NCAA action vs Oklahoma now & Alabama then

[WarEagle73]

This afternoon on the radio I listened Finebaum talking about the NCAA slapping Oklahoma on the wrist wile it just about drove Alabama into the ground just a few years ago. I had not thought of this but he has a good point. Why did they only take two scholarships & the 8 wins from the 05 season from Oklahoma when they clearly had two players being paid by a booster? Was it not booster activity that got Alabama into hot water? Seems like they are not dealing straight to me. Thoughts?

[SoonerManiac]

This afternoon on the radio I listened Finebaum talking about the NCAA slapping Oklahoma on the wrist wile it just about drove Alabama into the ground just a few years ago. I had not thought of this but he has a good point. Why did they only take two scholarships & the 8 wins from the 05 season from Oklahoma when they clearly had two players being paid by a booster? Was it not booster activity that got Alabama into hot water? Seems like they are not dealing straight to me. Thoughts?

I am honestly not that knowledgable about Bama's sanctions.

OU's was like this...I'll let you decide for yourselves.

1. Boren(OU Pres) got an email stating what was going on with a few players at Big Red Sports and Imports(the dealership). He sent it to the compliance dept.

2. The compliance dept pulled up all the information they had on the players mentioned. Rhett Bomar(QB)(Was the #1 QB in the nation comign out of HS), J.D. Quinn(OL)(without looking, I know he was a top 25 OL), and a walkon WR Hardaway. They found everything was in order with what they had.

3. Since they had nothing on their end that would say otherwise, they needed the dealerships tax papers etc. Brad McRae(50% owner) the dealership manager who was in on this with the players, said he could not give it to them.

4. OU did nothing other than check on all the other 17 players who worked there. And made Bomar/Quinn check in regularly with pay stubs etc.

5. In early July, the dealership was bought by a company in Oklahoma who owns quite a few dealerships.

6. OU asked them for the papers and received them supposedly a week or so later. After going through all the papers and confirming it a week or two after that, they let the President/Stoops/Castiglione(AD) in on what they had found. 2 days before fall practice. Which was either the last day of July or first of August, both players were kicked off the team. The walkon was kicked off the team like 6 months prior to this for going with his grandfather to a casino and gambling.

7. OU sends in its self reported and self investigated report to the NCAA. something like two weeks later, the NCAA shows up and does their own.

8. OU takes away some recruiting visits, 1 recruiter for the years of 2006 & 2007, both scholarships in 2005 & '06, limits some phone calls they can make to recruits etc. as self imposed sanctions.

9. The NCAA president also praised OU when this came out for being quick and decisive and doing the right thing.

10. This comes 6 months after the basketball program is hit with sanctions as well.

IMO, the difference here is OU reported it to the NCAA, kicked off the guilty members, banned the booster from contact with the players, no longer allowed players to work at the dealership, and placed the self-imposed sanctions. And did this very quickly. In other words, they never tried to hide it, but dealt with it quickly and decisively.

I don't know if the Bama administration did likewise.


The way I see it is this. The NCAA doesn't disagree that OU acted accordingly. They only disagree that OU could have had a better eye on the players and their activities. Which is where the "failure to monitor" comes in.


Hope that helps.

[BamaDude06]

This afternoon on the radio I listened Finebaum talking about the NCAA slapping Oklahoma on the wrist wile it just about drove Alabama into the ground just a few years ago. I had not thought of this but he has a good point. Why did they only take two scholarships & the 8 wins from the 05 season from Oklahoma when they clearly had two players being paid by a booster? Was it not booster activity that got Alabama into hot water? Seems like they are not dealing straight to me. Thoughts?

I compare this case more to Bama's 1993 case than the 2002 one.

Bama had a player take supposedly $400 to sign with an agent the night after the MC win over Miami, only for him to change his mind about leaving school early.

Oklahoma had three players get thousands of dollars from their "job" that they never worked at. Now, keep in mind this is the same dealership that let AP drive a car (Lexus I believe) for weeks for $0.

Prior to 1993 Bama's football team had never been placed on probation.
Prior to 2007 Oklahoma's football team had been placed on probation FIVE times.

Bama was placed on two years probation, a one year postseason ban, had to reduce the number of scollys from 85 to 81 in both 1995-1996 AND 1996-1997, and had to reduce the initial grants from the 1996-1997 season from 25 to 12. They also had to FOREFIT all wins the player played in, resulting in their 9-3-1 record being changed to 1-12.

Oklahoma loses TWO scholarships a year, no bowl ban, and VACATES
their 8 wins so their record from 8-4 to 0-4.

That is just one reason Bama fans hate the NCAA so much. They don't hand down punishment equally.

[BAMAPERRY]

I compare this case more to Bama's 1993 case than the 2002 one.

Bama had a player take supposedly $400 to sign with an agent the night after the MC win over Miami, only for him to change his mind about leaving school early.

Oklahoma had three players get thousands of dollars from their "job" that they never worked at. Now, keep in mind this is the same dealership that let AP drive a car (Lexus I believe) for weeks for $0.

Prior to 1993 Bama's football team had never been placed on probation.
Prior to 2007 Oklahoma's football team had been placed on probation FIVE times.

Bama was placed on two years probation, a one year postseason ban, had to reduce the number of scollys from 85 to 81 in both 1995-1996 AND 1996-1997, and had to reduce the initial grants from the 1996-1997 season from 25 to 12. They also had to FOREFIT all wins the player played in, resulting in their 9-3-1 record being changed to 1-12.

Oklahoma loses TWO scholarships a year, no bowl ban, and VACATES
their 8 wins so their record from 8-4 to 0-4.

That is just one reason Bama fans hate the NCAA so much. They don't hand down punishment equally.

DING! DING! DING! The Bama case against Langham and the sanctions were RIDICULOUS! The worst miscarriage of justice in NCAA history. Just for the record, Bama wasn't accused of paying a player. A booster was accused of paying a HS coach to steer a player to Alabama.

[WarEagle73]

How can we have any faith in the NCAA when they do not apply thier own rules the same for everyone. They are a joke.

[jthomas666]

This afternoon on the radio I listened Finebaum talking about the NCAA slapping Oklahoma on the wrist wile it just about drove Alabama into the ground just a few years ago. I had not thought of this but he has a good point. Why did they only take two scholarships & the 8 wins from the 05 season from Oklahoma when they clearly had two players being paid by a booster? Was it not booster activity that got Alabama into hot water? Seems like they are not dealing straight to me. Thoughts?Also take into consideration that

1. Oklahoma was a repeat offender--that is, they qualified as a repeat offender due to the basketball sanctions.

2. The bulk of the penalty was self-imposed. The only thing the NCAA added was vacating the wins and extending the probation.

I went over to Soonerfans.com after the announcement, and a lot of THEM thought they got off light.

[vandyfan84]

So, am I reading that an Auburn fan is ACTUALLY taking the favor of Alabama? wow! Now I can die in peace.

I agree, this ruling from the NCAA is complete utter BS! Only 2 scholarships? Bullcrap!