...are you talking about the 2 year bowl ban, four years probation, forfeiture of a year's wins/championship, and loss of scholarships over 3 years? (what was it, 10 a year?)
Yes. Their punishment was weak sauce. The idea of vacating the wins was weak, too. Vacating wins does nothing of merit.
Ok, so now I just want to know why that's weak, especially when it was one of the harsher penalties they had doled out to a major program since around the SMU case or so
Or are you just one of those pro-death penalty guys in this case?
University of South Carolina cited for failure to monitor - NCAA.org
So is the 3 year probation a postseason ban?
if y'all can clarify that, please do. :hi:
University of South Carolina cited for failure to monitor - NCAA.org
So is the 3 year probation a postseason ban?
if y'all can clarify that, please do. :hi:
The death penalty would be too harsh.
The 'sanctions' did nothing to hurt USC. They still piled up recruits because of back counting, and now they are poised to make a run for a national title fresh off of a two-year bowl ban.
The death penalty would be too harsh.
The 'sanctions' did nothing to hurt USC. They still piled up recruits because of back counting, and now they are poised to make a run for a national title fresh off of a two-year bowl ban.