- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Should Coaches with Recruting Violations Have them Transferred
Posted on 1/14/10 at 7:31 am
Posted on 1/14/10 at 7:31 am
the the new school that they go. Such as, if the NCAA nails TN on hostess gate and other violations, I think that USC should shoulder the penalties of Lane and his mob for indiscretions at Tennessee. Coaches have to have some tough accountability that follows them.
4
Posted on 1/14/10 at 7:39 am to 7 Moves
It's not USC's fault. Let the accused party take the hit but not the new school.
Posted on 1/14/10 at 7:47 am to BoogerEater
I don't agree. USC hired a coach with a 1/2 dozen outstanding violations not yet resolved that they know about. I think the NCAA should be involved in outlining to the hiring school of outstanding investigations and this needs to be accepted by the hiring school. Right now, creeps like Kiffen and O have no accountability -- just leave and it goes away and TN is left with the smoking gun. Indiana had some sanctions put on them when they hired Kevin Sampson from OU.
Posted on 1/14/10 at 9:05 am to 7 Moves
i say they should at least be on probation at the new school (the coaches)... in other words, a short leash with the NCAA.
These guys arent clueless as to what happens under their watch. They often choose to ignore it or stick their head in the sand.
Ignorance is not an excuse, IMO.
These guys arent clueless as to what happens under their watch. They often choose to ignore it or stick their head in the sand.
Ignorance is not an excuse, IMO.
Posted on 1/14/10 at 9:08 am to 7 Moves
this is a touchy situation. what if it's like Petey and he bolts for the pros? then no one is held accountible for the violations. Maybe if a coach is found to be in violation he must sign a non compete agreement where he can't coach anywhere else until his penalties are paid.
Posted on 1/14/10 at 11:09 am to 7 Moves
I think the penalty should stick to both the school and the coach (wherever he is coaching)
Posted on 1/14/10 at 11:13 am to ScarlettGrayBeast
I don't believe the violations should tranfer. They belong to the institution under whose watch they occurred.
However, I DEFINITELY think this should be a factor taken into account by the NCAA investigators in rendering sanctions against Southern Cal for their past violations. When a program takes action to clean up their program following violations, that should be one mitigating factor which lessens the sanctions. However, when a university which is already facing potential sanctions hires a coach which has recently amassed numerous sanctions (and shown a complete disregard for NCAA rules), the opposite should happen and the sanctions should be more severe. Hiring Kiffin and co. shows a complete lack of remorse for the past violations and is essentially USC thumbing its nose at the NCAA. This fits right in line with the way USC has handled the past violations, i.e. admitting to nothing and building a wall to hide them. I hope Southern Cal gets pummeled, as unlikely as that may be.
However, I DEFINITELY think this should be a factor taken into account by the NCAA investigators in rendering sanctions against Southern Cal for their past violations. When a program takes action to clean up their program following violations, that should be one mitigating factor which lessens the sanctions. However, when a university which is already facing potential sanctions hires a coach which has recently amassed numerous sanctions (and shown a complete disregard for NCAA rules), the opposite should happen and the sanctions should be more severe. Hiring Kiffin and co. shows a complete lack of remorse for the past violations and is essentially USC thumbing its nose at the NCAA. This fits right in line with the way USC has handled the past violations, i.e. admitting to nothing and building a wall to hide them. I hope Southern Cal gets pummeled, as unlikely as that may be.
Posted on 1/14/10 at 11:25 am to 7 Moves
quote:
the the new school that they go. Such as, if the NCAA nails TN on hostess gate and other violations, I think that USC should shoulder the penalties of Lane and his mob for indiscretions at Tennessee. Coaches have to have some tough accountability that follows them.
So if the coach gets fired, then the sanctions just poof and go away?
Posted on 1/14/10 at 11:43 am to arwicklu
I think both the school and the coach who caused the violations should each get punished. the school gets punished because they allowed it to happen. Lack of oversight on their part. The coach gets punished because he did it or allowed it to happen. The new school should have to take this into account when they make a decision to hire someone. what stops a coach from continuing to violate the rules if he can just pack up and leave and never get punished. if he cant follow the rules then he needs to not be a coach
Posted on 1/14/10 at 11:43 am to arwicklu
No, I don't think if a coach gets fired the sanctions go away. I think that the coach & the school should bear a double burden of violations. It is not fair for a coach to frick a school and run to another with no consequences. This would mitigate some cheating. If they go to the pro's then there is no recourse.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News