SB Nation's Ohio State Blog Along The Olentangy attempts to break down the differences between USC, UNC and tOSU and their respective NCAA cases.
Here is a taste...
Finally, some conclusions I have drawn from comparing the three:The USC situation is not a particularly good analogue for either UNC or Ohio State. It involved three teams, multiple coaches, agents, five years of compliance failure, and, most importantly, an administration that actively impeded the NCAA's investigation over multiple years. Neither UNC nor Ohio State have quite that combination of antagonism toward the NCAA.
Nothing like getting it wrong right out of the box...
It is a pretty chart and all and I am sure that the OP put a lot of effort into it but the assumption that USC didn't cooperate shows how some people either choose to ignore facts, not do their own research or regurgitate the same old tired untruths that have floated around for years.
Brdcstr once again sets the record straight...
Fact Check Required
In order to "compile the most accurate comparison page of the three investigations," you must first start with an accurate representation of the facts. In the case of USC, it’s abundantly clear you’re either:
a) Uninterested in gathering the facts, or
b) Too lazy to do the research and gather the facts for yourself.
< Hint> Second-hand media accounts and opinions spewed on Internet message boards are not where serious journalists gather their facts.
"an administration that actively impeded the NCAA’s investigation over multiple years"
Impeding an NCAA investigation is an NCAA violation in and of itself. Please explain why the NCAA didn’t cite USC for impeding an NCAA investigation?
"Neither UNC nor Ohio State have quite that combination of antagonism toward the NCAA."
It remains to be seen how the NCAA will feel about Jim Tressel affixing his signature to NCAA documents stating that he was unaware of the potential of any NCAA violations occurring.
It also remains to be seen how the NCAA will perceive Ohio State’s compliance Department failing to catch the e-mails in December, after being told by Tressel of the tip he received via e-mail of potential violations.
"For all the faults at UNC and Ohio State, both institutions have cooperated with NCAA investigators"
In the eyes of the NCAA, Jim Tressel IS Ohio State, as the actions of the coach are imputed to the University. Even the most ardent Buckeye fan will have to admit that Jim Tressel did not cooperate with NCAA bylaws or their December investigation.
"It’s been forgotten that Ohio State turned themselves in with Tressel’s emails"
It’s also not often mentioned from Buckeye fans that Ohio State finally turned themselves in on their third bite at the apple, after JT failed to come clean, and compliance failed to find the same e-mails in his inbox that lawyers subsequently found.
Since "Ohio State" is not a being, it’s intellectually dishonest to consider the lawyers that found JT’s e-mails more representative of Ohio State than JT himself.
"The NCAA report frequently mentioned the uncooperative behavior of everyone involved, from the student-athletes"
Don’t forget to mention they were FORMER student athletes who were not obligated to cooperate with the NCAA. This would only be a fair assessment of USC’s position if you’re willing to deem Ohio State as being uncooperative for Terrel Pryor’s unwillingness to now cooperate with the NCAA investigation.
"to the coaches",
Surely you have a link to back up this statement, no?
"to the USC administration."
Now you’re just making things up to strengthen your uninformed opinion While you’re diligently searching for ANY link to back up this statement with proof from and NCAA source that USC failed to cooperate, I’ll provide you with the exact verbiage taken from the NCAA report, starting on page 57, that emphatically states USC DID cooperate with the NCAA.
The committee also considered the institution’s cooperation in the processing of this case. Cooperation during the infractions process is addressed in Bylaw 19.01.3 -
Responsibility to Cooperate, which states in relevant part that, "All representatives of member institutions shall cooperate fully with the NCAA Enforcement Staff, Committee on Infractions, Infractions Appeals Committee and Board of Directors.
The enforcement policies and procedures require full and complete disclosure by all institutional representatives of any relevant information requested by the NCAA Enforcement Staff, Committee on Infractions or Infractions Appeals Committee during the course of an inquiry."
Further, NCAA Bylaw 32.1.4 – Cooperative Principle, also addresses
institutional responsibility to fully cooperate during infractions investigations, stating, in
relevant part, "The cooperative principle imposes an affirmative obligation on each
institution to assist the enforcement staff in developing full information, to determine
whether a possible violation of NCAA legislation has occurred and the details thereof."
The committee determined that the cooperation exhibited by the institution met its obligation under Bylaws 19.01.3.3 and 32.1.4. The cooperation the institution
demonstrated in this case must be weighed against the conduct and failures of the
University of Southern California Public Infractions Report
June 10, 2010
Page No. 57
institution and its personnel as set forth in Findings B-1-(b), B-6 and B-7. The
committee concluded that in light of the serious nature of the violations and the failure of the institution to detect and/or prevent them, the institution’s cooperation did not warrant relief in the penalties imposed by the committee in this case.
There you have it. FOUR times in the official NCAA report, they mentioned
- "The committee also considered the institution’s cooperation in the processing of this case."
- "the cooperation exhibited by the institution met its obligation under Bylaws 19.01.3.3 and 32.1.4"
- "The cooperation the institution demonstrated in this case…"
- " the institution’s cooperation…"
"USC received LoIC for its uncooperative behavior and systemic failure more than any one issue."
Rattling off the same mistruth ad nauseum doesn’t make it any more truthful the more often you say it.
"The USC compliance department only had one member at the time of the violations"
Oh brother…While you’re certainly entitled to your own opinion, you’re not entitled to your own separate set of facts.
May I suggest that you bone up a bit on the facts of the case as it pertains to USC before making yourself look like nothing more than a delusional Buckeye fan attempting to pacify your fan base from the impending hammer that’s about to be laid on your program?
FWIW, USC’s compliance Department got down to one officer for a few months when the head of compliance unexpectedly took a job elsewhere. Obviously, these positions require time to fill since candidates are identified through an intensive search.
That certainly doesn’t excuse USC for allowing the numbers to be so low, but if their compliance Department was as deficient as you claim, shouldn’t we have expected to see more violations over the four year period he NCAA investigated the program?
‘Ohio State has six’
According to your own internal audit in 2010, Ohio State’s six compliance officers continue to accept paperwork from athletes that’s incomplete, or not even turned in pertaining to car registrations… Which is the same mistake USC’s compliance Department made in failing to detect Reggie Bushs incomplete paperwork.
Good luck explaining to the NCAA why six compliance officers couldn’t find Jim Tressel’s e-mails last December. While you’re at it, good luck explaining why your internal audit identified your oversight of equipment as being lacking, which is likely a reason why Pryor and the others were able to steal and sign much of the equipment found by FBI agents.
Sheesh, That same internal audit identified 44 players driving cars that weren’t registered with your athletic department, and also found forms that were both incomplete, as well is not even turned in.
Making matters even potentially more ominous for Ohio State is that problems identified by auditors in 2006 were still uncorrected in 2010, primarily pertaining to car registrations and forms not being filled out properly.
Instead of wasting your time whistlin’ past the graveyard in an attempt to prove that Ohio State isn’t as bad as other programs, why not direct your focus on what needs to be done to improve the systemic corruption that appears to be running rampant within your program?
Why people attempt to compare these cases is beyond me.
These guys are whistling past the graveyard...