Story Poster
Photo by RVR Photos/USA TODAY Sports
Texas A&M Football

Raw Deal? R.C. Slocum opens up about A&M's early '90s NCAA troubles

June 20, 2018
59,461

Memories came flooding back as R.C. Slocum listened to a Greg Hill interview on TexAgs Radio a few weeks ago.

Anger did, too.

The winningest coach in Aggie football history, Slocum is irked that some see Hill as rule-breaking prima donna who got Texas A&M put on probation in 1994. And Slocum is still miffed that an NCAA Infractions Committee headed by David Boren, who would soon be named president of OU, put A&M on probation at all.

As Slocum delicately put it in his Orange, Texas, drawl: “That was the biggest screwing a school ever got.”

That became more than apparent 12 years later when Oklahoma received a slap on the wrist for a similar, yet more egregious infraction. More on that later.

First, understand the way things worked in college athletics 25 years ago. Today, athletes receive “full cost of attendance,” which covers an entire year of tuition, fees, room and board and includes a stipend of approximately $5,000 annually. That wasn’t the case before 2016.

So in those days, football players didn’t typically stay on campus during the summer. Instead, the athletic department helped arrange for them to land summer jobs that provided athletes a chance to earn and save money for the upcoming school year.

“During that time it was traditional for college kids to work summer jobs,” Slocum said. “I worked one summer in a shipyard. I worked in a chemical plant and at a Conoco refinery. That was a big part of my education. I learned how hard some of those jobs were and how little I got paid."

In the summer of 1992, Hill, a star running back who would become a first-round NFL draft pick, was among several A&M players who got a job working on Housing and Urban Development (HUD) projects in the Dallas area. They were summer help for a full-time staff that did “make readies” — replacing carpet, painting, cleaning, etc. — on HUD apartment units.

An audit found that from 1990-92 many employees were paid for hours when they were not actually at work. That included, but was not limited to, Hill and some other A&M athletes.

“They were doing what everyone else was doing,” Slocum said. “They were summer employees and doing what the full-time employees were doing. Sometimes they left early. Well, everybody else was leaving early. Sometimes after lunch they didn’t have anything to do, and the regular workers would say, 'Just show up (tomorrow) morning.'”

Slocum said the problem was more with the lax management on the South Dallas project than with the workers. A responsible manager could have docked their pay or fired them.

In fact, Slocum said another player was dismissed at his urging. A prize recruit who was on his way to becoming All-American was working that summer on a similar HUD project in Garland. Actually, “working” might not be an accurate verb.

That player was employed under a more diligent manager than Hill was, and the boss phoned Slocum to report that his player's on-the-job effort wasn’t satisfactory. Slocum recommended the player be fired. He was.

Slocum feels that proves A&M wasn’t conspiring to pay players for nothing. If one highly valued player wasn’t paid for unperformed work, why would Hill and some of the other, more marginal players be treated differently?

True, A&M had committed NCAA violations in the past. But after becoming head coach in 1989, Slocum was determined to run a compliant program.

Slocum had a private polygraph company administer tests to him, recruiting coordinator Tim Cassidy and other staff members to prove they were not involved in any schemes to fraudulently pay players. Hill and the other players involved also took the polygraph test.

“The first thing I did was call each of those players individually,” Slocum said. “I told them, 'I can deal with it if you made a mistake, but I can’t deal with it if you told me a bold-faced lie. If you lie to me, you can’t be on this football team.'

“When I went to Greg Hill’s house, his mother and grandmother were there. They said, ‘Gregory, you better tell coach the truth.' They all fessed up except for one.”

Actually, one player was released from the team. Slocum suspended Hill for the first five games of the 1993 season.

That wasn’t good enough for the NCAA or Boren, then an Oklahoma senator. A&M was advised an investigation would continue.

Then on Sept. 10, 1993 — the Friday before A&M faced Boren’s Oklahoma Sooners in Norman — the NCAA Infractions Committee announced A&M would face greater sanctions. The Aggies lost to OU, 44-14, the next day.

Those sanctions rankled Slocum. He was also upset by the timing of the announcement. At that point A&M had won consecutive Southwest Conference championships and dozens of recruiting battles against OU. The Aggies were also ranked fifth in the nation.

Could it be that Boren strategically waited until the eve of the A&M-OU game to make that announcement in hopes that it might be a distraction for the Aggies and give the Sooners an edge? Slocum thinks so.

“They hung us out to dry,” Slocum said. “If they had any integrity, that would at least have waited until Monday. That kind of indicates the vindictiveness at that time. Obviously, when I was coaching I couldn’t say anything about it.”

