I'm not arguing I'm stating, but if you choose to think of it that way then at least understand the "argument" I am making. If you re-read my statement, I didn't say they want to compete with the NFL. In fact, what I said is that they can't and that is why they don't want to. They just want money. The easiest way to do that is to not have to play by the rules in the NCAA. The 3/4s of FBS schools comment is actually an old argument and by far the weakest, even if you SEC folks seem to sound like a broken record with it. I doubt that is true, but even if it is, again, it doesn't make it right. Strive to be better than the best not, worse than the worst. Hey I just found the SEC conferences new slogan. "We are worse than the worst at cheating" (And probably academics) Ding Ding Ding. We have a winner. This is my biggest frustration. SEC teams don't cooperate with the NCAA. They don't lead thorough investigations. Texas A&M lawyered up and got the NCAA to give them a slap on the wrist. As a counter point, U of M basketball performed its own investigation and levied its own penalties that were likely far worse than the NCAA would have. They took down the banners, vacated wins, probation, fired a coach and gave back money all before the NCAA had even gotten its first cup of coffee in the morning. Although far more serious than money to players, Penn St also performed its own investigation to understand how it happened to make sure it never did again. They fired administrators and coaches and cooperated with the police. Then the NCAA came prancing in, all high and mighty, to use PSU's own report to penalize the football program. Clearly out of the jurisdiction of the NCAA as it was a criminal matter not one of competitiveness on the field or concerning any current or former players. The stink on this scandal was so bad PSU itself didn't fight the NCAA jurisdiction, for fear of looking worse, but they easily could have. They likely would have won in the courts, but not in the court of public opinion. I'm trying hard, but I can't recall any decent investigation or self-levying of penalties by an SEC school. Vacating wins and championships is a BS penalty. It affects no one but some editor of the record books. Your institution and fans still got to enjoy the season and party after each win. It still helped recruiting and the school and conference still made loads of money from it. It wouldn’t surprise me if you are right though. It’s just another example of the SEC doing the minimum to enforce rules. As another counter point, U of M basketball didn’t find any examples of a cover up, but the one thing you are forgetting is this pesky “lack of institutional control” that the NCAA has used before to penalize a program that wasn’t directly involved in the scandal. But I’m guessing the SEC will fight the NCAA on that and not get charged with that one as well.
The NCAA has lost it's leverage. The BCS bought control. The NCAA schools realigned to chase the BCS money. Expecting the NCAA to sink it's teeth into anything at this point is expecting too much IMO. The NCAA is struggling just to stay relevant. It'll be interesting how they handle the Oklahoma State fallout. Because I don't think anything was happening there that isn't happening elsewhere at upper echelon schools. Same could be said for the Ohio State situation a couple years ago. So what is the NCAA going to do about it? My bet is nothing. As for the SEC headlines this happened at UNC in the past 5 years and there were no sanctions. Active players were held out of games.
So......when are they going to get around to charging the rapists on the team at Notre Dame ??? Is that one up next, or still a way down the road ??
College and pro are two different entities, both wildly financially successful. The SEC is a "feeder" system that keeps the NFL supplied with "stars". There is a relationship between the two that is mutually beneficial.
Hell, if you want to get into criminal activity (and the cover up of it by schools) that is a whole other subject and a slippery slope with the NCAA. Up until now they have let the courts deal with the investigation and the schools to dole out suspensions (except in the PSU case) or kick the player off the team. EVEN when a team allows a player to stay on the team despite being found guilty, the NCAA doesn't step in. Sadly in some cases the only thing that kept the athlete from playing was being in jail, not the coach or schools sense of morality.
Shouldn't it be the NCAA is a feeder system that keeps the NFL supplied. As long as the SEC is allowed to do what they want and bully the NCAA, High School kids will preferentially choose the SEC. What I was eluding to was that if the SEC departed from the NCAA and said we want to pay players than they would start competing with the NFL instead of being a feeder. The NFL would then eat them alive. Also if the SEC did that they would be cut from the money pool that is college football, as entities like ESPN and FOX wouldn't consider them part of the college landscape anymore. Easiest way for the SEC to make money is to claim to be part of college athletics but operate as a minor league football league.
