OU forced to forfeit all 2005 wins . . .

[macallan25]

Originally Posted by wreckingcrew

I'm not arguing that A&M has a clean slate by any stretch of the imagination. The incident that you cite took place in 1988 and A&M was on 2 years probation after that point. The incident I brought up took place in 1993 and involved Greg Hill and other Aggies and resulted in our bans in 1994. We were off probation by then and it was a separate incidence. Now, if you're claiming the prior incidence influenced our sanctions, I can accept that. How can you then excuse OU whose past is even more checkered than A&M's (and thats saying something) receiving a light punishment? Their INSTITUTION is CURRENTLY still on probation from indiscretions committed by former basketball coach Kelvin Sampson. http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/!ut/p...tions_rls.html

A&M, off probation, harsher sentence. OU STILL ON probation, lighter sentence. And I'd expect someone from Austin to agree with the Sooners, since your school is also considered an "untouchable" institution. CU got slapped with essentially the same penalties, 2 years probation, loss of one scholarship for improper training table meals to walk-on athletes http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/!ut/p...orado_rls.html . A crime that I think most would agree is benign compared to illegal paying of players.

And for all the high and mighty Sooners, this story wasn't brought to light by self investigations or the University, the dust was kicked up after an internet posting. Had that individual NOT posted that information, its likely y'all would still be cheating.

Yeah, I was merely thinking that previous actions influenced the 1993 rulings for A&M. You are right though, what happened to OU in 2005 looks eerily similar to what A&M did in 1993........booster pay for play type stuff. Surely though you can see how bad A&M's violation looked to the NCAA. They get in trouble in 1988 for pretty serious infractions (I thought the resulting punishment didn't sound to bad given the wrong doing), have a probation period, and then immediately get in trouble again only a few years later.

The only problem I have with your arguments is this: A lot of people, like you, bring up the Kelvin Sampson illegal phone call ordeal. I am in no way all that knowledgeable about how the NCAA rules committee works.......but what does the conduct of OU's Basketball Program have anything remotely close to do with the OU Football program? I don't see how one can affect the other. I can't think of anything that the OU Football Program has done to get themselves in trouble for quite a ways back, at least not in the Stoops era. I just don't see how Sampson's screw up and the probation imposed on the basketball team would affect OU Football.

As far as OU's checkered past? Yeah, they have one.......but look at the dates:
1956
1960
1973
1980
1988 - These violations were pretty severe and had a rough judgement: 3 years probation, tv bans, substantial loss of scholarships, substantial recruiting restrictions, etc.

The current sanctions were laid down what? Close to 20 years later? I just can't see the NCAA taking into account the mess that Switzer caused when deciding the fate of Bob Stoops' team. Especially after what he did when he discovered the problem. Also, it is unfair for you to make the claim that OU was cheating. None of us know that.

As for us being an untouchable institution......I do know that we have 4 violations listed as MAJOR on the NCAA website.......but I don't know what sport they were in. I know our Baseball program got into some trouble a few years back, but that's about it.

Originally Posted by macallan25

Yeah, I was merely thinking that previous actions influenced the 1993 rulings for A&M. You are right though, what happened to OU in 2005 looks eerily similar to what A&M did in 1993........booster pay for play type stuff. Surely though you can see how bad A&M's violation looked to the NCAA. They get in trouble in 1988 for pretty serious infractions (I thought the resulting punishment didn't sound to bad given the wrong doing), have a probation period, and then immediately get in trouble again only a few years later.

The only problem I have with your arguments is this: A lot of people, like you, bring up the Kelvin Sampson illegal phone call ordeal. I am in no way all that knowledgeable about how the NCAA rules committee works.......but what does the conduct of OU's Basketball Program have anything remotely close to do with the OU Football program? I don't see how one can affect the other. I can't think of anything that the OU Football Program has done to get themselves in trouble for quite a ways back, at least not in the Stoops era. I just don't see how Sampson's screw up and the probation imposed on the basketball team would affect OU Football.

As far as OU's checkered past? Yeah, they have one.......but look at the dates:
1956
1960
1973
1980
1988 - These violations were pretty severe and had a rough judgement: 3 years probation, tv bans, substantial loss of scholarships, substantial recruiting restrictions, etc.

The current sanctions were laid down what? Close to 20 years later? I just can't see the NCAA taking into account the mess that Switzer caused when deciding the fate of Bob Stoops' team. Especially after what he did when he discovered the problem. Also, it is unfair for you to make the claim that OU was cheating. None of us know that.

As for us being an untouchable institution......I do know that we have 4 violations listed as MAJOR on the NCAA website.......but I don't know what sport they were in. I know our Baseball program got into some trouble a few years back, but that's about it.

The ONLY reason I bring up the Sampson thing is because in the wording the NCAA used, the entire institution was on probation, not just the basketball program. Do I necessarily think that's right? Not really, if my baseball coaches are running trains on students or midgets and get in serious trouble, it shouldn't affect the football program, but according to the wording the NCAA used in their decision the whole institution has to suffer.

Well, the reason I use the word untouchable is that y'all might get caught, but there's no way in hell the NCAA is going to take tu sports off television or suspend them from postseason play.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by wreckingcrew

Well, the reason I use the word untouchable is that y'all might get caught, but there's no way in hell the NCAA is going to take tu sports off television or suspend them from postseason play.

They imposed such a ban on Alabama fairly recently. Alabama has a pretty substantial fanbase. Probably not on the same order as OU or Texas, but it's substantial. I don't see why Texas or OU would be immune when a school like Alabama is getting hit.

