacated season ruling. My gut reaction to the penalties is, frankly - they are not enough. I would have thought that the NCAA would have come down much harder on a school infringing on the one supposed bastion of college athletics - amateurism.
Vacate The Premises?
I have a very hard time understanding how vacating the 2005 season is much of a penalty at all. Is everyone supposed to act like those games didn't happen? How does that penalize OU? Now they somehow didn't win the Holiday Bowl? Pa-lease. Bob Stoops' winning percentage drops from .819 to .804. Ooooh, ouch. That's gonna sting. Catching the sarcasm? Good, because I'm laying it on pretty thick.
In all honesty, this vacate notion is literally acting like the season didn't happen. And, I suppose that is pretty dang typical for the good old NCAA. Nope, nothing to see here, folks. Please keep watching and buying merchandise. Thanks, drive through.
Not a 1-for-1 Deal
The sanctions with real bite are the scholarship limitations. Losing players hurts, right? But, when you look closer, two lost over two years feels like an equivalent solution. It is comparable to losing the two players involved - Rhett Bomar and J.D. Quinn - for what would have been the remainder of their eligibility. In my opinion, it does little or nothing to affect OU's ability to compete for titles this year or any of the next 5 years when the scholarships lost would be "felt". Again, it's the NCAA Solomon-like wisdom of just saying, "well 2 players were involved, so you lose 2." That's not even close to fitting the crime.
Amateurism Apparently Not Sacred
All we ever hear out of the NCAA is how amateurism is sacred. They police kids' side businesses. They prevent Jeremy Bloom from getting endorsements for skiing. And on and on. But, here in a case when boosters were actually lining the pockets of players, the NCAA shows it's true colors with a lack of meaningful penalties.
Seriously, not coming down hard on a school that knows players have phony baloney jobs implies two things to me. First, that it is probably rampant. The NCAA knows - on some level - that this stuff is happening everywhere and isn't willing to really weed it out. And, second, that they might as well just acknowledge the lack of amateurism in this sport, and find a way to pay these kids a legit stipend in order to subvert the demand from players for this sort of booster-driven nonsense.
» Enjoy this article?
Send it to your friend or get Husker news by email!
Related Stories: Oklahoma
Post a comment
Jason Jul 12 07
Do you think they "went easy on them" because it was a self reported violation?
Also, Husker Mike makes a good point. This ruling should also "vacate" Callahan's gesture from the record. So, we don't have to bring that up ever again! :)
Thanks NCAA!
Steve Jul 12 07
Darren,
I respectfully disagree. The only reason this stuff came to light was that Stoops kicked the guys off the team and OU turned themselves into the NCAA. Short of wasting a member of your staff's precious time taking attendance and acting as a de facto supervisor at these jobs, it seems like it would be awfully hard to stop (which goes to your point about it being rampant).
Troy Smith at Ohio State got some money he didn't deserve and all they did was have him pay it back and he stayed on their roster. Let's not forget that Bomar was the #1 QB recruit out of high school. I give Stoops and OU enormous credit for having the stones to stand on principle. Giving up 2 scholarships over 2 years (plus giving up a star quarterback) is punishment enough in my book.
Heck, we know Reggie Bush was getting all kinds of cash from agents while at USC and what's their punishment been? I realize that boosters are more a part of your program (and thus easier to watch) than agents, but as far as I know, Bomar's family didn't get a house like Bush's did.
darren Jul 12 07
Steve,
We agree about it being rampant. Therefore the need for a more systematic approach to fixing it (stipends!) than another slap on the wrist.
To your other points.
- Bomar's profile as a recruit or talent level means almost nothing to me. That's qualitative, even subjective. Still, swapping 2-for-2 doesn't work. Kids were on the take. That has to mean something.
- Agents (in Bush's case) are a different ill than boosters. Agents go after players (or family) while boosters affect or work with programs, meaning institutional issues. The NCAA can at least police its member *institutions* better, if not the players.
