Nick Daschel is a veteran sports writer and columnist who has worked on the West coast for nearly three decades. Nick has covered the Pac-10 for about 15 years, primarily focusing on the Northwest schools.
Rival Pac-10 message boards of USC are going berserk over a story by Yahoo! Sports claiming that Trojans basketball coach Tim Floyd paid an associate of O.J. Mayo $1,000.
This, combined with the investigations and speculation that USC football has flouted the rules to do its business, has some fans of other schools clamoring for the NCAA to throw the book at USC.
Cheaters! Knew it! Probation! Death penalty!
Stop. Please.
Because as much as you’d like to see Southern California pay for its alleged transgressions, it would not be good for the Pac-10 to find Trojans football in the dumper.
Simply put, the better USC football is, the better it is for the Pac-10.
When USC is good, the country notices the Pac-10. As much as fans say they like the underdog, what they secretly crave is greatness.
Sorry, Cal as the Pac-10 bell cow isn’t as good for the league. Neither is Oregon or Arizona State.
Business is best in Major League Baseball when the Yankees rule. The NBA perked up last year when the league’s two traditional powers, the Lakers and Celtics, played for the championship. The NFL has great appeal regardless of who is on top, but it gets an extra bump when the Cowboys rule.
The same applies when the Trojans are atop the Pac-10.
USC football is a program every college football fan in America knows of. When it’s 10:30 p.m. on the East coast and the Trojans play Oregon, a fair number might stay up and watch on television. Because they want to see greatness, as well as the possibility of an enormous upset.
Oregon State’s stunning 27-21 win over USC was ESPN’s highest rated Thursday night football game of 2008.
If it’s the Beavers over Cal, the East Coast folks are about as interested as they would be a test pattern. Same, too, if it’s OSU over the watered-down Trojans of the late 1990s and early 2000s.
The Pac-10 needs a beacon to attract attention. It needs the Midwest and South and East to take a look at the conference. They’ll look with interest if USC is on top and rolling.
You’re kidding yourself if you think the rest of the country would do the same if it’s Cal or Arizona State ruling the Pac-10 roost.
No team in the Pac-10 carries the level of national clout as USC. When it was good, Washington could do some damage because of its cosmopolitan location, tradition and television market. But the Huskies aren’t anywhere close to appealing these days.
Not even UCLA, even though it is located in the same region as USC, has the same cache as the Trojans. The Bruins don’t have the tradition or passionate fan base to match USC.
If the NCAA proves that USC lacked institutional control over its football and basketball programs, then by all means, the Trojans should get punished. They shouldn’t get a wrist slap, either, just because they’re USC.
But the rest of the conference shouldn’t celebrate if that day comes. It will have an impact that reaches from Tucson to Pullman, and not in a good way.
Nick Daschel covers the Pacific-10 Conference for Buster Sports, and can be reached at ndaschel@bustersports.com. You can also follow Nick on Twitter
Your logic is pure crap and a slap in the face to the rest of the Pac-10 schools who HAVE to play by the rules.
The Pac-10 did not piss on the rules when Washington was ruling the roost - they buried the program - for far less than what is being reported at USC.
Money is your explanation for ignoring integrity, fairness? Can we all start doing it the USC way so we can at least have a competitive level playing field?
Take a step back Nick - time to re-evaluate your position.
Oh c'mon, if they broke rules they should be held accountable. What does it teach our children to allow cheaters to prosper? As noted by onewoodwacker, the HUSKIES were buried by their own conference. The same should happen to USC! BTW, there is a storm brewing in the Northwest, and it isn't the lame Ducks! Soon the Husky Nation will once again rule!
"If the NCAA proves that USC lacked institutional control over its football and basketball programs, then by all means, the Trojans should get punished. They shouldn’t get a wrist slap, either, just because they’re USC."
OK, let me see if I understand this correctly. So what you are saying is that no one will pick up where USC drops off? Really? Do we need to bring up the Washington probation from the early 90's? I do believe that the Huskies OWNED the Pac-10 and was considered a top ten program nationally every year. The things done were far smaller than paying players so USC should get a five to six year probation if the Pac-10 and the NCAA is to maintain any credibility, period. So how long after the Huskies went down did it take the conference to recover. Oh, that's right, it took no time at all. When the pipeline to the local kids dries up for USC, the Pac-10 as a whole will compete with the "Power" conferences of college football. Don't forget, parity is good for sports, period. End of discussion. With these talented kids going to other schools in the Pac-10, the conference will be stronger as a whole.
"Secretly crave" what? The same three or four teams dominating all of the college football landscape? No way.
