Recalling SMU
I was going to write about Penn State but since EJ beat me to it (just below), let me add a few cents on the only time the NCAA has ever used the death penalty. That would be in regard to Southern Methodist University, after repeated violations of recruiting rules in what was a wild period of college football in the old, now-defunct Southwest Conference.
My local paper ran an editorial this morning arguing for the death penalty. I hope each of the board members watch Pony Exce$$, a film based on a better book by David Whitford (which says a lot because the film is very good -- indeed, there is a 2-hour version that beats the shorter one ESPN occasionally still shows.) It's notable because the author and the filmmaker, both of whom I think began thinking SMU deserved the death penalty, end up ruing that it was ever created. It does just what it says: it kills a program dead. SMU went two decades with terrible teams until reaching a bowl game in 2009. (I teach a sports econ class, and Pony Exce$$ is part of one lecture.)
How dead? How many Ricochet readers even know which conference SMU plays in, or who their mascot is? That's how dead they were.
Will the same fate befall Penn State? Maybe so; the punishments handed down are severe. Most of their good players are now off looking for other schools, just as SMU players did 25 years ago, just after their team received the death penalty. The situations seem different because of what the violations were in the two cases. And because it had such a horrible effect on SMU, I don't think the NCAA could pull the trigger again (Penn State is also more connected as a "traditional power" than SMU was in the 1980s.) Not to apologize for them -- they are every bit as execrable an organization as the commentary on EJ's post portrays them. But don't doubt for a moment that the impact of the SMU penalties didn't weigh on the NCAA today.
- Comment (17)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (5)
Comments:
Apr '11
Re: Recalling SMU
So what are SMU alumni to think? We got screwed by the NCAA. Deal with it?
Oct '10
Re: Recalling SMU
Indeed. What Penn State did was far worse than any of Southern Methodist's recruiting violations. Thus, the Nittany Lions merited a far worse punishment than what was meted out today. The NCAA has brought disgrace upon itself and all of college football with this ridiculous slap on the wrist.
Edited on July 24, 2012 at 1:36amFeb '12
Re: Recalling SMU
The are, or were, the Mustangs, I think.
May '12
Re: Recalling SMU
By all measures, the Lack of Institutional Control charge should be applied to the NCAA. Granted, the Penn State scandal is of an order of magnitude worse than what other schools have done but the question to be asked is why do these college athletics scandals keep happening over and over and over and over...?
The answer I've come to; the NCAA is as corrupt as the college athletics programs it allegedly supervises.
Edited on July 24, 2012 at 1:37amMay '11
Re: Recalling SMU
A criminal conspiracy to protect a coach who serially over decades was known to be molesting children under the supervision of the university is much much much worse than paying players.
.
If a university goes to such criminal lengths to protect its athletic program, the only just thing to do is to kill that program. And jail the conspirators as well.
Oct '10
Re: Recalling SMU
Jim Ixtian
By all measures, theLack of Institutional Controlcharge should be applied to the NCAA. Granted, the Penn State scandal is of an order of magnitude worse than what other schools but the question to be asked is why do these college athletics scandals keep happening over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over...?
The answer; the NCAA is as corrupt as the college athletics programs it allegedly supervises. · 1 minute ago
Very true. And that lack of institutional control on the part of the NCAA and its affiliated universities gives more ammunition to the "let's ban football" statists. This is a complete disaster in so many ways.
Sep '10
Re: Recalling SMU
It is difficult to assess how this will hit the program. Certainly, the conventional wisdom is that it will severely damage, maybe permanently, the program.
One variable is that SMU was a school with little over 9000 enrollment. Penn State has an enrollment of 44,000. That's a much bigger alumni base to soften the blow and support the program.
Furthermore, SMU had 55 scholarships taken away, compared to 2o for Penn State. Also, Penn State does not face stiff limitations on off-campus recruiting (SMU could not for two years) and the number of assistant coaches (SMU was limited to 5 instead of 9).
