Interesting article from September about new NCAA president, Mark Emmert ...

[Shmuley]

The direction of the NCAA seems clear: Former kinder, gentler days are giving way to a new, tougher approach.

In June, after spending nearly 20 months debating harsher sanctions for rule breakers, the NCAA hit USC with the most severe penalties in years. The football program received a two-year bowl ban — the first time any school faced that penalty since Alabama completed its probation in 2003 — and barely avoided getting hit with the first TV ban since 1996.

With an increasing number of high-profile programs under scrutiny — such as Alabama, North Carolina, Michigan, Florida, South Carolina and Georgia — the penalty phase is getting more attention.

And Emmert thinks it is time to be tough.

"I can't talk about any one of those cases, but the fact that we've got strong enforcement going on, I think, is a good thing," he said.

The NCAA has launched a widespread investigation into athletes who might have had improper contacts with agents.

Emmert already has contacted the pro leagues and representatives from various players' associations and he hasn't ruled out lobbying states to enforce their statutes regarding sports agents.

Excellent Timing, Coach Dye

 

[NorthMsDawg]

Speaking of TV ban, let's say Auburn or any other SEC school was hit with sanctions that included TV ban. How would that affect the SEC/ESPN deal, would that school still get their cut?

 

[AssEndDawg]

that if you are on probation that limits something you don't get your cut of that thing. So if you can't go to a bowl you don't get the bowl cut, if you can't be on TV you don't get the TV cut. I seem to remember that from when we went to 12 teams.

 

[ckDOG]

But I would assume that if I'm ESPN and I'm going to enter into a contract with the SEC for hundreds of millions of dollars, there better be a clause that either A) scales back payments or B) lets me cancel the the contract, should 1 or more of the teams be put on probation with a ban from TV.

If that's the case, it makes complete sense why Slive would want this swept under the rug.

That being said, I'm sure the major TV networks have badgered the NCAA enough to where TV bans will never happen again. There's too much money involved for them not to have gotten that point across, plus TV bans punish more than just the banned team's fans. If USC didn't get a TV ban - I'm sure AU (or any other major conference team) wouldn't either.

 

[gptdawg]

On your link to the NCAA story there is another story about Jim McMahon losing his memory. Hadn't seen/heard that.

 

[FlabLoser]

Speaking of TV ban, let's say Auburn or any other SEC school was hit with sanctions that included TV ban. How would that affect the SEC/ESPN deal, would that school still get their cut?

A TV ban punishes schools who have not been banned. Say Auburn gets a TV ban - then we can't be on TV the week we play Auburn.

Maybe instead, Auburn can't get any TV money. THAT would stop **** REAL FAST. No amount of cheating can compensate the punishment of not getting TV money.