No one wants to see USC vs. Florida, or the Lakers vs. Celtics, or even the Dodgers vs. Yankees every stinking year, except for the networks, and the fans in those areas.
Yeah I have to totally disagree with what was said. Of course maybe USC getting caught and punished would put a dent in ratings or whatever for the PAC-10 for a little while, but in the long run, not really. Look at Alabama or OU. OU was dominant in the 70's (IE the 74 and 75 NC and really the 76 NC) still relevant in the early 80's and NC in '85 and near the top 86, 87, 88, and 89. OU was like USC now. They were "probably" having problems with money being given to players and other problems but nothing was proven until 1989 and thats when it came crashing down for OU (just look at their record from 1990 until Stoops came in 1999). That was a huge drop of for the then Big 8 (Texas then was in the SW conference). But at that time Nebraska had only won 2 NC, but Nebraska started to become a powerhouse again winning the NC in 94, 95, and 97. Furthermore rinky dink teams like Kansas State became national title contenders and being ranked in the top 5 and top 10. So although OKlahoma fell off for a decade which sucked for the OU fans, the big 8 (now big 12) didn't really miss a beat and in fact new talent and powerhouses emerged.
Remember before Washington's 1993 troubles and troubles after Neuheisel, they were pretty dominant and relevant and could lay claim to 4 NC's. USC's fall would only mean that maybe a Washington or Oregon would pick up the peices as did Nebraska in the Big 8 and another team in the PAC-10 would become more dominant. So I totally disagree with this article.
You on the USC payroll, too? Or, does Carroll just pay your bar tab while you're thinking up such dumb-a$$ column/blog entries?
Your point is stupid on two fronts:
First, and less important, PAC 10 EXPOSURE CAN'T GET ANY WORSE! We have, BY FAR, the WORST TV agreement of any major conference. USC would still be on TV, regardless.
Second, and more importantly, the PAC 10 WILL STILL - AND ALWAYS - GET AT LEAST ONE TEAM IN THE BCS. HELL, Utah and Boise State have made the BCS in consecutive years.
GUARANTEED, NO MATTER HOW BAD the PAC 10 is, IT WILL get a team in the BCS.
And, since the conference share bowl and TV revenues, WHO CARES if it's ASU, USC, WSU or Stanford in the BCS?
It's (the conference) is getting the same money anyway.
USC should feakin' BURIED... and whoregon should be next.
Time to level the playing field like the conference did with the UW. (Funny, anyone remember that the NCAA WAS RECOMMENDING FAR, FAR FEWER penalties than what the PAC 10 levied against UW?)
Payback's a bitch... and the conference's pockets are full.
Comments
The Pac-10 did not piss on the rules when Washington was ruling the roost - they buried the program - for far less than what is being reported at USC.
Money is your explanation for ignoring integrity, fairness? Can we all start doing it the USC way so we can at least have a competitive level playing field?
Take a step back Nick - time to re-evaluate your position.
I don't give a rip what the rest of the country thinks USC cheated they need to pay for it and I hope they get hit hard.
It also looks bad for the pac-10 if the only reason USC has accomplished what it has is by cheating.
Throw the book at them I say.
What part of that isn't clear?
No one wants to see USC vs. Florida, or the Lakers vs. Celtics, or even the Dodgers vs. Yankees every stinking year, except for the networks, and the fans in those areas.
Remember before Washington's 1993 troubles and troubles after Neuheisel, they were pretty dominant and relevant and could lay claim to 4 NC's. USC's fall would only mean that maybe a Washington or Oregon would pick up the peices as did Nebraska in the Big 8 and another team in the PAC-10 would become more dominant. So I totally disagree with this article.
Your point is stupid on two fronts:
First, and less important, PAC 10 EXPOSURE CAN'T GET ANY WORSE! We have, BY FAR, the WORST TV agreement of any major conference. USC would still be on TV, regardless.
Second, and more importantly, the PAC 10 WILL STILL - AND ALWAYS - GET AT LEAST ONE TEAM IN THE BCS. HELL, Utah and Boise State have made the BCS in consecutive years.
GUARANTEED, NO MATTER HOW BAD the PAC 10 is, IT WILL get a team in the BCS.
And, since the conference share bowl and TV revenues, WHO CARES if it's ASU, USC, WSU or Stanford in the BCS?
It's (the conference) is getting the same money anyway.
USC should feakin' BURIED... and whoregon should be next.
Time to level the playing field like the conference did with the UW. (Funny, anyone remember that the NCAA WAS RECOMMENDING FAR, FAR FEWER penalties than what the PAC 10 levied against UW?)
Payback's a bitch... and the conference's pockets are full.
Pay 'em back.