[TreesAndBirds]

Some of Shaws comments....

CFB has some similar issues but to a lesser degree
Solution is to heavily fine schools
Paying college athletes wont work

And the article also mentions that.....
One bball recruit allegedly offered $150K.

http://www.sfgate.com/collegesports/arti...hp?ref=yfp

[TreesAndBirds]

Some of Shaws comments....

CFB has some similar issues but to a lesser degree
Solution is to heavily fine schools
Paying college athletes wont work

And the article also mentions that.....
One bball recruit allegedly offered $150K.

http://www.sfgate.com/collegesports/arti...hp?ref=yfp

[Snorlax94]

Yeah I thought this was a bombshell. And in terms of a lesser degree, the quote was:
“It’s already happening in football. I don’t think it’s on the scale of basketball; the money’s not as big. There’s cheating in everything.”

So it’s unclear just how big it is.

I was also struck at how definitive he was in terms of saying that cheating is occurring and payments are being made. He is a very careful speaker and typically never makes ungrounded accusations, so I imagine this means he knows of specific examples. I could see many of Stanford’s recruits choosing to go to Stanford for only tuition, even if athletes were offered tuition+ to go elsewhere.

Hmm... so who are the Louisvilles of football?

[Snorlax94]

Yeah I thought this was a bombshell. And in terms of a lesser degree, the quote was:
“It’s already happening in football. I don’t think it’s on the scale of basketball; the money’s not as big. There’s cheating in everything.”

So it’s unclear just how big it is.

I was also struck at how definitive he was in terms of saying that cheating is occurring and payments are being made. He is a very careful speaker and typically never makes ungrounded accusations, so I imagine this means he knows of specific examples. I could see many of Stanford’s recruits choosing to go to Stanford for only tuition, even if athletes were offered tuition+ to go elsewhere.

Hmm... so who are the Louisvilles of football?

[stupac2]

Hmm... so who are the Louisvilles of football?

Everyone who's routinely in the top of the recruiting rankings.

[stupac2]

Hmm... so who are the Louisvilles of football?

Everyone who's routinely in the top of the recruiting rankings.

[Hulk01]

I'm most suspicious of programs that have made major surges in relatively short periods of time.  Despite their horrible season this year, Baylor comes to mind first.  Then Clemson and Oklahoma State. 

[Hulk01]

I'm most suspicious of programs that have made major surges in relatively short periods of time.  Despite their horrible season this year, Baylor comes to mind first.  Then Clemson and Oklahoma State. 

[CTcard]

I'm most suspicious of programs that have made major surges in relatively short periods of time.  Despite their horrible season this year, Baylor comes to mind first.  Then Clemson and Oklahoma State.

Or Stanford?

[CTcard]

I'm most suspicious of programs that have made major surges in relatively short periods of time.  Despite their horrible season this year, Baylor comes to mind first.  Then Clemson and Oklahoma State.

Or Stanford?

[OutsiderFan]

While Shaw certainly is correct that the institutions themselves should be fined if proven to be cheaters, how exactly does he propose that proof get collected?

The only reason the college hoops fiasco came to light is because the FBI uses things like subpoenas and wire taps. So while it sounds great to say "let's fine the schools when they are guilty of cheating," no school is going to agree to pay a fine unless there is iron-clad evidence against it that the NCAA has no power to collect.

Stanford, as an institution isn't going to spend any time worrying about cheating that goes on at other programs because Stanford doesn't get impacted by it much if at all, and because Stanford just doesn't care anyway.  And the schools that do cheat, they aren't going to want more enforcement.  So??????

[OutsiderFan]

While Shaw certainly is correct that the institutions themselves should be fined if proven to be cheaters, how exactly does he propose that proof get collected?

The only reason the college hoops fiasco came to light is because the FBI uses things like subpoenas and wire taps. So while it sounds great to say "let's fine the schools when they are guilty of cheating," no school is going to agree to pay a fine unless there is iron-clad evidence against it that the NCAA has no power to collect.

Stanford, as an institution isn't going to spend any time worrying about cheating that goes on at other programs because Stanford doesn't get impacted by it much if at all, and because Stanford just doesn't care anyway.  And the schools that do cheat, they aren't going to want more enforcement.  So??????

[VFRing98]

All of the SEC. It's an open secret among boosters and fans. "Passing the hat" for recruits is the norm, up and down the SEC...even the cellar dwellers.

[VFRing98]

All of the SEC. It's an open secret among boosters and fans. "Passing the hat" for recruits is the norm, up and down the SEC...even the cellar dwellers.

[cardcrimson]

All of the SEC. It's an open secret among boosters and fans. "Passing the hat" for recruits is the norm, up and down the SEC...even the cellar dwellers.

Proof?

[cardcrimson]

All of the SEC. It's an open secret among boosters and fans. "Passing the hat" for recruits is the norm, up and down the SEC...even the cellar dwellers.

Proof?

