The NCAA Hypocrisy
Fact: The University of Southern California (“USC”) is currently on probation for NCAA violations and forced to field a team of just 75 scholarship athletes. The NCAA punished USC for infractions arising out of players getting special treatment. Message: If you put your athletics programs above the rest of the University, your school is out of balance and the NCAA needs to step in to restore that balance with penalties.
Fact: Penn State University was just punished by the NCAA for putting football apparently above other considerations. As punishment for Penn State, any of its players can transfer. Message: If you put your athletics programs above the rest of the University, your school is out of balance and the NCAA needs to step in to restore that balance with penalties.
Fact: Silas Redd is going to transfer from one punished school, Penn State, to another punished school, USC. While USC is bowl-eligible, they are still being penalized. Message: The NCAA is a hypocritical organization.
If the NCAA had any desire to avoid hypocrisy, they should have said that Penn State players can transfer to any school not currently on probation. The schools on probation should be focusing on improving their overall athletic department’s compliance with NCAA rules. The schools on probation should NOT be focusing on improving their football product by taking on a player fleeing the sinking ship of Penn State. Wasn’t that the whole gist of the press conference by the NCAA?
If Silas Redd wants to leave PSU, so be it. Let’s not begrudge a kid for taking a step to help himself. If he blows out his knee in August, nobody will be passing a collection plate for him on either coast. He has to look out for himself.
But to go to USC? What about the schools that are NOT on probation? Many schools could have used him. The NCAA should have forced Redd to pick a football factory that either plays clean or has not quite had its dirtyness exposed.
The NCAA dropped the ball on this one. Two steps forward, one step backward for the NCAA in allowing this move.
The Confidential 
I agree that USC should not be allowed to recruit Penn State students, but I disagree that all schools on probation should not be allowed to recruit them.
First of all, the list of schools currently on probation is quite extensive, and while most (with the exception of Arkansas St.) are big-time programs (Michigan, FSU, WVU, etc…) the rationale to allow PSU students to transfer without waiver was not to create more parity in the NCAA, but instead to give the athletes something that PSU cannot offer: a chance to play in the postseason.
Considering that the athletes at Penn State were not the ones that caused the probation, then it definitely seems inhumane to make them stay and suffer if other schools are available.
Secondly, unless the NCAA specifically comes out and says so, I don’t see the probation period as being one to set a school’s priorities straight (not as much as a scholarship reduction or bowl ban would) and instead a probation in my opinion is nothing more than a period of additonal scrutiny that allows the school to demonstrate their ability and willingness for compliance.
This is especially pertinent when their is a leadership change as a result of NCAA sanctions. Should Al Golden have his hands tied because the prior administration was sleezy? Or instead, should Golden have the opportunity to prove that the school takes the restrictions seriously and is willing to be scrutinized more than most schools as a result.
If the school on probation does not violate any rules as part of the recruitment process, then whether it is on probation or not is moot.
Where I will agree is that the NCAA should not allow USC to recruit players is that they are currently facing a scholarship reduction. I don’t know how many scholarships they currently have to offer, but if they were able to go over the limit in order to get Redd, then that ultimately reflects how pointless the NCAA is. They will impose sanctions on one team, but not enforce them on another.
Fine. At the very least, schools with scholarship reductions should not have been allowed to accept transfers from Penn State. Frankly, any school that cannot follow the rules should not be allowed to benefit from another school’s similar misfortune. But the ones with major violations and scholarship reductions certainly cannot benefit.
So finally, we’re all in agreement about what’s going on with
the NCAA….the Rand Corporation, in conjunction with the saucer people, under the supervision of the reverse vampires, are forcing our recruits to go to football factories in a fiendish plot to reduce the number of modern football factories. We’re through the looking glass, here, people…
Actually, it has been reported that USC has zero scholarships left to offer. They were at their limit before adding Redd. The expectation is that one of the current players will become academically ineligible (and apparently lose his scholarship), or one player currently on scholarship will be asked or forced to relinquish it. That the latter would be allowed does seem hypocritical, considering that part of PSU’s sanctions specify that no player who stays can be denied a scholarship. Perhaps this was something the NCAA added from experience in how schools like USC have pushed the envelope.
Schools in good standing are allowed to add PSU transfers for this year, without the extras counting against their limit. They will have to be back under the usual limits by next season. Schools “on probation” aren’t allowed to go above their restricted limit. I put that in quotes because all that I remember from Emmert’s statements was that USC and Ohio State weren’t allowed to go over. I don’t know whether this applies to all schools on probation or if the criteria only applies to some of those schools.
It should be clarified that probation and sanctions are different things. During the 1980s the NCAA put many teams on probation without sanctions. This matches well with Vinnie’s description of probation being a time of scrutiny. PSU is on five years probation, but as near as I can tell some of the sanctions (bowl ban) are for 2012-2015 and others (scholarship limits) are for 2013-2016. I have no idea what five years the probation covers.
In case you were curious, here are the teams currently on probabation, and who among them are serving a bowl ban.
School Probation Bowl Ban
Central Florida 2012 – 2016 2012 or 2013?
Penn St. 2012 – 2016 2012 – 2015
Baylor (TX) 2012 – 2014 –
North Carolina 2012 – 2014 2012
South Carolina 2012 – 2014 –
Nebraska 2012 – 2013 –
Georgia Tech 2011 – 2014 –
Arkansas St. 2011 – 2012 –
Texas Tech 2011 – 2012 –
West Virginia 2011 – 2012 –
Boise St. (ID) 2011 (Sep) – 2014 –
Cincinnati (OH) 2011 (Sep) – 2013 –
Ohio St. 2011 (Dec) – 2014 2012
Southern California 2010 – 2013 2010 – 2011
Michigan 2010 (Nov) – 2013 –
Florida St. 2009 – 2012 –
Teams with Probabation By Conference:
Big Ten: 4
Big 12: 3
ACC: 3
SEC: 1
Pac 12: 1
Big East (current): 1 / Big East (future): 3
Other: 1