It is the college system as a whole that is the "feeder" for the pros. Pro rosters aren't made up exclusively of SEC players. High school kids with dreams of NFL careers (and the talent that has to accompany that dream) choose schools that regularly compete on the biggest stage and most often on TV. Does an SEC team like Alabama have an edge in that? Sure. So does Notre Dame with their exclusive NBC contract. High school players have been clamoring to come to a place like Alabama for decades preceding the rise of the massive TV money. It's one of those programs that they knew could get them to "the promised land", the NFL. It's the same reason that a hot shot basketball prospect wants to go to (now) Duke or (back in the day) UCLA. The SEC (as well as every other conference across the land) makes "easy money" because they have a devoted following that is indoctrinated from day 1 of their lives to not only love a particular school, but to despise that school's main rival with every fiber of their being.
Forgot to use the line most parents use when a spoiled brat uses this as an excuse "If Johnny jumped off a bridge would you do it too?"
I have no problem with kids going to schools that get them to the promised land because they get more coverage at the school of their choice. I may be biased since Michigan has historically been one of those schools. The problem is that when a kid gets money (which is still against NCAA rules) it adds more incentive to choosing one school over another. The lure to a certain school should be on the merits of the school within the rules. The crazy thing is that several SEC schools would still get the same talent as they have now. What would change is teams 4-12 would not be as strong. Just like how the Big Ten seems to function I'd also like to see the SEC guarantee 4 years of scholarship to students when they offer a high school kid. This is really in the students best interest, since the majority of scholarship players don't make it to the NFL. The SEC pulls scholarships from upper classmen that are not performing fully so they can offer more to new recruits. This is one area, while not against the rules, hurts the Big Ten when competing for talent with the SEC.
Asking the SEC (or any other college) to care about the best interests of the student versus what will make money for "THE PROGRAM" is the mark of a true dreamer. Not a bad trait at all and I agree with you completely.
I'm not going to quote your entire post because its too long, but suffice it to say that you're apparently too blinded by your dislike of the SEC to make a "statement" that holds water. First and foremost, saying that the SEC doesn't want to compete with the NFL because it can't is ridiculous. Not because I think they can, but because you're making a statement no one is trying to make. Its an incongruous comparison. Second, the 3/4s of FBS schools thing is absolutely true, regardless of whether you think its weak. Or were you not paying attention this week to Oklahoma St., or recent allegations at USC, or a few months ago to Miami, UNC, and a list of others I seem to be forgetting. Lastly, this wasn't about SEC schools. This was about an agent paying a handful of players independently of the schools. Yes, the players were from SEC schools, but saying this is about the institutions is reaching a bit. I'm, by no means, an SEC apologist. I'm a fan, but I'm a fan of football in general. If I thought a school was cheating, I'd say so, even if it were the SEC. I don't know what Alabama and/or Miss. St. can do to cooperate with investigations into former players, especially if the stuff took place off campus, but I know for UT's part with Mo Couch, Butch Jones took him out of practice, took him out of the lineup for the game this weekend, and he's not even travelling with the team to Oregon. Beyond that, I think there's probably more to be discussed, but who knows. I don't know what more they can/should do beyond that. I guess the questions you could ask yourself are: 1. What more can a program do to prevent a player from taking money from an outside agent with no ties to the program? 2. Did the program gain an "unfair advantage" by an existing player, already on the team for a year or more, accepting money from an outside agent with little or no relation to the program? Its one thing if its a systematic issue (like Miami, Auburn, or USC) where boosters and those with close ties to the program contribute to get a player to come there. Its completely another when the player is already there, and someone outside is paying them to gain their business when they turn pro.
