The Goat Pen

Posted: **Mon Jul 25, 2011 10:17 am**

Not saying I fully agree with it but KSR had a nice story today breaking down the "dirtiest" conference. Their conclusion in basketball? The Big 10.
Again, not saying I fully agree with vacated wins as a measuring stick but they make a case for it. Its a bit long but worth reading.

Code: Select all

I would be willing to bet that if you polled sports fans around the nation and asked them who they thought was the dirtiest conference in America, the SEC would win that poll.  Especially in football, the SEC has gotten the reputation of finding ways around the rules, or flat out disobeying them.  But, is that opinion actually accurate?  Does the SEC have the dirtiest schools in college athletics.  Well, over the next 2 days, I’ll try and figure that out.  Amazingly, the NCAA keeps a very thorough database of all the schools who have committed MAJOR violations since 1953.  Today, we analyze college basketball. 

College Basketball Vacated Wins by Conference
251 wins-Big 10: Michigan (114), Ohio State (82), Minnesota (36), Purdue (19)
92 wins-Pac-10: California (28), USC (21), Oregon St. (17), Arizona (19), UCLA (5), Arizona St. (2)
58 wins-Big East:St.Johns (46), Depaul (6), Villanova (4), UCONN (2)
28 wins-ACC: Florida State (24), Clemson (2), Maryland (2)
9 wins-SEC: Florida (3), Alabama (2), Georgia (2), Kentucky (2)
5 wins-Big 12: Missouri (3), Texas Tech (2)

17 mid-major programs have also had to vacate a combined 306 wins.

Note: Loyola Marymount, Marshall, and NC State have vacated games on their record, but only in losses.  Yes, games can be vacated that were losses.  For instance, Memphis’ loss in the NCAA Championship in 2008 was vacated.

OK, so the Big 10 is far and away the conference that has been hammered the most in the win-loss column due to infractions, but Steve Fisher and Jim O’Brien can almost single-handedly be thanked for that.  2 guys does not a dirty conference make.  Otherwise, the WAC would forever been considered dirty thanks to Jerry Tarkanian.  What we can say is that the Big 10 has had the biggest of the big violations, but which conference has had the most overall MAJOR violations?  
________________________________________________________

Before reading those numbers, consider this about the stat below.  Just because a men’s basketball program committed major violations does not mean it committed those EXCLUSIVELY.  In many of the cases below, several of a school’s sports programs were grouped together on the punishment list.  So, while the basketball team may have broken the rules, other programs at the school may have committed the most serious violations.  There is no way to tell from the information the NCAA gave.  Anywho, here are the schools who have been included on a major violations report:    

College Basketball MAJOR Infractions Cases Since 1953 (NCAA reference, click here)
24 cases-Big East:Cincinnati (5), West Virginia (3), Louisville (3),  St. Johns (2), Depaul (2), Seton Hall (2), UCONN, Villanova, Rutgers, Pittsburgh, Syrcause, South Florida, Notre Dame

23 cases-SEC: Kentucky (4), Georgia (3), Auburn (3), South Carolina (3), Alabama (2), Arkansas (2), LSU (2),  Florida (2), Mississippi State (2)

20 cases-Big 10: Minnesota (5), Ohio State (3), Wisconsin (3), Illinois (3), Purdue (2), Indiana, Michigan, Iowa, Michigan St.

18 cases-ACC: Florida State (4), NC State (4), Wake Forest (2), Clemson (2), Maryland (2), Duke, Miami, North Carolina, Georgia Tech

17 cases-Big 12: Kansas (5), Baylor (3), Texas A&M (3), Oklahoma (2), Missouri (2), Texas Tech, Kansas St.

13 cases-Pac-10: UCLA (3), California (2), Arizona (2), USC, Washington (2), Arizona State, Oregon St., Oregon

(Note: Mid-Major teams have a total of 151 MAJOR violations cases since 1953.) 

OK, that stat doesn’t bode as well for the SEC as the vacated wins stat.  Nine of the SEC’s members have MULTIPLE major violations to their records.  Umm, ouch? 
________________________________________________________

What about which percentage of each conference’s teams have experienced a major violation?  These conference affiliations relate to the ones from the 2010-11 season, and do not reflect the conference realignment coming next season.

