Colorado problems

by greenman on Jun 22, 2007 8:28 AM CDT Comment 19 comments

Bad news for Colorado. The school reported to the NCAA that over the last six years a number of meals at the university were undercharged to student atheletes, totaling $61,700.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/colle...

This is considered a "major" infraction by the NCAA, and Colorado will be put on two years probabtion, fined a hundred grand, and lose one football scholarship the next three seasons. I kinda feel bad for Dan Hawkins now, seeing as how this was going on long before he arrived, and he most likely had no idea this was going on.

Those training table meals are quoted as $14-15 dollars as well, which is a lot for a student to be spending consistently on a meal. I think UT's was somewhere around $10. Is it really a "major" infraction to be undercharging the atheletes overpriced meals? Especially since the university was doing it "inadvertantly" (I guess that is kinda an ambiguous term) and they reported it to the NCAA themselves. I guess what I'm asking is, does the punishment fit the crime here, and how much will the program suffer? I'm not too well versed on NCAA infractions.

All comments, FanPosts, and FanShots are the views of the reader-authors who create them.

0 recs | Comment 19 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

AGGGGG!!!

No more, CU has had enough pain.

It seems like every time CU gets a new coach they reveal some kind of cheating by the old coaches. Last time it was after Neuheisel left with over 100 violations looming.

I guess getting your boosters to pay your players and give them cars is not a major violation, but accidentally under charging your athletes for food is.

by Wells on Jun 22, 2007 10:22 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

This "amateur" crap needs to stop

Why does the NCAA insist on this amateur status thing? It seems like the biggest hypocrisy in America.

If they really wanted to make college sports truly amateur it would be simple to do: stop charging admission to the games. DUHHH.

The colleges make millions and the athletes make "nothing" ??? Give me a break! These kids get run ragged, risk injury, and bring honor and glory to their schools (for the most part). They ought to at least get lifetime free tuition.

The NCAA is really stoopid. Everybody knows there are BIG money programs that have been skating enforcement for years. Its a joke that CU get pounded for feeding their kids when there are plenty of more egregious infractions around. Hell, the food ought to be free anyway. I thought scholarships included dorm fees.

by Arby A on Jun 22, 2007 11:56 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

That is the rub

Scholarship Athletes get the food for free. The problem was that they were letting non-scholarship students buy the regular meal plans and then eat in the athlete dining hall.

Pretty much they are punishing CU for not charging walk ons an extra 5 bucks per meal they ate with the team.

by Wells on Jun 22, 2007 1:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't get this

granted I'm not familiar with all the NCAA regs... but it seems like the schools should be able to feed the athletes as long as they don't give them banned substances. If you're on scholarship, that should include meals, right? There were some examples cited where walk-ons paid the wrong price for the type of meal they got, which seems kind of silly to me.

FWIW student cost for a meal at UT is $3.30 (lunch). I don't know what they're cooking up at CU that costs $7-15.

by SelimSivad on Jun 22, 2007 12:28 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Meal Prices

Certain team functions here at UT would cost walkons $19.99 to eat with the scholarship guys. To me, I think it's unfair that certain members of a team can't eat with the rest of them. Not necessarily at the dining hall like what happened at CU, but the once a week team dinner after game preparation is complete.

by james on Jun 22, 2007 3:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

wow

that is unfair. So our starting kicker has to pay to eat with the team, great job Mack.

by SelimSivad on Jun 22, 2007 4:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

major?

so this is a major infraction? what about living in a $750,000 house for free? is that major, or just a misdemeanor? And why is this low-priority item being carried out ahead of higher priority things?

You'd think the NCAA would want to take care of the bigger fish they need to fry instead of worrying about the guppies (not saying CU is a guppy, just the infraction).

...til Gabriel blows his horn

by BigTexBD on Jun 22, 2007 12:31 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

In reggie's defense

He didn't live in a $750,000 house. That was his parents. He lived in an apartment off campus (to my knowledge).

Just throwing that out there.

