Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Syracuse Hoops Takes a Hard Hit From the NCAA

as an ACC fan I hate this. damn those private schools.
as a VT fan, Jim Boeheim had it coming. schadenfreude.
 
Lot of strong language about booster involvement and academic integrity... but it sounds like the only thing the NCAA was able to prove is that Boeheim and the AD didn't follow the school's written policies on banned substances.

In short, it sounds like they ignored it if a player was caught smoking mj.

Is this like when the NCAA hit USC with a draconian set of penalties for what it was able to prove because they were pretty darn sure that there was a lot more going on that they couldn't prove?
 
What are the violations even for? This goes back to 2001. A 14 year investigation? Seems like UNC must be in for the death penalty if this is how hard they come down on Cuse.
 
NYbuffDIEHARD said:
This is very interesting and if true the NCAA seems to have an axe to grind with Syracuse.

http://www.cuse.com/news/2015/3/6/GEN_0306152940.aspx
Click to expand...

Considering that Syracuse had imposed some penalties on itself in past years and self-imposed a postseason ban this year, I don't understand at all why they're getting much of anything in additional penalties.

My suspicions: the bureaucrats at the NCAA got really pissed off when a new Chancellor came in at Syracuse and publicly embarrassed the people working on the Syracuse case by daring to say that an 8-year investigation is ridiculous.
 
12 scholarships over four years lost? That's basically the death penalty. It's saying that Syracuse can keep playing, but only with walk-ons. Syracuse will be like a D-II team very shortly. This is a devastating blow to that program. This is the kind of thing that puts programs on the shelf permanently.

I had always viewed Syracuse as a second-tier blueblood program. A lot like Arizona, Florida, Michigan, Michigan State, etc. They were always a team that *could* win the whole thing. That is no longer the case.
 
sackman said:
12 scholarships over four years lost? That's basically the death penalty. It's saying that Syracuse can keep playing, but only with walk-ons. Syracuse will be like a D-II team very shortly. This is a devastating blow to that program. This is the kind of thing that puts programs on the shelf permanently.

I had always viewed Syracuse as a second-tier blueblood program. A lot like Arizona, Florida, Michigan, Michigan State, etc. They were always a team that *could* win the whole thing. That is no longer the case.
Click to expand...

I follow Cuse pretty closely and Boheim usually only plays 7 or 8 guys and if I am not mistaken you get 13 scholarships a year. So take 3 of those away and I think they will still be able to compete. Kids like playing in front of 30,000 fans a night and no more post season bans so I am thinking it might be able to survive.
 
I've always liked Jimmy B., but this is bad. The basketball staff was basically doing the players' homework (they had the players' email passwords, were communicating with professors).
 
NYbuffDIEHARD said:
What are the violations even for? This goes back to 2001. A 14 year investigation? Seems like UNC must be in for the death penalty if this is how hard they come down on Cuse.
Click to expand...

Never, never assume that what the NCAA does to one school has any relation to how they treat another school.

This is one of the most frustrating things about the NCAA, their "enforcement" seems almost random.

I have no question that Syracuse has probably done a series of things to deserve a penalty of some sort.

I also have no question that the penalty will make no sense in relation to the penalty that other schools recieve for lesser or greater offenses.
 
Buffnik said:
Lot of strong language about booster involvement and academic integrity... but it sounds like the only thing the NCAA was able to prove is that Boeheim and the AD didn't follow the school's written policies on banned substances.

In short, it sounds like they ignored it if a player was caught smoking mj.

Is this like when the NCAA hit USC with a draconian set of penalties for what it was able to prove because they were pretty darn sure that there was a lot more going on that they couldn't prove?
Click to expand...

Why do you say they couldn't prove the academic fraud and paying of players? No evidence is mentioned at all - they may have had none or a ton.
 
NYbuffDIEHARD said:
This is very interesting and if true the NCAA seems to have an axe to grind with Syracuse.

http://www.cuse.com/news/2015/3/6/GEN_0306152940.aspx
Click to expand...

That says that Syracuse was under investigation as far back as 2001 and continued to accrue violations over and over. there's a pretty well established principle in criminal law that bad acts when one is on notice are much more serious than otherwise. (If you are on bond or probation
in Colorado, and commit a new offense, the penalties are doubled).
 
Boeheim would probably be able to somehow hold things together and keep them competitive for the most part (if he doesn't say "**** it" and walk away). What he's done this year basically playing 6 guys with only 37 percent of his scoring from last season is pretty impressive. Cuse will always have its allure. There's something about playing your home games in front of over 33,000 fans...
 
NYbuffDIEHARD said:
What are the violations even for? This goes back to 2001. A 14 year investigation? Seems like UNC must be in for the death penalty if this is how hard they come down on Cuse.
Click to expand...
I heard most of the serious stuff goes back to, like, 2011, or something.
 
Another thing I heard on ESPN is that the NCAA investigative group has reorganized since the Miami debacle and is much better at keeping secrets. Much more "professional," I guess.
 
NYbuffDIEHARD said:
I follow Cuse pretty closely and Boheim usually only plays 7 or 8 guys and if I am not mistaken you get 13 scholarships a year. So take 3 of those away and I think they will still be able to compete. Kids like playing in front of 30,000 fans a night and no more post season bans so I am thinking it might be able to survive.
Click to expand...

I think you get 13 scholarships, period. I don't know if it's like in football where you have a maximum class size. The way I see this working out is if they are set to graduate 4 players, they only get one scholarship to replace those guys. If, in the following year, they graduate 3 players, they get nothing. Typical hoops classes run 3-5 players per year. This takes Syracuse down to 0-2 players per year.

Am I not reading this right?
 
sackman said:
I think you get 13 scholarships, period. I don't know if it's like in football where you have a maximum class size. The way I see this working out is if they are set to graduate 4 players, they only get one scholarship to replace those guys. If, in the following year, they graduate 3 players, they get nothing. Typical hoops classes run 3-5 players per year. This takes Syracuse down to 0-2 players per year.

Am I not reading this right?
Click to expand...

NY has it right. Scholarships are year to year. So, they lose 3 / year for 4 years for a total of 12. That means they are effectively on 10 schollies for the next 4 years. It looks like there is a little wiggle room to defer them year to year depending on financial aid agreements, so it may end up being 2 the first year and 1 or 2 left over in the fifth year. So it wouldn't be surprising if they have up to 11 or 12 players still on schollie next year.
 
NYbuffDIEHARD said:
I was 8 in 1987, So I wasn't reading the Times quite yet. But I sure did love Derrick Coleman and Sherman Douglas!
Click to expand...

You were just a bit too young to remember the Pearl Washington years, then. That dude was special.
 
goalline said:
NY has it right. Scholarships are year to year. So, they lose 3 / year for 4 years for a total of 12. That means they are effectively on 10 schollies for the next 4 years. It looks like there is a little wiggle room to defer them year to year depending on financial aid agreements, so it may end up being 2 the first year and 1 or 2 left over in the fifth year. So it wouldn't be surprising if they have up to 11 or 12 players still on schollie next year.
Click to expand...


I'm not saying you're wrong, because this is certainly a possibility. But if that's the case, then why not simply lower their scholarships to 10 and call it good? Why the "three per year for four years" stuff?
 
I heard on the radio they vacated over 100 of his wins too, now he's somewhere around 858. They hit them hard geez.
 
[tweet]574002802567024641[/tweet]

Sounds like JB is going to fight the NCAA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top