And, the relationship between OU (7 times an NCAA policy violator) and Big Red Sports and Imports (giving players "extended test drives"), didn't just pop out of nowhere. The lack of NCAA response is gross.
Ze Robertinho Jul 12 07
Whaddup bros?!
Just to let you know, apparently I'm a 'bad boy' now since I just today got booted from HuskerExtra's, "Life in the Red"--unjustly I might add. I enjoyed a certain moderate popularity there amongst the best and smartest bloggers and that led to me posting alot in real time to converse with all my bros there. But certain 'trolls' didn't like the amount of posts(again, I was just responding to those who wanted to 'talk' to me) and they complained to the editor, evidently, especially after I got in their faces a little bit after, and only AFTER, they repeatedly attacked me for no good reason, it's just their 'troll' WAY! So the editor e-mailed me a few times saying it's 3 three strikes and your out, you now have 2 strikes. I told him I was voluntarily wiffing on the third 'pitch' before it reached the 'plate', and basically told him to EAT ME, since he was clueless. Again, I was considered amongst fellow bloggers as one of the good guys.
Anyhoo, just to forewarn ya'll that I have a 'record' now, though I've only blogged for about 6 months total. I DO like to stretch out a bit, do various personas, be outrageous, bring in analogies from other areas of life, bring in occasional allusions that seem to others as controversial, e.g.,'why do AfroAmericans dominate most major U.S. sports?'
But I'll probably keep it as vanilla as possible here, to GET ALONG. And the lack of real time interaction here will definitely keep the post quota down, down, down.
I like the vibe here, though, that I've observed for some months and posted under the 'name', 'sa blang thang'. I may interchange with that 'name' from time to time.
Just thought I'd let ya know.
So, this Sooner 'vacation' thing is a relatively meaningless slap on the wrist. I think Stoops took the hard action last season by booting the 2 guys off the team. The vacated games don't effect Stoop's overall record that much, it still looks good. This will not effect their recruiting that much at all. The only thing that will do that is if they lose games. If NE looks better than them by the end of '07, we may be able to steal a recruit ot 2 from them.
Ze Robertinho Jul 13 07
In addition, apart from the fake jobs being in violation of NCAA rules and therefore against the 'law', as it were, I don't particularly blame/fault Bomar and the other guy for taking the free money. Happens every day. In fact, isn't there a certain glorified 'non-work' ethic within American society: 'money for nothin', chics for free'--on MTV--type thang? The American Dream is all about making it rich for as little effort as possible, ideally, and then cruising on easy street.
Lottery, casinos, power ball, keno: I rest my case.
Those guys were just doing their 'duty' as red blooded Americans!
Buff Fan Jul 13 07
Colorado self-reported giving WALK-ON athletes in minor sports meals at the training table without charging them the difference between what a dorm meal costs and what a training table meal costs.
This oversight, which gave CU no competitive advantage in any revenue producing sport, cost them a fine in excess of $100,000 and some football scholarships.
To say that I'm disgusted with the leniency shown OU for a far greater violation is a huge understatement.
brad Jul 13 07
Steve,
No offense, but you obviously haven't read the official NCAA transcript and are buying into a major Oklahoma lie. They didn't self report the violations. Here is a quote from the NCAA...
"In its response to the enforcement staff's notice of allegations, the institution claimed that it "self-reported" the employment violations to the NCAA. In reality, the violations at the dealership were first exposed in a March 3, 2006, electronic message (e-mail) sent by an anonymous source to both the NCAA enforcement staff and to institution officials. This e-mail stated that several student-athletes, including student-athlete 1, the institution's starting quarterback, were paid by the dealership for work that they did not perform. But for this e-mail, it is unlikely that these violations would have come to light."
brad Jul 13 07
Darren,
I agree that the punishment is incredibly weak. They actually met the criteria for the death penalty since they had another major violation (in basketball) in the last three years. Oklahoma doesn't care about the punishment, and I wouldn't be surprised if they are paying players with booster cash again already. After all, Switzer got caught trying this same trick, among dozens of other things, in 1988. This is an NCAA quote from the 1988 case with Switzer:
"The rules violations found in this case include: arrangements by an assistant football coach for a prospective student-athlete, who had signed a letter of Intent, to be employed by a representative of the university's athletics interests who then provided an automobile and over $6,000 for summertime "employment," even though the prospect provided no services for these benefits..."