[TreesAndBirds]

While Shaw certainly is correct that the institutions themselves should be fined if proven to be cheaters, how exactly does he propose that proof get collected?

Your point is a very good one. I have found that when corporations get caught for doing bad things it is usually a disgruntled employee, or customer, or shareholder etc who informs on them.  And the SEC (the government, not the football conference) has mandated well publicized anonymous tip lines that go directly to the board where people can disclose nefarious things to the top levels at the company. There are of course other things that could be done as well (eg, NFL not hiring coaches whose teams broke significant rules, sports clothing companies being banned from all NCAA activities if they break significant rules, etc) but as you also mentioned, the key is whether there is a will to address the problem.

[TreesAndBirds]

While Shaw certainly is correct that the institutions themselves should be fined if proven to be cheaters, how exactly does he propose that proof get collected?

Your point is a very good one. I have found that when corporations get caught for doing bad things it is usually a disgruntled employee, or customer, or shareholder etc who informs on them.  And the SEC (the government, not the football conference) has mandated well publicized anonymous tip lines that go directly to the board where people can disclose nefarious things to the top levels at the company. There are of course other things that could be done as well (eg, NFL not hiring coaches whose teams broke significant rules, sports clothing companies being banned from all NCAA activities if they break significant rules, etc) but as you also mentioned, the key is whether there is a will to address the problem.

[SamuelMcF]

[quote author=VFRing98 link=topic=17777.msg207807#msg207807 date=1508956938]
All of the SEC. It's an open secret among boosters and fans. "Passing the hat" for recruits is the norm, up and down the SEC...even the cellar dwellers.

Proof?
[/quote]

https://www.sbnation.com/college-footbal...-interview

Widely believed (at least on Reddit) that this is an Ole Miss booster. The whole "stopped donating because the coach was crass and kept taking the Lord's name in vain" matches up with Ed Orgeron being coach there.

Also, Ole Miss's recruiting rankings shot up out of nowhere a couple years ago. They got a few #1/#2 ranked recruits for their positions, and then nobody else who was higher than #15 or so. Specific example would be #1 receiver Laquon Treadwell, a player from inner-city Chicago. You know, a place where players DREAM of playing at Ole Miss.

[SamuelMcF]

[quote author=VFRing98 link=topic=17777.msg207807#msg207807 date=1508956938]
All of the SEC. It's an open secret among boosters and fans. "Passing the hat" for recruits is the norm, up and down the SEC...even the cellar dwellers.

Proof?
[/quote]

https://www.sbnation.com/college-footbal...-interview

Widely believed (at least on Reddit) that this is an Ole Miss booster. The whole "stopped donating because the coach was crass and kept taking the Lord's name in vain" matches up with Ed Orgeron being coach there.

Also, Ole Miss's recruiting rankings shot up out of nowhere a couple years ago. They got a few #1/#2 ranked recruits for their positions, and then nobody else who was higher than #15 or so. Specific example would be #1 receiver Laquon Treadwell, a player from inner-city Chicago. You know, a place where players DREAM of playing at Ole Miss.

[cctop]

[quote author=Hulk01 link=topic=17777.msg207800#msg207800 date=1508949224]
I'm most suspicious of programs that have made major surges in relatively short periods of time.  Despite their horrible season this year, Baylor comes to mind first.  Then Clemson and Oklahoma State.

Or Stanford?
[/quote]

Nope.  Stanford's success is due to steroids, at least according to Cal fans.

[cctop]

[quote author=Hulk01 link=topic=17777.msg207800#msg207800 date=1508949224]
I'm most suspicious of programs that have made major surges in relatively short periods of time.  Despite their horrible season this year, Baylor comes to mind first.  Then Clemson and Oklahoma State.

Or Stanford?
[/quote]

Nope.  Stanford's success is due to steroids, at least according to Cal fans.

[SamuelMcF]

[quote author=CTcard link=topic=17777.msg207804#msg207804 date=1508954301]
[quote author=Hulk01 link=topic=17777.msg207800#msg207800 date=1508949224]
I'm most suspicious of programs that have made major surges in relatively short periods of time.  Despite their horrible season this year, Baylor comes to mind first.  Then Clemson and Oklahoma State.

Or Stanford?
[/quote]

Nope.  Stanford's success is due to steroids, at least according to ןɐɔ fans.
[/quote]

Have they seen our defensive line this year?

[SamuelMcF]

[quote author=CTcard link=topic=17777.msg207804#msg207804 date=1508954301]
[quote author=Hulk01 link=topic=17777.msg207800#msg207800 date=1508949224]
I'm most suspicious of programs that have made major surges in relatively short periods of time.  Despite their horrible season this year, Baylor comes to mind first.  Then Clemson and Oklahoma State.

Or Stanford?
[/quote]

Nope.  Stanford's success is due to steroids, at least according to ןɐɔ fans.
[/quote]

Have they seen our defensive line this year?