USC Trojans Appeal Denied.

[SacFalcFan]

It's been more than 11 months since the NCAA Committee on Infractions hit USC with the harshest penalties in the modern era of college football since the "death penalty" meted out to SMU in 1987.

Wednesday, according to multiple sources inside and outside the university, the final decision of the NCAA's Infractions Appeals Committee was in hand and being reviewed by USC before its Thursday release by the NCAA.

And it's not good news for USC football.

Despite speculation and media reports that there might be a willingness on the part of the NCAA to listen favorably to a USC appeal that had asked that the 30 scholarships lost over three years with a maximum of 75 allowed and a two-year postseason bowl ban be cut in half, USCFootball.com's sources indicate that USC's appeal has been denied completely.

The Trojans football team will be allowed to sign no more than 15 players to scholarships for the next three seasons (against a top limit of 25 for schools not under sanction).

And of even more immediate impact, USC would not be able to compete for the first-ever Pac-12 championship or appear in the first-ever postseason championship game in 2011 as well.

Of further concern, the NCAA's unprecedented additional sanction allowing players affected by the postseason ban this year to immediately transfer to another institution without sitting out a season would still be in play for this year's seniors.

While USC did not release the appeal it filed with the NCAA for its Jan. 25 hearing, the hope has been that the NCAA's favorable treatment of both Ohio State and Auburn, who were allowed to play in this year's BCS bowl games despite serious allegations against each program, would play in USC's favor.

At the time in Indianapolis, USC Pres. Max Nikias said: "All I will say is that I want to thank the NCAA for giving us an opportunity before the appeals committee to have a good and fair hearing. Now we have to wait for the ruling."

Now that they have the ruling, it appears much in line with the complete denial the NCAA's Infractions Appeals Committee made in the case of former USC assistant Todd McNair three weeks ago. And while McNair has clearly reserved the right to consider a lawsuit against the NCAA for a number of mistakes in his case, USC Athletics Director Pat Haden had removed that possibility from the school's potential responses.

"A lot of people say it's going to help you," Haden said of the Auburn and Ohio State cases in January before the hearing. "I don't think so. I don't think it helps or hurts us; I think it's irrelevant.

"This is it," Haden said of further action by USC. "There is no appeal after this . . . This is the final frontier."

USC did issue a statement on receiving the appeal Wednesday afternoon saying that "USC has received a response from the NCAA regarding our appeal of NCAA sanctions. However, under NCAA rules, we cannot comment on this response until the NCAA releases the decision to the public tomorrow morning (May 26)."

[itsjustafleshwound]

It's been more than 11 months since the NCAA Committee on Infractions hit USC with the harshest penalties in the modern era of college football since the "death penalty" meted out to SMU in 1987.

Wednesday, according to multiple sources inside and outside the university, the final decision of the NCAA's Infractions Appeals Committee was in hand and being reviewed by USC before its Thursday release by the NCAA.

And it's not good news for USC football.

Despite speculation and media reports that there might be a willingness on the part of the NCAA to listen favorably to a USC appeal that had asked that the 30 scholarships lost over three years with a maximum of 75 allowed and a two-year postseason bowl ban be cut in half, USCFootball.com's sources indicate that USC's appeal has been denied completely.

The Trojans football team will be allowed to sign no more than 15 players to scholarships for the next three seasons (against a top limit of 25 for schools not under sanction).

And of even more immediate impact, USC would not be able to compete for the first-ever Pac-12 championship or appear in the first-ever postseason championship game in 2011 as well.

Of further concern, the NCAA's unprecedented additional sanction allowing players affected by the postseason ban this year to immediately transfer to another institution without sitting out a season would still be in play for this year's seniors.

While USC did not release the appeal it filed with the NCAA for its Jan. 25 hearing, the hope has been that the NCAA's favorable treatment of both Ohio State and Auburn, who were allowed to play in this year's BCS bowl games despite serious allegations against each program, would play in USC's favor.

At the time in Indianapolis, USC Pres. Max Nikias said: "All I will say is that I want to thank the NCAA for giving us an opportunity before the appeals committee to have a good and fair hearing. Now we have to wait for the ruling."

Now that they have the ruling, it appears much in line with the complete denial the NCAA's Infractions Appeals Committee made in the case of former USC assistant Todd McNair three weeks ago. And while McNair has clearly reserved the right to consider a lawsuit against the NCAA for a number of mistakes in his case, USC Athletics Director Pat Haden had removed that possibility from the school's potential responses.

"A lot of people say it's going to help you," Haden said of the Auburn and Ohio State cases in January before the hearing. "I don't think so. I don't think it helps or hurts us; I think it's irrelevant.

"This is it," Haden said of further action by USC. "There is no appeal after this . . . This is the final frontier."

USC did issue a statement on receiving the appeal Wednesday afternoon saying that "USC has received a response from the NCAA regarding our appeal of NCAA sanctions. However, under NCAA rules, we cannot comment on this response until the NCAA releases the decision to the public tomorrow morning (May 26)."

Would it be classless for me to open a beer in celebration?