Just days after A&M completed a 10-2 season, the NCAA placed Texas A&M on five years probation and barred the 1994 Aggies from appearing on television or in a bowl game and from competing for the Southwest Conference championship.

The next season, A&M blasted Oklahoma, 36-14, en route to an undefeated 10-0-1 campaign. With A&M ineligible, five teams — Baylor, Rice, Texas, TCU and Texas Tech — shared the SWC championship with 4-3 conference records.

“That’s a championship our team won but didn’t get credit for,” Slocum said. “We won on the field with none of the players that were involved (in the controversy)."

The NCAA cited a “lack of institutional control” as a factor in A&M’s harsh punishment. Slocum still says that charge was bogus. He said he and compliance director Tedi Zalesky were doing everything they could to run a clean program. He even felt like they were a model of compliance.

“We were so conscientious about what we were doing,” he said. “We were the cutting edge of what was being done for compliance. But they (the infractions committee) said we should have gone on the road and monitored those jobs. That’s stupid. We had players on jobs all over the country. If you showed up one day, somebody might not be there the next day.”

Even Boren would have to admit Slocum had a point.

In 2006, during Boren's tenure as OU President, Sooners quarterback Rhett Bomar and guard J.D. Quinn were found to be paid for work not performed at an Oklahoma City car dealership. Bomar received as much as $18,000 despite only working five hours a week.

Bomar and Quinn were dismissed from the team, but the Oklahoma program received almost no punishment. Oklahoma had to “vacate” its 2005 season and lost two scholarships in 2009 and 2010. Unlike A&M, Oklahoma was still allowed to compete for championship. The Sooners won the Big 12 championship the following season.

Slocum denied the inconsistencies in NCAA sanctions motivated him to speak out. He maintains he’s merely responding to those who ignorantly and unfairly criticize Hill.

“Greg Hill was a good guy, a good man who paid his dues,” Slocum said. “I can’t say what he did was right. He’d be the first to say he made a mistake in judgment. But he was just doing what the other workers were doing.”

However, Slocum also couldn’t deny some bitterness remains.

“I’m going to my grave saying we took a royal screwing,” he said.

Discussion from...

Raw Deal? R.C. Slocum opens up about A&M's early '90s NCAA troubles

41,704 Views | 55 Replies | Last: 2 yr ago by MaroonMachine
Convincingly
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
*******s
Mostly Sunny Disposition
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
David Boren is and has always been a sloppy dripping snatch of a human being.

He's ****ing terrible, and was before this particular instance.
HackerAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Bookmark this article the next time the OU to the SEC discussions start.
AggieBQ70
How long do you want to ignore this user?
At least he's the one trapped in the Big 12 with the school that calls all the shots.
fasthorse05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This incident was the death knell for Slocs, even though no one knew it then.

First of all, the investigation had to take 1 to 1 1/2 years. Secondly, the penalty of a 5 year probation effectively killed A&M recruiting for 10 years. IF another infraction happens during that time period (10 years), then the NCAA can hit you with the death penalty.

So, beginning the day the probation/penalty was announced, recruiting was dead, or at least never at the level Slocs was recruiting from '90 to '94. THEN 1999 comes along and the triangle of death. tu hires Mack Brown, OU hires Stoops, and LSU had already hired Saban. We were just coming out of our probation.

It's kind of odd that all three of those coaches won national titles from 2000 to 2005!

Just an observation, but it started with that gawd awful NCAA investigation. The very best teams A&M ever had were in 1975, under Bellard and 1993, under Slocs.
Hate is how progressives sustain themselves. Without hate, introspection begins to slip into the progressive's consciousness, threatening the progressive with the truth: that their ideas and opinions are illogical, hypocritical, dangerous, and asinine.
This is backed by data.
Emilio Fantastico
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
SlackerAg said:

Bookmark this article the next time the OU to the SEC discussions start.

This. Ou can continue to rot in the hell they are trapped in.
Aggie87
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Please don't ever call him "Slocs" again.
aggiedent
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
One more reason not to have anything to do with any members of the Big XII. Let em rot.
ColoradoMooseHerd
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This article is not accurate and probably should not have been written. I think you should actually take it down. There is not new information here, Slocum is repeating what he has always said but there is definitely some incorrect information in the story. Actually his quote about the timing of the announcement is almost exactly what he said in 1993 after the game.

1. The main reason for the severity of the penalty was that we were already on probation from the Jackie Sherrill days. Then we had the Kermit Davis situation in Basketball. Then the football payment issue again. The Death Penalty was discussed, but the NCAA immediately took it off the table because of what it did to SMU. "The Lack of Institutional Control" Claim was not that far off. The compliance department that we had to form to start monitoring all of our actions was very annoying for us athletes but probably necessary.

