menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
Ohio Football Topic
Topic: NCAA show-cause penalty unlawful in Calif
Page: 1 of 1
Pataskala
General User
P
Member Since: 7/8/2010
Location: At least six feet away from anybody else
Post Count: 9,465
person
mail
Pataskala
mail
Posted: 10/10/2018 12:20 PM
settings_applications edit_note
A judge has ruled that the penalty is an unlawful restraint on engaging in a lawful profession. In other words, preventing someone from coaching for any period of time is too harsh a penalty, regardless of the infraction. This is from former USC assistant Todd McNair's defamation suit against the NCAA regarding the show-cause order against him from the Reggie Bush scandal. The PAC 12 and Big West commissioners claim that without the show-cause penalty, their Calif schools might not be able to be NCAA members. http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/24945390/...
BillyTheCat
General User
BTC
Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,795
person
mail
BillyTheCat
mail
Posted: 10/11/2018 10:17 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Pataskala wrote:expand_more
A judge has ruled that the penalty is an unlawful restraint on engaging in a lawful profession. In other words, preventing someone from coaching for any period of time is too harsh a penalty, regardless of the infraction. This is from former USC assistant Todd McNair's defamation suit against the NCAA regarding the show-cause order against him from the Reggie Bush scandal. The PAC 12 and Big West commissioners claim that without the show-cause penalty, their Calif schools might not be able to be NCAA members. http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/24945390/...
Two things here:

1. Likely the this court has NO jurisdiction as this is larger than Superior Court in LA, this judge has overstepped his bounds.

2. Membership to the NCAA is voluntary, and the bylaws are established by the member institutions.

Federal judge will quickly overturn this.
Maddog13
General User
M13
Member Since: 12/22/2004
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Post Count: 725
person
mail
Maddog13
mail
Posted: 10/11/2018 10:46 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Perhaps, but I think the NCAA is looking at more and more legal challenges down the road.
BillyTheCat
General User
BTC
Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,795
person
mail
BillyTheCat
mail
Posted: 10/11/2018 11:52 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Maddog13 wrote:expand_more
Perhaps, but I think the NCAA is looking at more and more legal challenges down the road.
Find me any organization that is not facing more and more legal challenges down the road. We are a society of lawsuits. The lawsuit is the fabric of American political discourse today, if you do not get what you want though the organization or bureaucracy you simply file suit.
GoCats105
General User
GC105
Member Since: 1/31/2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Post Count: 7,817
person
mail
GoCats105
mail
Posted: 10/11/2018 12:06 PM
settings_applications edit_note
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
A judge has ruled that the penalty is an unlawful restraint on engaging in a lawful profession. In other words, preventing someone from coaching for any period of time is too harsh a penalty, regardless of the infraction. This is from former USC assistant Todd McNair's defamation suit against the NCAA regarding the show-cause order against him from the Reggie Bush scandal. The PAC 12 and Big West commissioners claim that without the show-cause penalty, their Calif schools might not be able to be NCAA members. http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/24945390/...
Two things here:

1. Likely the this court has NO jurisdiction as this is larger than Superior Court in LA, this judge has overstepped his bounds.

2. Membership to the NCAA is voluntary, and the bylaws are established by the member institutions.

Federal judge will quickly overturn this.
Agreed. I'm pretty sure the show-cause penalty was originally introduced to protect the NCAA's member institutions, not penalize a coach's career opportunities. And really it's up to the institutions to make a decision on hiring someone with this penalty being enforced, not the NCAA.

