• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Nebraska Cornhuskers (corn)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
By way of comparison, Alabama had a similar - but not the same - situation in 2007. The total value of the textbooks they received was around $40k, there were 201 athletes involved, and Alabama was forced to vacate a total of 21 wins from 2005-2007.

The key difference here is probably that 22 of those athletes knew that they were getting improper benefits, while our athletes say they did not know they weren't supposed to be getting these books. Also in Alabama's case, some of their athletes were getting books for boyfriends/girlfriends, and we were not. Again, allegedly.

Here's the NCAA's ruling on the 'Bama scandal:

NCAA Ruling on the Alabama Textbook Scandal

The decision by the NCAA Infractions Committee concerning the improper distribution of textbooks by University of Alabama student-athletes was announced this afternoon. The penalties include three years probation, vacation of records, and a $43,900 fine. No scholarships will be lost.

A total of 201 student athletes from 16 sports including football were involved and the total value of the improper benefits was $40,000. The committee found that 22 of the athletes receiving almost $22,000 in benefits who were aware they were impermissible.

University of Alabama officials said they were disappointed at the severity of the penalties given no competitive advantage was gained for any sport and "not one athlete pocketed one dollar" in the scheme. Athletic Director Mal Moore said the university would "carefully consider our options regarding an appeal."

According to the university's response to the NCAA, scholarship student-athletes were acquiring texts and materials of a value greater than $100 for girlfriends, boyfriends, or other student-athletes. The athletes were also receiving non-required textbooks and materials in addition to the required items for their classes.

When the textbook scheme was brought to light in the middle of the 2007 Crimson Tide football season, five players were suspended for four games due to their participation.
Click to expand...

Alabama also self-reported their violations. They were not required to lose any scholarships, nor did they incur a post-season ban.


Here's a writeup from YardBarker about the NCAA's denial of Alabama's appeal, which helps further explain why we may not face the same kind of penalty:


Back in June of 2009 the NCAA handed down a penalty to sixteen athletic programs at the University of Alabama, all but the rowing team was found at fault for improperly obtaining textbooks from other students.

The basis of Alabama?s appeal was that the penalty given to the teams was not consistent with past penalties handed down by the NCAA from textbook violations. The Crimson Tide received three year probation and the football team was ordered to vacate 21-football wins from 2005-2007. 2005-06 was under Mike Shula as the head coach, and the 2007 team was coached by Nick Saban.

Alabama was not appealing the three year probation it received, but the football wins that were vacated. In no other textbook case had the institution been forced to vacate wins, but the NCAA considers the Crimson Tide a repeat offender due to the probation it was on at the beginning of the decade as well.

Alabama self reported the violations back in 2007 when they found out that football players, Antonie Caldwell, Marlon Davis, Glen Coffee, Marquis Johnson, and Chris Rogers had been obtaining the textbooks improperly. The five players were promptly suspended prior to the 2007 Tennessee game.

The University was hoping the fact that they self reported the violation and suspended the players when they found out what was going on would sway the NCAA into being more lenient. But, the fact that it had been going on since the beginning of the 2005 season made it tough for the NCAA to not give a strict punishment to a team that had as recently as 2002 received probation for violations.

The NCAA was actually somewhat lenient to the Crimson Tide because they self reported and suspended the players when they found out. The University had nothing to do with the players obtaining said textbooks, but they were at fault for not more closely monitoring the situation.
Click to expand...

The bold and bold/underlined may be why we face little if any further penalties from the NCAA over this. 'Bama was nailed for ten major violations in 2002, mostly because their boosters were giving their athletes cash. Since we haven't had anything like that kind of penalty lately, I think we'll be OK.
 
Upvote 0
The difference is that 5 players at Alabama were purposefully scamming the system to profit monetarily from it, and at Nebraska it sounds like simply an oversight on part of the school, coming down to semantics and how it applies to the NCAA.

Gotta think that's a secondary violation with a "don't do that anymore".
 
Upvote 0
BuckTwenty;1949131; said:
The difference is that 5 players at Alabama were purposefully scamming the system to profit monetarily from it, and at Nebraska it sounds like simply an oversight on part of the school, coming down to semantics and how it applies to the NCAA.

Gotta think that's a secondary violation with a "don't do that anymore".
Click to expand...

TBH, at the moment, I couldn't give a fuck about text books.
 
Upvote 0
stowfan;1950338; said:
Considering the value of the property, some of those folks have to be extremely wealthy.
Click to expand...


Old joke from these parts:

A farmer just won the lottery and was interviewed by the local paper. The reporter asked, "So now that you're a millionaire, are you going to retire and live a life of luxury?"

"No," the farmer replies. "I think I'll just keep farming until it's all gone."​

My grandfather and an uncle farmed. Grandpa made a decent living, but was never wealthy. My uncle gave it up and moved to Phoenix. It's a hard life, and I don't envy those who choose to live it.
 
Upvote 0
muffler dragon;1950369; said:
They were originally called the Bugeaters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1892_Nebraska_Bugeaters_football_team
Click to expand...
Nebraska's football team began its history as the "Old Gold Knights", and was also sometimes known as the "Tree Planters", "Nebraskans", "The Rattlesnake Boys", "Red Stockings", "Antelopes" or "Goldenrods" in their early years.

& found this to be pretty cool too..

Illinois - This was Nebraska's first game against another major university program, and the Bugeaters secured the season-opening victory with just a single touchdown produced as a result of a fumble recovery. Both the fumble recovery and the winning touchdown were accomplished by African-American med student George Flippin, Nebraska's first black player and only the fifth black athlete to play at a major predominantly white college nationwide.

& then...

Missouri - This game was to have been Nebraska's first ever conference game, however the University of Missouri squad refused to take the field, protesting the presence of African American George Flippin on the Bugeater squad. As the Tigers refused to play, the game was ruled as a forfeit and the score officially recorded as 1-0. This unfortunate event resulted in the new conference establishing a rule that prevented member teams from refusing to play scheduled matches.[5][6]
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top