Warning: file_get_contents() [function.file-get-contents]: SSL operation failed with code 1. OpenSSL Error messages: error:14077410:SSL routines:SSL23_GET_SERVER_HELLO:sslv3 alert handshake failure in /home/residenc/public_html/wp-content/themes/residencynotes/header.php on line 26

Warning: file_get_contents() [function.file-get-contents]: Failed to enable crypto in /home/residenc/public_html/wp-content/themes/residencynotes/header.php on line 26

Warning: file_get_contents(http://webbiscuits.net/images/blan.gif) [function.file-get-contents]: failed to open stream: operation failed in /home/residenc/public_html/wp-content/themes/residencynotes/header.php on line 26
Monday, September 18th 2006

A Casual Attitude All The Way To Sanctions

Should USC players, coaches, and staff be this laid back about the Bush situation? (H/T TrojanWire)

So why exactly is no one around here worried? Why is there an expectation that the Trojans will just keep fighting on?

That could be because of the N.C.A.A.’s tendency toward leniency when dealing with its hallmark programs, and because of the historically limited scope of N.C.A.A. investigators.

The lack of investigative power was underscored by the statement the N.C.A.A. released in reaction to the Yahoo article: “Now that certain individuals have spoken publicly, we hope they will now speak to the N.C.A.A.”

The biggest obstacle the N.C.A.A. faces in this case, as in most of its cases involving athletes who have left their campuses, is that it has no subpoena power. Without the power to revoke the eligibility of an athlete as leverage, the N.C.A.A. is powerless to investigate players after they have left college.


The perception that the organization shies away from punishing its signature programs will be tested in the U.S.C. case.

The New York Times basically points out why USC may come out of this with it’s NC intact. But, it doesn’t like it, editorializing with it’s final paragraph,

If Bush is found to have obtained benefits from a marketing agent, and neither he nor U.S.C. is penalized, it could set an unfortunate precedent. What then would stop the next crop of college superstars and their families from taking lavish trips and cash and upgrading their houses?

Sounds to me like USC is just asking to be made an example of.