---

To dovetail off of that, I'm really surprised nobody took a chance at hiring Jim Tressel once his show-cause penalty was almost completed. Whether or not you agree with anything he did as the head coach at Ohio State, the guy knows football and knows how to motivate student-athletes. It's a little too late in his career now, but it was always interesting to me.
catfan28
General User
C28
Member Since: 6/11/2011
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 1,503
person
mail
catfan28
mail
Posted: 10/11/2018 2:59 PM
settings_applications edit_note
A school should be allowed to assume the risk of hiring anyone that they so choose. It certainly rubs me the wrong way that the NCAA can place such a penalty on a person.
BillyTheCat
General User
BTC
Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,795
person
mail
BillyTheCat
mail
Posted: 10/11/2018 4:19 PM
settings_applications edit_note
catfan28 wrote:expand_more
A school should be allowed to assume the risk of hiring anyone that they so choose. It certainly rubs me the wrong way that the NCAA can place such a penalty on a person.
This person is allowed to be hired by anyone, the show-cause penalty has expired, this is simply his attempt at clearing his name. He lost a defamation of character suit in LA courts and is grasping at straws. His lack of employment in the field of football is a direct result from his actions for being a bag man and taking the fall for Pete Carroll. That sounds like a "him" problem.
catfan28
General User
C28
Member Since: 6/11/2011
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 1,503
person
mail
catfan28
mail
Posted: 10/11/2018 11:37 PM
settings_applications edit_note
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
This person is allowed to be hired by anyone, the show-cause penalty has expired, this is simply his attempt at clearing his name. He lost a defamation of character suit in LA courts and is grasping at straws. His lack of employment in the field of football is a direct result from his actions for being a bag man and taking the fall for Pete Carroll. That sounds like a "him" problem.
I'm not talking about this case in particular, just the concept in general. Every school should be allowed to make it's own hiring decisions. The NCAA putting the "scarlet letter" on certain coaches seems ridiculous. You should be allowed to hire anyone you so choose.
BillyTheCat
General User
BTC
Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,795
person
mail
BillyTheCat
mail
Posted: 10/12/2018 5:12 AM
settings_applications edit_note
catfan28 wrote:expand_more
This person is allowed to be hired by anyone, the show-cause penalty has expired, this is simply his attempt at clearing his name. He lost a defamation of character suit in LA courts and is grasping at straws. His lack of employment in the field of football is a direct result from his actions for being a bag man and taking the fall for Pete Carroll. That sounds like a "him" problem.
I'm not talking about this case in particular, just the concept in general. Every school should be allowed to make it's own hiring decisions. The NCAA putting the "scarlet letter" on certain coaches seems ridiculous. You should be allowed to hire anyone you so choose.
Every school is 100% free to hire who they want, they are also free to join or leave the NCAA, no one is making any school do either. I suspect if the employee was desirable enough and valuable enough a school would make that choice. Thing is, up in till now, no one has found the employee who is that perfect.
GoCats105
General User
GC105
Member Since: 1/31/2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Post Count: 7,817
person
mail
GoCats105
mail
Posted: 10/12/2018 8:21 AM
settings_applications edit_note
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
This person is allowed to be hired by anyone, the show-cause penalty has expired, this is simply his attempt at clearing his name. He lost a defamation of character suit in LA courts and is grasping at straws. His lack of employment in the field of football is a direct result from his actions for being a bag man and taking the fall for Pete Carroll. That sounds like a "him" problem.
I'm not talking about this case in particular, just the concept in general. Every school should be allowed to make it's own hiring decisions. The NCAA putting the "scarlet letter" on certain coaches seems ridiculous. You should be allowed to hire anyone you so choose.
Every school is 100% free to hire who they want, they are also free to join or leave the NCAA, no one is making any school do either. I suspect if the employee was desirable enough and valuable enough a school would make that choice. Thing is, up in till now, no one has found the employee who is that perfect.
Very rare indeed.

Chip Kelly was given a show-cause penalty after he already left Oregon for the NFL and it has since expired, but UCLA did hire him. He is the first Division I coach to receive a job after the show-cause.

And different sport but...

Kent State kept Rob Senderhoff on the basketball staff as an assistant and later given the head job after he was given a show cause penalty due to his time under Kelvin Sampson at Indiana. Sampson ended up returning to college at Houston after his expired.

Bruce Pearl was hired at Auburn after the penalty was up, the first ever for a power conference member.

This link has a list of names:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Show-cause_penalty
Showing Messages: 1 - 10 of 10
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)