USC?

[osubeavs721]

Quote: Originally Posted by chicagopax

Now I know the real reason why Madden is implementing tendancies. Carries a concealed weapon Y/N Sells property given to from college Y/N Personally the main issue with OSU is that Tressel didn't report the violations and they do deserve to be punished for that. If Tressel reported it as soon as he knew, then only the players should've been suspended. Death penalty is beyond insane, I hate OSU with a passion in large part to their cocky *** THE Ohio State University they try to get started. Until another Ohio State University pops up, I won't be calling OSU, tOSU. But none the less, unless they can prove more than Tressel knew and the extent of the knowledge than go from there, but with Tressel stepping down, I doubt they will have any worse than what USC got. Like I said, Mississippi State needs to get penalties, they flat out admitted to offering Newton money but they aren't getting punished?

Did you read the SI article? Tressel has had this stuff follow him since youngstown state. Clarett said Tressel knew about his dealings. I have a hard time tressel was innocent and I dont think the death penalty is warranted BUT, they need a steeper suspension than USC got for reggie bush.

[reyes the roof]

Quote: Originally Posted by bostonsports

I will personaly prevent us from post season play in the game, but why would they actually put it in the game. Theirs a ton of sc fans who wouldnt buy the game because of that.

Do you really think USC fans wouldn't buy the game because they couldn't play in a bowl game their first year? If they are that upset over it, they could just sim the first year

[volstopfan14]

I don't get the opposition to the restrictions being in the game. USC will not be in a bowl or in a conference championship game this year and it would be cool to see it represented in the game. It will happen in real life regardless of how USC fans feel about it and should happen in the game. While it would be inconvinient for USC users, it would be realistic and an interesting challenge. Isn't the EA Sports moto "it's in the game"?

[kingkilla56]

You realize if EA were to add these teams specific bans to real life situations, they would essentially be admitting to using players and coaches in their game? Why is video game OSU getting penalized if there was never anybody named Pryor in the game?

An interesting challenge?

[volstopfan14]

Quote: Originally Posted by kingkilla56

You realize if EA were to add these teams specific bans to real life situations, they would essentially be admitting to using players and coaches in their game? Why is video game OSU getting penalized if there was never anybody named Pryor in the game?

No they would be punishing the TEAM. The USC situation was involving Reggie Bush. Bush was not penalized, (his Heisman was taken away but that would not be represented in the game) the TEAM was. No current individual player or coach for USC is affected any more than any other right now.

[kingkilla56]

Yes they would be punishing the TEAM. But why is a team in NCAA 12 getting punished because of their real life counterpart? Reggie Bush never existed in the game right? So NCAA 12 Football USC did nothing wrong then.

We need to separate real life from the video game somewhere. Nobody is trying to stop you from demolishing USC's roster in your game, but no reason for my copy to ship with any such ban the same way Madden doesn't ship with team draft picks altered.

[edawg]

Quote: Originally Posted by franko3219

I could be wrong, but I am pretty sure that they know that Cam's dad had solicited money for him. The NCAA ruled that because "Cam didn't know" ::cough cough:: they would not rule him nor Auburn ineligable. Plan and simple the NCAA is inconsistant and is a joke, and yes I said this before OSU ever got in trouble. What ever happened to the whole recruiting services investigation that never really started involving Oregon, LSU, and a couple of other schools that I cannot remember?

Disclaimer: I am an Auburn University student and probably see through Orange-and-Blue sunglasses, but this is the most accurate description of the Cam Newton situation.

Cecil Newton and a Mississippi State booster (Kenny Rogers) were found to have solicited money from MSU -- this made Cam ineligible at Mississippi State (see the Albert Means case -- Means was ruled ineligible for soliciting money from Alabama, however, his eligibility was intact at other schools and he played his college football at Memphis).

Since it was never found that Cecil, Cam, or anyone else actually sought money from Auburn, Cam would have been eligible at Auburn.

Finally, the key to this case is not the fact that Cam claimed to have never known of his father's actions (in all reality he did). Mark Emmert himself stated that that was a nonfactor in the NCAA's decision making when ruling Cam eligible prior to the SEC Championship Game. The main thing is that money never changed hands (at MSU or Auburn). That is largely why Cam Newton remained eligible and will unless further evidence is presented.


On another note, I know that all SEC schools use recruiting services such as Rivals for film on prospects. If Oregon and LSU are in trouble, than several other schools probably are as well.

War Eagle!

[Yrogergj24]

What about programmable sanctions?