Oklahoma has been playing stupid about this, and the NCAA IS stupid enough to fall for it. Stoops and his assistants were sending coaches to Big Red Auto, and they knew damn well what was going on, just like Switzer did. All they are doing is changing their strategy when they get caught now...we are supposed to feel sorry for them. Sorry, but this is the sixth major violation by them in football (Wilkinson 2, Fairbanks 1, Switzer 2, Stoops 1), so they sympathy would be poorly placed.
I do disagree with you, however, on the vacating wins. I think this would be awesome if the NCAA would apply it more because it would scare boosters. They would think, 'Damn, it's not worth buying recruits like we have been for seventy years because they might retroactively strip our titles.'
My questions:
1) Why didn't the NCAA vacate Oklahoma's wins and three national titles from 1952-1960, when Bud Wilkenson was PROVEN to have had his entire teams taking booster cash during each of these years?
2) Why didn't the NCAA vacate their national title in 1974 when they were already on probation for cheating, but the associated press credited them with the title anyway?
3) Why didn't the NCAA vacate their wins and national title in 1985 when it was shown, in the two years prior to 1985, that Switzer was recruiting by sending his assistants out with envelopes of cash?
If the NCAA ever got some testicles and started vacating seasons that mattered for cheating, like they should, the cheating would drop to zero overnight, as would the number of national titles the Sooners can claim. A fact to leave you with: every national title the sooners have in football has been directly tied to cheating.
Navy Sker Jul 14 07
Ze Bob, what is up? I might have to write a letter to the editor myself, and tell them how stupid they are over are Husker Extra. Do you know who complained?
All I can really say about this whole Okie deal is all good things to those who wait.!!!
Steve Jul 15 07
Brad,
You're right, I was snowed. I had no idea about the e-mail going to the NCAA at the same time as OU. In light of that, I the punishment does seem lenient. In fact, kicking Bomar off the team in that case might have been completely necessary to spare the program severe penalties.
As to your last line about every title of theirs being tied to cheating. What's the tie for their 2000 title?
Buff fan,
Did they really lose football scholarships over that? That does seem excessive. Considering that most athletes get free training table food much of the time anyway, it's hard to believe any advantage was gained by it (especially when you look at CU's mediocre recruiting results in recent years).
Ze Robertinho@adelphia.net Jul 16 07
JFTR, my comment from 7/13 was, in part, tongue in cheek.
Navy-sker...how the heck are YOU! Good to hear from you. Stiil out there on the big one? I think it was the attacking trolls that complained, but don't know exactly, could make some good guesses. It's o.k. I guess they've revamped their site some, but I think they're editing/monitoring and general concept is still in the dark ages. Just look at any pro sport site--Bears, Pats, R Sox, etc., and you'll see whaddup. I was actually setting trends over there, but it won't be for a few years for them to realize it and get with the rest of the world. Sipp is alright, but I think Rosenthal is a dweeb and the editor is probably just a miserable old person.
Sorry for the aside, Navy sker you can e-mail me at robertinho@adelphia.net.
OU7times Jul 21 07
Brad, Why the panties in such a bunch? Of course we cheat! What the hell do you think a "Sooner" is? Ha,ha. I'm sue that OU having the "Death Penalty" placed upon them is what you watch the sports report on TV, every night for. Relax though, It's normal for you to feel that way. When "someone" like OU knocks you down and takes you "milk money", you're supposd to be mad as hell. Heh,heh.