Syracuse self imposes one year ban for THIS season

[caw]

UConn had a vote in the rule change that led to the BET ban being imposed on us, and judging by the fact that it passed unanimously, evidently voted for it themselves. I said back when the Big East passed that rule that it was a good rule but I didn't want to see them going and granting a waiver to Syracuse when they were inevitably banned. Well, 'Cuse is not in the Big East anymore, and neither are we (though I believe that rule along with everything else Big East except the name carries over to the AAC) but I'm glad to see it being applied to them too. The merits of our ban versus theirs are another issue, but the Big East didn't issue our postseason ban, and made the right decision in making the rule change. Think about it - there's a decent chance SMU gets a postseason ban before the tournament starts, self-imposed or otherwise. They're probably getting one eventually, it's a matter of when rather than if. Suffice it to say, either this year or next, SMU will probably be banned from the postseason. Imagine if they were allowed to participate in, and win, the AAC Tournament. At this point, it's highly unlikely we're going to the NCAA Tournament unless we win the conference tournament. Considering how the selection committee hated The American last year and will hate them even more now that Louisville's gone, it's possible the same will be true next year even if we have a better season. Imagine if SMU were postseason banned and we faced them, and lost, in the AAC Title Game, costing us a tournament berth. Would that be fair? Of course not. We'd all be complaining about it, and justifiably so.

Postseason bans should include conference tournaments. When you allow the conference to determine the merits of the postseason ban, you start up a very slippery slope that I don't particularly want to get into. And it could also cost a team a spot in the tournament.

Ummm, still widely different having it enforced by the conference and self imposing it. A lot of the angst was due to the other part of my post, the events surrounding the conference tournament bans must be considered in how people react/ed to the two.

 

[jibsey]

Boeheim has a big class coming in for next year so it's very transparent for him to do this and try and protect that class. The NCAA has to call him on this and ban them next year too because aside from a couple seniors this is hardly any punishment.

 

[tzznandrew]

Boeheim has a big class coming in for next year so it's very transparent for him to do this and try and protect that class. The NCAA has to call him on this and ban them next year too because aside from a couple seniors this is hardly any punishment.

I'm not sure they ultimately deserve 2 years in a vacuum, but your point is right. If this is the only punishment, it is no punishment, because the team wasn't making the tournament and so the program doesn't feel the stink they deserve...the stink we felt leading up to and after the ridiculous APR ban.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I f*%&ing hate ESPN.

 

[uconn13]

if they really wanted to punish boeheim, they'd institute a lifetime ban on digging in his nasal cavity for life on live television

 

[BFieldHusky]

There was talk on their board last week according to some here about a 2 year ban. Anyone have any info on what they are saying? I was kicked off recently.

 

[BoatShow]

This isn't final. NCAA may tack on an additional year to the ban, and vacated wins & scholarship losses look likely at this point.

BUT WHAT ABOUT THE HELMS TROPHIES

 

[CL82]

Can we self-impose a ban for this season, and then go break some recruiting rules?

"Yeah it is not a problem at all son. We got a get out jail free card."

We'd be a lock for the SEC....

 

[BoatShow]

UConn had a vote in the rule change that led to the BET ban being imposed on us, and judging by the fact that it passed unanimously, evidently voted for it themselves. I said back when the Big East passed that rule that it was a good rule but I didn't want to see them going and granting a waiver to Syracuse when they were inevitably banned. Well, 'Cuse is not in the Big East anymore, and neither are we (though I believe that rule along with everything else Big East except the name carries over to the AAC) but I'm glad to see it being applied to them too. The merits of our ban versus theirs are another issue, but the Big East didn't issue our postseason ban, and made the right decision in making the rule change. Think about it - there's a decent chance SMU gets a postseason ban before the tournament starts, self-imposed or otherwise. They're probably getting one eventually, it's a matter of when rather than if. Suffice it to say, either this year or next, SMU will probably be banned from the postseason. Imagine if they were allowed to participate in, and win, the AAC Tournament. At this point, it's highly unlikely we're going to the NCAA Tournament unless we win the conference tournament. Considering how the selection committee hated The American last year and will hate them even more now that Louisville's gone, it's possible the same will be true next year even if we have a better season. Imagine if SMU were postseason banned and we faced them, and lost, in the AAC Title Game, costing us a tournament berth. Would that be fair? Of course not. We'd all be complaining about it, and justifiably so.