Big 10: 9 of 11 teams (82%)
Big East: 13 of 16 teams (81%)
Pac-10: 8 of 10 teams (80%)
SEC: 9 of 12 teams (75%)
ACC: 9 of 12 teams (75%)
Big 12: 7 of 12 teams (58%)

Look, what does all this mean?  I don’t know if you can say but 1 thing about all of this: COLLEGE ATHLETICS ARE QUITE DIRTY.  And they have been dirty since the NCAA started keeping track in 1953.  Someone will have to explain how a school such as Minnesota, Kansas, or Cincinnati can commit major violations 5 TIMES in their history, and the NCAA has not canned their programs yet?  Until the NCAA grows a set of cajones and ends a major program (never going to happen), then you can’t blame programs for trying.

Oh, and the Big 10 is the dirtiest college basketball conference in history.

Posted: **Mon Jul 25, 2011 10:31 am**

2 points of clarification: football's bigger in the SEC than basketball so except for Kentucky, one would expect more cheating in the SEC in football than basketball

one of the criticisms, is that SEC teams don't have as many games vacated as they should (don't necessarily agree with this, but there it is)

I think it'll still hold up that the SEC doesn't lead the pack when it comes to football either.

Posted: **Mon Jul 25, 2011 10:52 am**

they're going to use the same analysis on football tomorrow.

Posted: **Mon Jul 25, 2011 11:02 am**

SEC football is under more NCAA scrutiny than any of the other conferences according to Thomas Yeager (chair of the CoI) a few years back.

But regardless, when the NCAA visits repeatedly, they will find things everywhere. You have a system set up for such.

1. Big money boosters who like the steroid shot to their ego when they get a player to "their" team. They look at a team win with that player and are able to take credit for it; they feel a part of it.

+

2. Impatient fans who call for the head of a coach who doesn't win enough (quickly enough).

+

3. Coaches making millions who know they'll be axed if they don't win enough (see #2).

+

4. College kids who need money who rationalize it by saying, "everybody does it."

+

5. A capricious NCAA that metes punishments inconsistently; giving many the belief that they can 'lawyer' their way out of it (if it is even investigated in the first place).

Posted: **Mon Jul 25, 2011 11:15 am**

I think the LSU example is a good one for all. A rogue assistant coach gave aid to a student recruit. The compliance officer felt that things just didn't smell right and asked the student questions. After a couple of interviews, she had no proof, but recommended that he not only not play but not accompany the team and called the NCAA. The coach was immediately suspended and the player never got into a game.

The aggessive nature of going after potential wrongs, limiting the exposure and prompt action limited the penalty.

Posted: **Mon Jul 25, 2011 11:26 am**

That's fine and well...but the NCAA makes judgement unevenly in those cases.

While they may accept the desigantion that the assistant was "rogue" in this case, in others (with the same evidence or lack thereof) they might say that they think that the assistant coach was acting on behalf of the head coach and the school. Or that the cutlure was to cheat - and that even IF the head coach didn't know, he should have - so they lower the boom

With regard to LSU: They were very lucky. When a member of the coaching staff is caught cheating, the NCAA usually (always?) delivers a much harsher punishment. So much depends on the members on that particular CoI.

Posted: **Mon Jul 25, 2011 11:35 am**

That's fine and well...but the NCAA makes judgement unevenly in those cases.

That's very true, although I think it was appropriate for LSU. Aggressive action by your compliance dept and erring on the side that there is a problem before proven should be heavily considered and encouraged.

Posted: **Mon Jul 25, 2011 11:51 am**

Owlman wrote:
That's fine and well...but the NCAA makes judgement unevenly in those cases.

That's very true, although I think it was appropriate for LSU. Aggressive action by your compliance dept and erring on the side that there is a problem before proven should be heavily considered and encouraged.

Oh, I agree completely. It should be. And it was in this case, which is great for LSU.

Alabama had something like this happen in Basketball a few years back. An assistant for Gottfired (Tyrone Beamon) relayed a request for cash from a recruit's mother to a monied booster. The booster called Gottfired who called UA compliance. UA Compliance fired Beamon and reported what he attempted to do to the NCAA, as well as pulling the scholarship offer from the recruit - who never got a dime from that booster.

The NCAA lauded our efforts and said this is how things are supposed to work. A few weeks later UA fans were astounded when the penalties were handed down: We got hit with a major violation and put on 5 years probation (among other things). That was what made us "repeat offenders" when the Albert Means case rolled around. In fact, the CoI on the Means' case said, "You just had a major violation in 1998! That's why we've got to hit you extra hard for this." What's funny is, that the Albert Means thing could be chalked up to a rogue asstant, too (Ivy WIlliams). There was no eveidence than any other asst coach was involved.