Fight On! Beat the Wolverines!

by USCLink on Jun 22, 2007 5:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

he also...

went to Las Vegas and stayed in a Suite at the Venetian for his 21st birthday...What's wrong with that? Nothing except it was all payed for by the "prospective marketers" credit card. Not that i care if USC faces sanctions, but c'mon. If you're gonna have stupid rules and enforce them, lets enforce them with all teams...even the ones in sunny LA.

And why is Oklahoma not sanctioned yet?

by bleed burnt orange on Jun 25, 2007 8:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Where's the crakdown...

on OU and USC? Don't they have proof of their infractions by now? If the NCAA is making a big deal out of this then, by scale, OU and USC should be getting some huge punishments.

by sharkbait101 on Jun 22, 2007 1:44 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

the difference

is in what the universities knew and when.

Colorado admittedly did this knowingly (though they apparently didn't know it was against the rules), whereas there are questions about whether USC or OU knew about their infractions while they were going on.

that's why nothing has happened to the other two yet. there either has to be knowledge by the athletic department or there has to be a lack of institutional control (no effort to learn what was going on or an effort made to avoid learning about it) for them to receive any real punishment. I'm not saying those didn't exist with USC and OU, but there's at least an as-of-yet unanswered factual question there. That's why the NCAA hasn't cracked down on them, whereas they have on the open-and-shut violation by CU.

by billyzane on Jun 22, 2007 2:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The moral of the story is

let your boosters do the cheating for you, and have plausible deniability.

But don't give walk ons access to the athletic meal hall with out charging them $5 dollars on top of the meal plan they have to pay for.

by Wells on Jun 22, 2007 3:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

There are no boosters...

involved in the Bush issue. Lets make that very clear. This was Bush cutting his own deal on the side. Terrible, but true.

Conquest Chronicles

by Paragon SC on Jun 22, 2007 5:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

how are they going to crackdown on USC?

The NCAA needs Bush to acknowledge what happened. Bush is telling the NCAA to go jump in a lake. He paid off the wanna-be marketer/agent so he won't say anything.
I know many will disagree with me, but I don't even think what may/may not have gone on with Bush should be considered a major violation. It isn't like they were telling recruits, "Hey, come to USC, where would-be sports marketers can set your parents up with a sweet deal".
What was going on wasn't an inducement to help the program, it was a player's parents with their hands out.
This wasn't a case of USC deliberately trying to get around the system to improve their program.

As for OU, the NCAA is taking their sweet time making a decision on them.

by Beergut on Jun 23, 2007 12:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

USC recruiting

The thing that bothers me is USC has celebrities like Snoop Dogg and Will Ferrell hanging around thier practice fields 24/7. Imagine a big name high school recruit visiting USC. Sure he was big in his hometown, but after visiting USC he gets to hang out with Snoop and hit up the biggest LA night clubs with the other atlethetes. That's got to be a huge impact on impressionable kids. Probably a big reason USC has had outstanding recruiting for the last 5 years.

by sharkbait101 on Jun 23, 2007 3:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Case in point

Joe McKnight

Officially a Limey Longhorn

by patienthornsfan on Jun 24, 2007 3:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

What I want to know..

How does this benefit CU football? is cheaper meals supposed to attract a better talent in the walk on Pool. Is CU going to capture all the best walk on's in the Nation with the offer of cheap food?
CU will become a powerhouse with the best fed walk on' in the county.
Look out Big 12 schools with all your scrawny starving walks, you don't stand a chance against well fed walk on's at CU.

What does the well paid staff at the NCAA do?

what if a school replaced the margarine with butter, low cost store brands with expensive named brands foods. What if they replaced plastic dishes with fine china? HEB brand cola with Coca Cola?

Dynasties will fall and we would all lose trust in the amateur standing of college athletics. Yikkes

xerxes

by Xerxes on Jun 24, 2007 11:29 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

the way the NCAA views it is

Colorado was essentially giving their walk-on athletes $60,000+ to play for them.
Not the view that I'd take, b/c I think walk-ons should be allowed to eat with their teammates, scholarships or not, but then I probably think too logically to work for the NCAA.

by Beergut on Jun 25, 2007 2:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs