Source “inside USC Athletics” tells @atvn USC penalties will likely include DQ from 2010 bowls, loss of scholarships; Heismans, 2004 wins and title not affected. http://bit.ly/9Lp8PP (via @USCFootballNews)
Source “inside USC Athletics” tells @atvn USC penalties will likely include DQ from 2010 bowls, loss of scholarships; Heismans, 2004 wins and title not affected. http://bit.ly/9Lp8PP (via @USCFootballNews)
To summarize this article, someone talked to a USC football player and that player knew all the details of the sanctions from a report that hasn’t been completed or sent to the school. Okay, got it.
Not credible. Here is a quote from the article: “Past awards, including multiple Heisman trophies, would not be revoked, and USC would retain its 2004 NCAA National Championship.” Multiple Heismans? The only one at issue is of course Bush…and besides the NCAA does not control that…the Heisman Trust would have to take a separate action anyway so the NCAA announcement would not address this at all. Similarly, USC did not win any NCAA National Football Championship in 2004 (or in any other year for that matter) since there is no such thing. Whoever wrote this article obviously is either very dumb or has very little understanding of the NCAA (I suggest both.)
In pondering what has taken so long I wonder if there is a split on the committee about what to do. Could there be a minority report for example, dissenting either from the lack of or the excess of penalties imposed by the majority?