Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Unconfigured Ad Widget 7

Collapse

NCAA Hammers SEMO again

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • NCAA Hammers SEMO again

    As if the penalties the NCAA slammed Southeast Missouri State with a year ago weren't enough..........
    Last year - this is how hard they hammered SEMO

    • Public reprimand and censure.
    • Two years of probation (June 18, 2008, to June 17, 2010).
    • Reduction of women’s basketball scholarships in the 2006-07 academic year from 15 to 12. (Self-imposed by institution).
    • Reduction of women’s basketball recruiting days from 85 to 80 between September 2006 and August 2007. (Self-imposed by institution).
    • Prohibition of off-campus recruiting by the former women’s basketball head coach during the July 2006 evaluation period. (Self-imposed by institution).
    • Financial penalty of $12,600 upon the men’s basketball program in the 2006-07 fiscal year. This amount is twice the value of the costs associated with the three men’s basketball student-athletes who traveled to away games. (Self-imposed by institution).
    • Reduction in the number of recruiting days in men’s basketball from 130 to 125 between September 2006 and August 2007. (Self-imposed by institution).
    • Vacate all wins in which ineligible student-athletes competed





    Now the NCAA hammers them again!! - surely they must be hoping we don't notice
    it's been 5 years and counting without anything at all in the USC Reggie Bush scandal!!

    New penalties in addition are.........

    * Public reprimand and censure.
    * Three years of probation to be added to the institution’s current two-year probationary period, which was to conclude June 17, 2010, but now concludes on June 17, 2013.
    * Reducing the number of scholarships in men’s basketball for the 2009-10 academic year from the NCAA maximum limit of 13 to 12. (Self-imposed by the university.)
    * Reducing the number of off-campus contact and evaluation recruiting opportunities in men’s basketball during the 2009-10 academic year by 15. (Self-imposed by the university.)
    * Reducing the number of occasions in which men’s basketball student-athletes may be supervised by strength and conditioning staff to no more than two per week. This is a reduction of 28 opportunities that generally are conducted in May through August. (Self-imposed by the university.)
    * Disassociating the booster for three years due to her involvement in the impermissible tuition payments for the student-athlete. (Self-imposed by the university.)
    * Vacation of wins in which the involved men’s basketball student-athletes competed during the 2006-07 and 2007-08 seasons; and the vacation of the individual records of the student-athletes and record of the former men’s basketball coach.
    * A three-year show-cause period beginning June 30, 2009, and ending June 29, 2012, during which the athletically related activities of the former head coach at any employing NCAA institution will be restricted, including no in-person contact with any employing institution’s men’s basketball team members during summer breaks. Also, if he is employed at a member institution, he must attend at his own cost an NCAA Regional Rules Seminar during each of the years he is employed.
    * A one-year show-cause period beginning June 30, 2009, and ending June 29, 2010, during which the athletically related activities of the former assistant coach at any employing NCAA institution will be restricted, including no in-person contact with any employing institution’s men’s basketball team members during summer breaks. Also, if he is employed at a member institution, he must attend at his own cost an NCAA Regional Rules Seminar during each of the years he is employed.


  • #2
    YahooSports:
    "NCAA hammers SEMO, proves absolutely nothing"

    "The NCAA loves to punish the little guys for the slightest of crimes
    but buries its head in the sand when it comes to major programs.
    There's no reason to think that small programs cheat any more than the big ones
    -- in fact, it would seem to follow that the higher the stakes, the greater the incentive to cheat
    -- and yet the NCAA has uncovered so few major programs for the same violations
    they're hammering little guys on left and right.

    Or maybe all the small schools are cheaters and all the big ones are
    completely, 100 percent above board. I don't know. I suppose it's possible.*

    *No I don't. It's not possible."

    Comment


    • #3
      "Big Programs" don't need to cheat.



      Comment

      Unconfigured Ad Widget 6

      Collapse
      Working...
      X