Postseason bans should include conference tournaments. When you allow the conference to determine the merits of the postseason ban, you start up a very slippery slope that I don't particularly want to get into. And it could also cost a team a spot in the tournament.

In 2013, I felt that they easiest way for a team to not feel jipped about that was to beat us. I still feel that way if it's SMU in that position.

 

[CL82]

This isn't final. NCAA may tack on an additional year to the ban, and vacated wins & scholarship losses look likely at this point.

If it's just one, Syracuse will have gotten off easy.

 

[amory]

*shrug*

what did you guys expect? They're P5 now. It's not the same standards and we've known that, so we may as well just worry about our own team. And I'm not trying to take the high road or anything, either.

Their championship drought continues.

 

[UConn9604]

A hedge against NCAA action. Hopefully won't work.

Hopefully it works as well as this one did (but without the Cinderella ending):

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bas...lf-imposed-penalties-academic-progress-report

 

[Dooley]

I'd be shocked if the NCAA doesn't tack on an additional year or years. They aren't getting away with self-imposing a ban on a lost season. Well, on second thought, this is the NCAA I'm talking about. It wouldn't surprise me to see UCONN have to serve the Fruit's penalty.

 

[EastCoast2]

If it's just one, Syracuse will have gotten off easy.

Do you know what the violations were?

 

[zyron]

Do you know what the violations were?

I would check the Syracuse Board part you guys set up about it, but I was banned on your board for posting HERE.

 

[UConnNick]

This isn't final. NCAA may tack on an additional year to the ban, and vacated wins & scholarship losses look likely at this point.

Does this mean the NCAA will vacate their 6 OT win over us in the BET? I also think they should be forced to admit that Devendorf is a punk, even though it's common knowledge.

 

[huskyharry]

Please, please tell me this can't happen.....

Here's a quote from their press release: Syracuse initiated the investigation when it self-reported possible infractions to the NCAA in 2007. According to the school, "Much of the conduct involved in the case occurred long ago, and none occurred after 2012. No current student-athlete is involved."

So they spend 7 years investigating, wait until they suck, and then self-impose a ban for this year with a month to go in the season? From the category of you can't make this up.....and I assume there are good odds that they will get away with this, right?

Yes, they can. Remember this is the school that conducted a hush-hush internal investigation about the sexual abuse of two of their BallBoys by the assistant coach and took no action...then when the story comes out several years later the Head Coach verbally assaults the victims....then as soon as the audio tape comes out that implicates that same coach (&conveniently after the Statute of Limitations expires), Syracuse rapidly fires the asst. coach, while the program and the head coach suffers not even a smidgen. They are a dirty, dirty program!

 

[huskyharry]

I don't get the joke.

You have a weird sense of humor.

Or he is a troll.

 

[CL82]

EastCoast2, post: 1215871, member: 1935"]Do you know what the violations were?

Know? No, but what I`ve read is that it is a pattern of academic problems going back at least 10 years. If the NCAA punishes that less severely than what amounted to one year of bad grades for transfers, then they are essentially inviting everyone to cheat since the sanction for that for a 10 year period is less than the sanction for accurately reporting bad grades. The problem they are facing is whatever they give Syracuse for a decade's worth of cheating ought to be double d for UNC's 2 decades of cheating. IMO 'cuse ought to tourist wins for each year the ineligible kids were played plus at least a two year ban and UNC ought to get the death penalty.

 

[donyell34]

Will be totally surprised if they are banned next year. Maybe a loss of a ship or two. P5 power in place now and money talks. The maac, American , Atlantic and any other conference not in a power position would be ripped apart if they were doing what the Orange are doing and have done. UNC is a dilemma for Ncaa and I don't think they know what to do but they will tread carefully here. Big name, big school , long time big money and powerful friends. Not in a million years will you see the death penalty and the line will be way up from there. All told it's at least nice to see the Orange squirrel in there pus.

 

[caw]

Will be totally surprised if they are banned next year. Maybe a loss of a ship or two. P5 power in place now and money talks. The maac, American , Atlantic and any other conference not in a power position would be ripped apart if they were doing what the Orange are doing and have done. UNC is a dilemma for Ncaa and I don't think they know what to do but they will tread carefully here. Big name, big school , long time big money and powerful friends. Not in a million years will you see the death penalty and the line will be way up from there. All told it's at least nice to see the Orange squirrel in there pus.