2. Why was it such a big deal about the players being paid for work not performed, was the fact who paid them. This was not just some players cutting out a little early. Some of these guys did not work at all. I firmly believe that RC had no knowledge at the time that the players were being paid for work not done. He was innocent. It was a Booster that did the damage. And it was not just some rogue boosters paying the players, it was the President of the Aggie Club. Because of the scandal the Aggie Club was renamed The 12th Man Foundation. Warren Gilbert was the guy.

3. Warren Gilbert was on the board of the Aggie Club when we got in trouble under Jackie and was now the President the Aggie Club. The board actually knew about the situation before the allegations officially came out. Gilbert liked to brag about everything he did and he was bragging about players working for him at a board meeting. The problem was, several of the players were already working for another board member and they brought that up in the meeting when he said it. You know who was also at this meeting, John David Crow - the Athletic Director at the time. This is also one of the main reasons he was not the athletic director after this penalty.

4. OU paying of players. Yes OU should have gotten much stiffer penalties and it was a joke the punishment that they did receive.

There is much more to this story too and it either should not be written at all or written correctly. Not sure the need of this story at all at this time. Especially with the inaccurate and missing info.
Post removed:
by user
sawemoff2010
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm too young to remember any of this. I knew we had thishappen to us bit didn't know why. I'm glad to know all of this now....so sad.
fasthorse05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sawemoff2010 said:

I'm too young to remember any of this. I knew we had thishappen to us bit didn't know why. I'm glad to know all of this now....so sad.
There's more too it, but I gave you the cliiff notes.

Within 24 hours of the news that the NCAA was investigating, any decent coach would have been hammering a recruit that had Aggie leanings. Once the probation was announced, it would have been easier to sell,

It didn't help that Greg Hill fumbled out of the endzone against Florida State in the '94 Cotton Bowl, but there was a whole series of rotton **** that happened then.
Hate is how progressives sustain themselves. Without hate, introspection begins to slip into the progressive's consciousness, threatening the progressive with the truth: that their ideas and opinions are illogical, hypocritical, dangerous, and asinine.
This is backed by data.
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

Greg Hill fumbled out of the endzone against Florida State in the '94 Cotton Bowl
'92 Cotton Bowl. The investigation was announced right before the game, I think. Basically no resolution for another year and a half.
99 Luft
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ColoradoMooseHerd said:

This article is not accurate and probably should not have been written. I think you should actually take it down. There is not new information here, Slocum is repeating what he has always said but there is definitely some incorrect information in the story. Actually his quote about the timing of the announcement is almost exactly what he said in 1993 after the game.

1. The main reason for the severity of the penalty was that we were already on probation from the Jackie Sherrill days. Then we had the Kermit Davis situation in Basketball. Then the football payment issue again. The Death Penalty was discussed, but the NCAA immediately took it off the table because of what it did to SMU. "The Lack of Institutional Control" Claim was not that far off. The compliance department that we had to form to start monitoring all of our actions was very annoying for us athletes but probably necessary.

2. Why was it such a big deal about the players being paid for work not performed, was the fact who paid them. This was not just some players cutting out a little early. Some of these guys did not work at all. I firmly believe that RC had no knowledge at the time that the players were being paid for work not done. He was innocent. It was a Booster that did the damage. And it was not just some rogue boosters paying the players, it was the President of the Aggie Club. Because of the scandal the Aggie Club was renamed The 12th Man Foundation. Warren Gilbert was the guy.

3. Warren Gilbert was on the board of the Aggie Club when we got in trouble under Jackie and was now the President the Aggie Club. The board actually knew about the situation before the allegations officially came out. Gilbert liked to brag about everything he did and he was bragging about players working for him at a board meeting. The problem was, several of the players were already working for another board member and they brought that up in the meeting when he said it. You know who was also at this meeting, John David Crow - the Athletic Director at the time. This is also one of the main reasons he was not the athletic director after this penalty.

4. OU paying of players. Yes OU should have gotten much stiffer penalties and it was a joke the punishment that they did receive.

There is much more to this story too and it either should not be written at all or written correctly. Not sure the need of this story at all at this time. Especially with the inaccurate and missing info.
Accurate or not, I think you missed the overall point.

The NCAA has a long history of fraud. Programs not named Oklahoma, the freaking Longhorns, meat chicken, etc. were treated more severely. Oklahoma should have been given a lack of institutional control finding, and the fact that they didn't is so disgusting, that I don't wanna see the NCAA around our program ever again, infractions or no infractions. They can get bent.

The timing of all those sanctions is highly suspect as well.

I appreciated the ruthless defence that we put up on the Johnny issue. Once again, we have a little bit of success, and the sharks start swimming.