[GJDM]

[TXDawg]

So what happens to all the kids that signed with USC. Do they have enough scholarships to sign them all?

[SacFalcFan]

i believe usc can only sign 6 players for this class.

[IveyLeaguer]

Every now and then, something good and decent happens.

~~~

[aPureTerror]

i believe usc can only sign 6 players for this class.

that's hilarious.

[aPureTerror]

Would it be classless for me to open a beer in celebration?

Nah man.... gone and celebrate.

Edited May 26, 2011 by aPureTerror

[Ronaldo77]

Also with this ruling I think they can get to the Ohio state case faster than expected

[Ransack]

i believe usc can only sign 6 players for this class.

If that's true they already have 7 committed. One of them is screwed.....

[Nick Flair]

i believe usc can only sign 6 players for this class.

That's crazy!!!

[SacFalcFan]

so i read one article that said they would only be able to sign 6 and then another article that says they can only sign 15.. whatever the number is they are going in for some tough times ahead.

[South FL Dawg]

I read 6 players as well. But that assumes all the incoming 2011 class qualifies AND no one leaves early for the NFL, transfers, gets (ahem) medically disqualified, etc. I think they'll sign 12-15. They just can't go over 75 total.

Edited May 27, 2011 by South FL Dawg

[Billy Ocean]

so i read one article that said they would only be able to sign 6 and then another article that says they can only sign 15.. whatever the number is they are going in for some tough times ahead.

I haven't read anything since February, but I think the # is 15 or close to it. Thats based on USC signing at least about 10 more kids than they should have in '11.

This ain't popular opinion but this looks like selective overkill to me. Outside of Bush and Mayo I really don't know what they had on USC in order to find lack of institutional control or whatever. If 2 kids in seperate sports is enough to warrant a near-death penalty, then proportionate justice would dictate that they burn tOSU to the ground. Literally.

[South FL Dawg]

I haven't read anything since February, but I think the # is 15 or close to it. Thats based on USC signing at least about 10 more kids than they should have in '11.

This ain't popular opinion but this looks like selective overkill to me. Outside of Bush and Mayo I really don't know what they had on USC in order to find lack of institutional control or whatever. If 2 kids in seperate sports is enough to warrant a near-death penalty, then proportionate justice would dictate that they burn tOSU to the ground. Literally.

Wasn't their problem that the RB coach was letting it happen?

It's still far from the death penalty that SMU got. And for the game in general, it's just as well.

Is it just me or does anybody else think it's telling that the Pac 10 isn't taking any action, as if those other schools are all saying "could've been us" .....

[SacFalcFan]

I haven't read anything since February, but I think the # is 15 or close to it. Thats based on USC signing at least about 10 more kids than they should have in '11.

This ain't popular opinion but this looks like selective overkill to me. Outside of Bush and Mayo I really don't know what they had on USC in order to find lack of institutional control or whatever. If 2 kids in seperate sports is enough to warrant a near-death penalty, then proportionate justice would dictate that they burn tOSU to the ground. Literally.

Bryan Fischer:

"As it stands right now, prior to any defections, USC can only take a class of six in 2012 to get under the 75 man roster limit."

if they don't have any defections they can only sign 6.. but we know they will have a few guys leave early.. however right now as it stands they can only sign 6. also we won't agree on it being overkill. they had an rb coach who did indeed know what was going on and it's highly doubtful carroll didn't know anything about it. usc's arrogance and how they handled it also is a big reason they were hammered.. imo they deserved what they received.

[chadtm77]

they had an rb coach who did indeed know what was going on and it's highly doubtful carroll didn't know anything about it. usc's arrogance and how they handled it also is a big reason they were hammered.. imo they deserved what they received.

Wow maybe in a year we can change a coaches name and school name and have it say the same for Auburn and OSU

Edited May 27, 2011 by chadtm77

[Billy Ocean]

IMO it is overkill given how wildly inconsistent the NCAA has been. The NCAA should adopt something resembling sentencing guidelines if they have any interest in appearing legitimate. I suspect they'll just continue their arbitrary practices until Congressional hearings inevitably occur. BTW South Park had an excellent episode about the NCAA last night.

http://www.foxsportswest.com/msn/05/26/11/USC-vehemently-disagrees/landing.html?blockID=528870&feedID=9470&

Citing previous cases such as those involving the University of Miami (1995), University of Florida (1996), University of Alabama (2002), University of Kentucky (2002) and University of Michigan (2003), USC's legal team argued that — to put it in layman's terms — worse crimes have been committed, but worse punishments were not given out, especially given the lack of solid evidence provided to the NCAA on the Trojans' case. USC wasn't crying innocence. But it was still crying foul. The legal team spoke in the name of past precedence.

I would add that NCAA RICO should apply to the continuing criminal enterprises operating in Auburn, Clemson, Tuscaloosa and Columbus.

[Falconsken]

At this point i cant even open my mouth to defend osu.......

hard times ahead.....

[JHav]

Boy I remember how hard it was for Bama losing those scholarships in 2002. We lost 21 scholarships over a 3 year period.

Going to be some tough years coming up for USC.