Finally, schools have a lot more ways to generate revenue than SMU did in 1986. For instance, it seems Penn State still will see revenue from Big Ten Network tv royalties. ESPN estimates that over the next couple of years the penalties will cost $15M per year. But Penn State reported a surplus of $31.6 million in 2010-11. So they might be able to weather the financial hit.
It think the program will be damaged for some time but has a much better chance rebounding quicker than SMU did.
Edited on July 24, 2012 at 2:40amRe: Recalling SMU
Were and are; very good.
Ronaldus: I think that makes the point. They knew then and know now that the penalty SMU received was too severe. This is their admission of guilt. And it's too severe because they can't afford to lose the money Penn State brings in on Saturday afternoons in the fall.
Jul '11
Re: Recalling SMU
Penn State's crimes were much greater in dimension. SMU got the death penalty because they cheated, then lied about it, and sort of flaunted it. That brought Thor's hammer.
I was glad to see Penn State meet the hammer; I'm not sure they wouldn't have been better off getting the death penalty. It's going to be at least a decade until they are competitive.
And the reason I feel that way is that I don't think a certain segment of the Penn State fanbase gets it. Their institution covered up child rape.
The day that Paterno was fired, they had a rally on his lawn and then held a riot.
I think their little hero-worshipping, priorities out-of-proportion world needs to burn before they fully get the cluestick.
Apr '11
Re: Recalling SMU
Just ordered this on Netflix, although I don't think it is going to make me feel any better about how SMU was treated.
Sep '10
Re: Recalling SMU
On what planet do defenders of the Cult of Happy Valley exist? Burn Beaver Stadium to the ground. Blow it up. And send a message that any culture that permits these monsters to offend not once, not twice, but multiple times should not exist. Shame on you all. Shame, shame, shame.
Sep '10
Re: Recalling SMU
Let the civil and criminal courts punish the perpetrators, not an athletic association that, by the way, has done nothing in its penalties to actually punish those responsible. Has the athletic director been sanctioned by the NCAA? Barred from serving at any NCAA member institution? No. Has the school president been sanctioned? No. As I said in EJ Hill's post, this is sound and fury signifying nothing.
Shame on mindless penalties that do nothing but make people feel good.
May '12
Re: Recalling SMU
The penalty handed down to SMU taught collegiate football nothing. It was treated as a one off incident and every major program in the U.S. went on to business as usual, look at USC-Reggie Bush as an example and there are many others.
The Penn State Penalty is a four year inconvenience. Five years from now the only people that will remember this episode will be Sandusky's victims.
As long as those of us that are fans of college football treat it as though it is our fall Saturday lifeblood dressed in school colors selling out stadiums and glued to ESPN gameday football will continue to be the main business of schools with education, ethics, and all else secondary.
I am not suggesting any changes or judging right or wrong on the NCAA, I just think it would be better to have an honest discussion. Major universities: SEC, Big 10, Big 12, etc. main business is football, all else is secondary. Once we realize this is football's farm system we can at least stop trying to hide errors in the system.
Apr '11
Re: Recalling SMU
King,
Didn't SMU also self-impose restrictions on their football program? I seem to recall they raised the academic standards so that if a student could not be admitted under the regular admissions process they could not receive a football scholarship. If this is correct, does it suggest that the Death Penalty on its own was not too harsh, but SMU engaged in a level of self-correction because of its desire to reemphasize academics?
May '10
Re: Recalling SMU
And SMU didn't even have Michael Mann to live down.
Jul '11
Re: Recalling SMU
For a minute, I was going to tear into you about the brilliance of Thief and Maneater, but then I figured out you didn't mean the director.
Mar '11
Re: Recalling SMU
And why, pray tell, should we be concerned that Penn State may never recover on the gridiron? Did I miss something, and football became an essential part of education? If the NCAA had imposed the so-called "Death Penalty," so be it. If Penn State never fielded a football team again, academics wouldn't be hurt, people would get on with their lives, and the school's story would stand as a monument to the wages of sin. I'm tired of folks acting like the purpose of the university was to field a blasted football team. Unbunch your jock straps and get back to work, ladies.