Posted: **Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:03 pm**

"I'm sure if he was a 20/10 kid the UK fans would have looked at him with a more open mind."

I guess "a more open mind" is one way to put it...

Posted: **Mon Jul 25, 2011 2:50 pm**

AlabamAlum wrote: Alabama had something like this happen in Basketball a few years back. An assistant for Gottfired (Tyrone Beamon) relayed a request for cash from a recruit's mother to a monied booster. The booster called Gottfired who called UA compliance. UA Compliance fired Beamon and reported what he attempted to do to the NCAA, as well as pulling the scholarship offer from the recruit - who never got a dime from that booster.

The NCAA lauded our efforts and said this is how things are supposed to work. A few weeks later UA fans were astounded when the penalties were handed down: We got hit with a major violation and put on 5 years probation (among other things). That was what made us "repeat offenders" when the Albert Means case rolled around. In fact, the CoI on the Means' case said, "You just had a major violation in 1998! That's why we've got to hit you extra hard for this." What's funny is, that the Albert Means thing could be chalked up to a rogue asstant, too (Ivy WIlliams). There was no eveidence than any other asst coach was involved.

It was basketball. Alabama is not a national basketball power. Primary complaint about the NCAA. They seem to give more leeway to national powers unless the issue is extremely public and egregious.

Posted: **Mon Jul 25, 2011 3:27 pm**

They've never given us leeway in football either. In fact, it was just the opposite.

Posted: **Mon Jul 25, 2011 3:37 pm**

Football examples: our textbook (loan) "scandal" was much less severe than Kent State (who was brought up on the same thing). They hid their scandal, we reported ours. They lost 2 schollies, we vacated 20 wins.

In 1995, the crux of the infraction was Antonio Langham signing a cocktail napkin with an agent and getting $300. We also had a player, years earlier, get an unsecured bank loan. And even though the bank had a history of making such loans to other young people with similar credit, it was found to be a violation. This was near the same time as the Notre Dame/Kimberly Dunbar situation, where Ms Dunbar, an employee of the athletic department, funneled thousands of dollars, did papers for players, and had sex with some of the team. ND lost 2 schollies. Alabama lost 20, got 5 years probation, vacated wins, and was issued a bowl ban.

Remember, it's not paranoia if they really are out to get you

Posted: **Mon Jul 25, 2011 3:39 pm**

Football examples: our textbook (loan) "scandal" was much less severe than Kent State (who was brought up on the same thing). They hid their scandal, we reported ours. They lost 2 schollies, we vacated 20 wins

Can't compare. Kent State didn't have 20 wins to vacate.

Posted: **Mon Jul 25, 2011 3:44 pm**

Didn't some stud for Alabama last year have to sit out two games and repay some money? I wish some of Carolina's players had gotten that same type of "punishment"...

Posted: **Mon Jul 25, 2011 3:45 pm**

But Kent State also had a massacre, so maybe that balances it out.

In fact, I can't help but think that AA's targeting of Kent State is really due to his hatred of "Southern Man". Look, leave Kent State out of this, your beef is with Canada, damn it!

Posted: **Mon Jul 25, 2011 3:56 pm**

You do realize that Alabama didn't run their own TV station that had major money going to the NCAA. No program was in Notre Dame's league monetarily at that time. Can't compare.

Recruiting violations: Alabama (it's actually not that bad)

http://loserswithsocks.com/2009/06/15/bamas-timeline/

A timeline of Alabama’s NCAA problems – Sports – Ledger-Enquirer.com
Key dates for Alabama’s NCAA run-ins since 1993:

January 1993: Led by coach Gene Stallings, Alabama defeats Miami 34-13 in the Sugar Bowl to finish 13-0 and win the 1992 national championship, the school’s first since Bear Bryant’s last in 1979. Early the next morning, star defensive back Antonio Langham signs with a sports agent, but the underclassman decides to stay at Alabama.

September 1994: NCAA delivers official letter of inquiry accusing Alabama of rules violations under Stallings, including allowing Langham to play during the 1993 season and lack of institutional control.

August 1995: In its first-ever NCAA penalty for rules violations, Alabama is placed on probation for three years, banned from a bowl appearance, ordered to give up 26 scholarships over three years and forced to foreit eight victories from 1993.

November 1995: NCAA appeals committee sides with Alabama, lifting one year of probation and restoring nine scholarships.

May 1996: NCAA strips the football program of one scholarship for failing to disclose player loans that were guaranteed by a Birmingham tire and wheel dealer.