The only football school I can think of which compares to Duke in basketball as far as being untouchable is Notre Dame.

[sueali]

Originally Posted by macallan25

I am in no way all that knowledgeable about how the NCAA rules committee works.......but what does the conduct of OU's Basketball Program have anything remotely close to do with the OU Football program? I don't see how one can affect the other. I can't think of anything that the OU Football Program has done to get themselves in trouble for quite a ways back, at least not in the Stoops era. I just don't see how Sampson's screw up and the probation imposed on the basketball team would affect OU Football.

The NCAA looks at the institution and it's compliance as a whole. The Basketball violation was also a failure to monitor. So as a whole the NCAA is penalizing the Oklahoma Athletic Department (really their compliance department) for failure to monitor for rules compliance. Does that make sense?

As I said in a previous post I am an administrator for a DI program, who is in charge of NCAA Compliance on my campus. This has caused a stir amongst institution compliance programs, because OU was monitoring their employment the same way if not more than most institutions (None of the institutions that I have worked with have ever collected gross employment earnings, which OU was doing, now they failed to collect them during this time, but this was still their policy). A lot of compliance efforts rely on the student and the employer being honest, which in this case they were not. It was a complete disregard for the rules by the employer and the student-athlete (who were both informed on the NCAA policies), which is in no way the fault of OU.

[macallan25]

Originally Posted by sueali

The NCAA looks at the institution and it's compliance as a whole. The Basketball violation was also a failure to monitor. So as a whole the NCAA is penalizing the Oklahoma Athletic Department (really their compliance department) for failure to monitor for rules compliance. Does that make sense?

As I said in a previous post I am an administrator for a DI program, who is in charge of NCAA Compliance on my campus. This has caused a stir amongst institution compliance programs, because OU was monitoring their employment the same way if not more than most institutions (None of the institutions that I have worked with have ever collected gross employment earnings, which OU was doing, now they failed to collect them during this time, but this was still their policy). A lot of compliance efforts rely on the student and the employer being honest, which in this case they were not. It was a complete disregard for the rules by the employer and the student-athlete (who were both informed on the NCAA policies), which is in no way the fault of OU.

Yeah that makes perfect sense. Absolutely. It's just a shame that when it boils down to it......honesty on the part of your own players is the main issue here. It sounds like OU was doing more than necessary to make sure that rules were followed. You would think that after being given the opportunity to play at a place like OU......you would try to show at least a little bit of integrity. I know I sound incredibly naive (I know this kind of stuff happens everywhere), but man, it is just ridiculous.

[sueali]

I agree with you one hundred percent. It is really disheartening when a student-athlete has not respect for the institution that has given them a chance to play at that level, and they could care less if something like this happens to the school. I am not going to get into the argument about paying players, but I do want to say that these kids are well taken care of, especially football and basketball players, especially at a large institution like OU(I'm not insinuating rules violations, just stating that some smaller schools can not afford to give their players as much as larger schools can within NCAA rules).

[macallan25]

Originally Posted by sueali

I agree with you one hundred percent. It is really disheartening when a student-athlete has not respect for the institution that has given them a chance to play at that level, and they could care less if something like this happens to the school. I am not going to get into the argument about paying players, but I do want to say that these kids are well taken care of, especially football and basketball players, especially at a large institution like OU(I'm not insinuating rules violations, just stating that some smaller schools can not afford to give their players as much as larger schools can within NCAA rules).

No, trust me, I know of the arguments about paying players. I played baseball for a year and a half in college, at Texas, before getting injured. I think that a lot of people just have absolutely no idea how well athletes in major sports at universities are taken care of......if not simply spoiled. The locker rooms, the player's lounges, the special cooks, the free tutoring, work programs to earn money, meal stipends for road trips, etc. etc. I'm pretty sure you can also get up to 200$ a year for clothing, I'f I'm not mistaken? I was/am fortunate enough to not have to worry about financial difficulties..........but even if I was, I just don't see how I would be worrying about anything so long as I was keeping myself out of trouble and in good standing on the team.

[sueali]

Originally Posted by macallan25

No, trust me, I know of the arguments about paying players. I played baseball for a year and a half in college, at Texas, before getting injured. I think that a lot of people just have absolutely no idea how well athletes in major sports at universities are taken care of......if not simply spoiled. The locker rooms, the player's lounges, the special cooks, the free tutoring, work programs to earn money, meal stipends for road trips, etc. etc. I'm pretty sure you can also get up to 200$ a year for clothing, I'f I'm not mistaken? I was/am fortunate enough to not have to worry about financial difficulties..........but even if I was, I just don't see how I would be worrying about anything so long as I was keeping myself out of trouble and in good standing on the team.

You can get up to $500 a year for clothing if you are a pell grant recipient.

[Munchkin03]

Originally Posted by macallan25

I just don't see how I would be worrying about anything so long as I was keeping myself out of trouble and in good standing on the team.

But, I thought that's why they took such good care of the athletes? I definitely didn't go to an SEC school, but my undergrad has the best crew teams in the nation, and our athletic conference (D1) specifically outlawed athletic scholarships back in 1954...but we really didn't notice, because the rowers were SO well taken care of--the coaches and the boosters felt that the money was worth it to keep them out of trouble and keep the crew winning.

A friend of the family was a football player at Auburn back in the mid-90s. Boosters would buy him cars, they got his braces, and always kept him in nice clothes. He still didn't finish college. No excuse!