Death Penalty Substitute

F

FrozenMadman

Well-Known Member
We all know O$U is not going to get what they deserve. However, contemplate the following.

In lieu of an SMU style death penalty, the NCAA imposes a new form of punishment, a 6 year (minimum) moritorium of participation in any BCS bowl game to any totally dirtbag program, such as Ohio State and USC, due to their egregious behavior. Such a "long sentence", coupled with significant scholarship reductions for at least three years, could be as close to the death penalty for a program as I think we might ever see.

Perhaps I am just dreaming (or ranting) on this. But it is sweet to think of the long term effects such a "writ of non-participation" in BCS games would have, especially given the extended period of time, 6 years. It would negatively impact recruiting of high caliber players to these rogue institutions for years to come. The best players would typically, but not always, not sign with a school that has no chance to go to the Rose, Orange, Sugar, etc.. Bowls any time soon.

Plus it would be worth it every fall for the next 6 years to see the moronic Buckeye fans cry and wet themselves each week as they are going nowhere come December and January. I hate O$U!!
 
I'm probably repeating other thoughts, but here's my suggestion for a penalty:

#1--$h!tload fine (not sure how they calculate this)

#2--forfeit any games in which these players started and played (eliminates previous glories ill-gotten)

#3--return any trophies won by these players in bowl games (diminishes previous glories ill-gotten)

#4--four year bowl ban, enough to make new recruits think twice about OSU (affects recruiting)

#5--reduced # of scholly's available for same 4 year period
 
SDK46 said:
I'm probably repeating other thoughts, but here's my suggestion for a penalty:

#1--$h!tload fine (not sure how they calculate this)

#2--forfeit any games in which these players started and played (eliminates previous glories ill-gotten)

#3--return any trophies won by these players in bowl games (diminishes previous glories ill-gotten)

#4--four year bowl ban, enough to make new recruits think twice about OSU (affects recruiting)

#5--reduced # of scholly's available for same 4 year period
Click to expand...



#1--Let B1G fans--excepting OSU--vote on appropriate amount

#2--Nuff said/Self-Explanatory/Agreed

#3--My guess is that trophies were part of what the players sold. I will also assume OSU sold "team" trophies to heavy-hitter boosters/alums, so all that merchandise will have to be retrieved from the online auction sites

#4--"Rolling" 4-year bowl ban, i.e., as long as OSU stays clean, it's 4-year ban, but if they mess up in ANY of those 4 years, ban is extended another 4 years

#5--Same as #2

Finally, OSU should NOT be allowed to revenue-share off bowls with other conference members for that same 4-year period.

Come to think of it, I think B1G should change revenue-sharing, anyway. Miss a bowl for, say, 5 straight years...maybe take reduced shares. Do it for the period OSU is on probation, at least, since you'll now have 11 schools vying for 7 or 8 bowl slots. If you can't crack that bowl slotting during the next 5 years, you need to reassess a school's commitment to B1G football. Cheating of the OSU variety sucks, but schools going bowl-less for half a decade is almost as bad. Our b-ball team is on a 5-season streak without post-season play. It's not right for us to share in NCAA Tourney/NIT/etc. revenue if it were to continue.
 
SDK46 said:
I'm probably repeating other thoughts, but here's my suggestion for a penalty:
Click to expand...
How about the offending school forfeiting their bowl game payouts for each year they had violations?

And now for an additional (maybe too harsh) suggestion:

Any coach found guilty or complicit in significant violations has a 5-year complete ban from NCAA football (including coaching at another school or even having a TV position). As an example, if the NCAA finds that significant violations occurred at Tennessee, then USC would have to immediately fire Kiffin.
 
Smu was wayyyyyy worse than this. The 30 for 30 explained it well. They were on probation when they got busted again and again. This is osu first big thing. It should be worse than usc's though.
 
OSU's penalties will be very similar to USC's. All victories from last year will be vacated, a two-year bowl ban, & a loss of ten scholarships for three seasons.

Also, be careful what you wish for! Iowa got as much money from the Sugar Bowl as Ohio State. The other ten schools & the Big Ten Office all received a healthy pay day for Ohio State's BCS participation.
 
FrozenMadman said:
The best players would typically, but not always, not sign with a school that has no chance to go to the Rose, Orange, Sugar, etc.. Bowls any time soon.
Click to expand...

Best part of the post, substituting Fiesta for etc...not trying rag on the op too much because I just found it funny saving yourself 3 letters while mentioning the other 3 BCS bowls.
 
Honestly, I don't think forfeiting games does anything.

The BCS took USC's 2004 championship away. We all watched the game. We all saw the dominance of Oklahoma. Just because the BCS took it away doesn't erase it from our memories. When people ask who won the 2004 National Championship, I'll always say it was USC. The same goes for Bush's 2005 Heisman. Taking wins/awards away is too little, too late.
 
There needs to be a minimum of 4 year postseason ban. A 2 year postseason ban only really affects the players that are currently on the roster (some of which didn't accept benefits). With a 2 year bowl ban, an incoming freshman will simply redshirt and then only miss 1 post season.
 
I believe that they will get a four year bowl ban. USC got a two year ban for violations for two players. SI listed 23 players and ESPN brought up several others with major violations. If the NCAA substantiated Yahoos report about R. Bush then what if all of these are found to be true. The fact that it was allegedly reported to compliance at tOSU, that Pryor and others were stealing equipment and exchanging them for ink would be one act of lack of institutional control.
The phone calls between Tressel and Pryors "mentor" could prove out to be another act displaying a lack of institutional control and the violation that got USC the bowl ban, was an assistant coach lying about improper benefits. That is why another punishment will be seriously considered. It is one that was considered for USC, a ban from any televised games.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top