I doubt they would even lose a scholarship for next year. They are full and it would be a bit odd for the NCAA to make them cut a kid. If they start to lose scholarships it would probably be 2016 class, no recruits committed (signed) from that class yet.

 

[mauconnfan]

Coach K chimes in:

Duke's Mike Krzyzewski called the ban "shocking news."

"I feel bad that that's happening," Krzyzewski said. "I love Syracuse, I love Jim and you don't want anything bad to happen to any conference member."

Yeah K, it's awful when they're a member of your conference now but when they were in the Big East they played in the NCAA tourney knowing full well neither Fab Melo or Sutherland should have been playing for them. That's the BS we're seeing here - to think that only this year, when they blow, would be their only penalty is unbelievable and should not happen. Our APR ban was much less of an issue and we suffered for it and may still be doing so. They should ban them next year and some frosh will leave and others in the future will think before they choose! That's "penalizing" not letting them choose

 

[auggie22]

I f*%&ing hate ESPN.

Well if you were listening to Mike and Mike this morning, your head has most likely exploded. Tons of mock outrage from these fools about how unfair this punishment is to the players on the court, suffering for past transgressions of others. In the positioning of good vs bad - SU good, NCAA bad.

I am so close to the point of not watching college sports any longer. At this point I only watch UCONN games anyway. This is almost entirely on ESPN.

 

[mauconnfan]

Well if you were listening to Mike and Mike this morning, your head has most likely exploded. Tons of mock outrage from these fools about how unfair this punishment is to the players on the court, suffering for past transgressions of others. In the positioning of good vs bad - SU good, NCAA bad.

I am so close to the point of not watching college sports any longer. At this point I only watch UCONN games anyway. This is almost entirely on ESPN.

But it was ok for the UConn kids to suffer for a couple guys who left school and didn't finish their work 3-4 years prior? What a bunch of morons these guys are.

 

[djct1999]

From Boeheim, to ESPN, to even Coach K's response...........this entire thing is a farce. ESPN is the equivalent to Goldman Sachs during the housing crisis, shorting subprime while pimpin it out to its customers. We can point to many reasons on why college athletics has been destroyed, but no matter the reason the core of it all is ESPN. I really hope one day it blows up in their face.

 

[BoatShow]

Self imposing a ban in a year you probably won't make the tourney. Is that the kind of "transparency" they look for in investigations?

 

[auggie22]

There is a deliberate PR campaign under way to frame the NCAA as the bad guy, by default making SU a sympathetic figure in this process. Which I get. What i don't get is how the University has managed to get all of the media onboard with this plan.

They self reported ( conveniently not mentioning that they continued to do things after self reporting for at least five years)

The transgressions are in the past and no current students were implicated ( ahem.... This has never been a meaningful argument before today )

Syracuse is fully cooperating ( oh, and despite that fact it has taken 8 years to adjudicate these issues )

They have self imposed a harsh punishment ( in the second half of the season, now with dim chances at an ncaa birth )

I noticed on ESPN radio an impressive combination of "they weren't a lock for the tournament anyway" comments, quickly followed up with "but still, it isn't right to punish current students for things that may have happened 8 years ago"

Jiminy cricket. I know all fanbases think espn has done them wrong, but motherjumper you cannot tell me it isn't apparently true in our case.

 

[Caronimo]

If it's just one year, hopefully the NCAA gets it right and bans them in the future. They need to suffer with recruiting the way it hurt us. They won't even lose a step at all in any way if they are banned this year.

 

[UConnRock]

They are 15-7 w/ 9 games left. It is a heavily backloaded schedule w/ 5 ranked teams- 2 games against Duke, and 1 against Louisville, UVA, and ND. They also play at Pitt, NC State and BC. Only home game against an unranked team is Pitt. They could realistically end the season in the 17-14 range. Certain NIT material.

I would have to think the the NCAA has told them it would be 2 years and they threw out a lifeline by offering this year. They know that a 2016-2017 ban and Boeheim leaving would decimate the program

 

[7774]

Do you know what the violations were?

What does it matter what the violations were? There were violations, and if you only get a ban this year + scholarship reductions + vacated wins, then you basically haven't been punished at all. You stink this year so the ban isn't relevant, your coach plays about 7 guys each year so the scholarship reductions aren't relevant, and total wins is meaningless so who cares if some are vacated.