You keep making this about the SEC... Its not. Its about whoever is "good" at the moment. As soon as OSU starts winning championships again, it'll be about the Big 10, and I suspect you'll be okay with it. Here's something to think about... Let's say you're right for a moment. Let's say the SEC has had it with the NCAA and secedes from the Union. How many schools would go with them? I can think of at least 4-5 right away that were already discussed as potentials when Texas A&M and Missouri joined. Still think its about the SEC only? Still think that the SEC is the only conference that cares about money? Here's an anecdote - do you know why Texas A&M joined the SEC? University of Texas and their disagreement over the Longhorn Network. A&M wasn't happy with how that went down and knew they could do better, so they went to the SEC. Know what the SEC Network contract is worth? For starters, CBS is paying $5 million for each of the 14 games it will show ($70 million). There are 45 games to be televised. I could be wrong, but I believe that does not include the SEC title game, which is worth many millions by itself. It also doesn't include bowl games.
I don't often hurl insults on the web, but you are an idiot. Very convenient that you don't want to discuss topics that you can't defend by saying my post is "too long". Nice deflection with the incorrect statement that I am too blindsided by dislike. It's the other way around. My dislike is from the facts about cheating (and fighting penalties) and non-guaranteed scholarships and then having SEC folks talk about how they have the best talent. While you do have the best talent, how you got it is why I dislike the SEC. My eyes are wide open on this subject. The purpose of this thread is to discuss Alabama (and other SEC) schools cheating and to confront the people that pump their chests out and say the SEC rules. I'm sure they wouldn't if they played by the rules instead if trying to find ways to go around them or fight when caught. As for the incongruous argument, let me walk you through this slowly College teams that play by the rules = No payment = Amateurs College teams that DON'T play by the rules = payments = Pro's NFL teams that play by their rules = salaries = Pro's College teams that DON'T play by the rules = NFL teams that play by their rules College Teams that DON'T play by the rules that admit it and try to compete with the NFL <<<<<<<<<<<< NFL teams Congruous enough for you? Again with the 3/4 comment. I'll use math again to help you out ~125 FBS schools X 3/4 = 93.75. I'll be nice and round down to 93 In all your posts you've listed maybe 10 teams. You have quite a ways to go to get to 93.
Holy Shit. Now I'm wondering if you've actually read anything I've written. You do realize I am a Michigan fan and Alum right? Aint no way in hell I'll be OK with OSU winning championships again, especially if they are tainted. What I'm pissed about is that Michigan self penalized itself in basketball and then got smacked with harder penalties than many schools have gotten for paying players. Do you know what for? For practicing too much. There was a concern about what is considered a "voluntary" practice. Everyone knows you can skip a voluntary practice, but it might affect your playing time. So while labeled voluntary it's not really at any school. Since a punk journalist was trying to make a name for himself tricked a freshman into admitting that he would have rather spent time with his mommy on Sunday and gets statements from a disgruntled ex player that transferred to Ohio State, we get penalized. If we broke rules fine, but when other do and don't get penalized that's wrong. Defending those same schools because you are blinded by the love of that school is fanatical. The difference between our arguments is that I want strict enforcement of the rules and strong penalties for those that break them, including my own school. You say "ahhh 3/4 of the schools do it so we shouldn't get penalized". See the difference there?
Well in all honesty, the purpose of this thread was to zing Kerry with a parody of his "TOUCHDOWN ALABAMA!" posts on game nights but he's not weighed in, but then he's got racing to take care of today in NOLA. The discussion can go down any path you guys want to make it, no storyline is sacred in my book and payola has great potential for fun.
Oh, shit. I'm sorry, bro. I will speak slower and in shorter words. I have a good friend from Michigan, so I've had some practice.
Ah, yes, yet another person that does not know how to distinguish between a mascot and a battle cry. The Tiger is the Mascot (Aubie) War Eagle is the battle cry. We have an eagle fly in because it is awesome and because we can I mean really, which would you choose as your battle cry? or WAR EAGLE!