November 1996: NCAA Infractions Committee admits making a major mistake in its handling of the Langham case, publicly apologizes to a school official wrongly accused of ethical lapse. Stallings retires days later, setting the stage for the hiring of defensive coordinator Mike DuBose as head coach.

February 1999: Alabama avoids NCAA sanctions following claims a former assistant basketball coach, Tyrone Beaman, tried to create a slush fund for recruits. NCAA warns severe penalties could result from any violations over the next five years.

May 1999 — Head coach Mike DuBose holds a news conference to deny rumors of improper conduct with a former secretary. DuBose later admits his denial was misleading and the school pays $360,000 to settle the woman’s sexual harassment claim.

December 1999 — DuBose receives two-year contract extension after Alabama beats Florida 34-7 to win its first Southeastern Conference football title since 1992.

November 2000: DuBose resigns and coaches his last game, a 9-0 loss to Auburn that caps a 3-8 year, Alabama’s worst season in more than four decades.

December 2000: TCU coach Dennis Franchione accepts the Alabama job after other high-profile candidates withdraw from consideration.

January 2001: Following days of rumors posted on Internet chat rooms, a newspaper in Memphis, Tenn., The Commercial Appeal, reports that a Crimson Tide booster is said to have paid a high school coach $200,000 to steer a top recruit, Albert Means, to Alabama.

February 2001: Alabama receives a preliminary letter of inquiry from the NCAA.

August 2001: Federal grand jurors in Memphis indict former Trezevant High School head coach Lynn Lang and former assistant Milton Kirk on charges of trying to sell Means to seven schools.

Sept. 6, 2001: Eight days later, Alabama receives official notice of alleged rules violations from NCAA.

Feb. 2, 2002: Alabama football receives five years probation, including a two-year postseason ban, because of a recruiting scandal in which boosters were accused of paying money for prep players.

Oct. 17, 2007: University bookstore employee discovers questionable textbook charges by women’s track and field athlete, prompting internal investigation.

Feb. 20, 2009: Alabama appears before NCAA Committee on Infractions.

June 11, 2009: The NCAA places 16 athletic programs, including football and men’s basketball, on three years of probation for misuse of free textbooks student athletes obtained for others using their scholarships.

Posted: **Mon Jul 25, 2011 5:32 pm**

There are many inaccuracies with the "loserswithsocks" summaries. Anyway, Alabama has had four "major" violations in football:

(1) In 1964, Paul Bryant talked to an Ole Miss player who wanted to transfer.
(2) In 2002, we had the Albert Means saga.
(3) In 1995 we had the Antonio Langham $300 cocktail napkin, and...
(4) in 2009, we had students who recived impermissable book loans.

In every case EXCPET 1964 we were punsihed much more harshly than is the normal precedent.

(BTW, Nick Saban is a Kent State alum. He was there when the shootings happened.)

Posted: **Mon Jul 25, 2011 5:33 pm**

hedge wrote:Didn't some stud for Alabama last year have to sit out two games and repay some money? I wish some of Carolina's players had gotten that same type of "punishment"...

Marcel Dareus. The scuttlebutt was that Dareus became an "informant" on everyone else, and the NCAA gave him a lenient punishment in return.

Posted: **Mon Jul 25, 2011 5:42 pm**

The Langham thing still kills me.

He signs the cocktail napkin and gets 3 bills from an agent in the French Quarter after the Sugar Bowl. He decides to renege on the agent and play in 1993 for Alabama. The agent writes Stallings and tells him of the cocktail napkin. Stallings calls Langham in and asks him about it. Langham tells Stallings that the guy is crazy. "Sign something? Three hunnert?! No way!"

Stallings accepts that as the truth and goes on. Compliance talks to the "agent" and does not find him credible because he will not even release or provide a copy of the "contract" (the cocktail napkin).

The NCAA decides that "Alabama should have done more to corroborate Langham's denial". What? How? Other than speaking with the agent, which they did, what else could they do?

21 scholarships lost, bowl ban, game vacation...

Posted: **Mon Jul 25, 2011 5:50 pm**

Marvin Austin paid Marcel Dareus' plane fare to Miami. That is something Austin never denied. Dareus' story was that he never knew of the agent/coach that Austin was involved with - so I'm not sure how much of an informant he could be.

They asked him who paid for the trip, and he said Austin. He also states that he paid Austin back and produced a signed receipt. Is that true? Probably not, but since neither party disputed it, Dareus' suspension from 4 games to 2 games, stood.

The Goat Pen

Ostensibly Hoops

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Re: Ostensibly Hoops