I hope our BMAs have a reserve of oil money set aside to pay a full courtroom of lawyers to beat the s*** out of the NCAA if Jimbo starts doing well. You can bet they'll be coming.
Father Sarduchi
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ColoradoMooseHerd said:

"Not sure the need of this story at all at this time. Especially with the inaccurate and missing info."


I prefer to trust R.C.'s explanation over anything you have to say about it.




fasthorse05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
94chem said:

Quote:

Greg Hill fumbled out of the endzone against Florida State in the '94 Cotton Bowl
'92 Cotton Bowl. The investigation was announced right before the game, I think. Basically no resolution for another year and a half.
I remember the great seasons, but the years change on Jan. 1st, so I'm never sure what year were discussing. Just nitpicking.......however, I do remember freezing my ass off in the Cotton Bowl that day of the FSU game. We had multiple opportunities, but that's why they play the game.

Whoooo boy, the temperature was right between 31 to 33 degrees, and there was ice all over those aluminum stadium seats.
Hate is how progressives sustain themselves. Without hate, introspection begins to slip into the progressive's consciousness, threatening the progressive with the truth: that their ideas and opinions are illogical, hypocritical, dangerous, and asinine.
This is backed by data.
ColoradoMooseHerd
How long do you want to ignore this user?
fasthorses05 said:

94chem said:

Quote:

Greg Hill fumbled out of the endzone against Florida State in the '94 Cotton Bowl
'92 Cotton Bowl. The investigation was announced right before the game, I think. Basically no resolution for another year and a half.
I remember the great seasons, but the years change on Jan. 1st, so I'm never sure what year were discussing. Just nitpicking.......however, I do remember freezing my ass off in the Cotton Bowl that day of the FSU game. We had multiple opportunities, but that's why they play the game.

Whoooo boy, the temperature was right between 31 to 33 degrees, and there was ice all over those aluminum stadium seats.
Football Season Fall 1991 - Cotton Bowl Jan 1, 1992
Temple Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anyone ask him why he never coached again after he left aTm?
coupland boy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I recall the news broke before playing Notre Dame and not Florida State. During the 91 season and the 92 cotton bowl this was not a story.

The DMN (go figure) ran with this story prior to, I believe, the 93 cotton bowl
aeon-ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
fasthorses05 said:

This incident was the death knell for Slocs, even though no one knew it then.

First of all, the investigation had to take 1 to 1 1/2 years. Secondly, the penalty of a 5 year probation effectively killed A&M recruiting for 10 years. IF another infraction happens during that time period (10 years), then the NCAA can hit you with the death penalty.

So, beginning the day the probation/penalty was announced, recruiting was dead, or at least never at the level Slocs was recruiting from '90 to '94. THEN 1999 comes along and the triangle of death. tu hires Mack Brown, OU hires Stoops, and LSU had already hired Saban. We were just coming out of our probation.

It's kind of odd that all three of those coaches won national titles from 2000 to 2005!

Just an observation, but it started with that gawd awful NCAA investigation. The very best teams A&M ever had were in 1975, under Bellard and 1993, under Slocs.
Slocs????!!!!
91AggieLawyer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

The main reason for the severity of the penalty was that we were already on probation from the Jackie Sherrill days. Then we had the Kermit Davis situation in Basketball. Then the football payment issue again. The Death Penalty was discussed, but the NCAA immediately took it off the table because of what it did to SMU. "The Lack of Institutional Control" Claim was not that far off. The compliance department that we had to form to start monitoring all of our actions was very annoying for us athletes but probably necessary.

Institutional control had nothing to do with the first two incidents you speak of. Jackie was paying players. When it was determined, he was fired. Kermit signed a recruit through an agent, or something like that. In both cases, it was ONE athletic department employee doing something almost no athletic department's oversight could have prevented other than by hiring a more ethical coach. In both cases, A&M fired the coach involved and the athletes suffered some form of eligibility loss. In fact, having been at school during the whole Kermit mess, I didn't think a firing was warranted, but I understand why such actions were taken.

In the Gilbert mess, the most we should have been hit with was scholarship reductions like OU was after the Bomar incident. Hell, the NCAA had all of the information on this because WE gave it to them. In virtually every case in the last 20 years, schools have learned that the NCAA can't find much out if they don't cooperate. So, like UNC and Miami, they largely don't. Gilbert being a booster was or should have been a very small part of the case. Players were suspended and the amounts they got for allegedly not working was very small. By the time A&m finished their probation sentence, they had been labeled a "model" athletic program in terms of compliance. What, we got scared sober? Hardly. We'd been doing it mostly right all along.

The NCAA alleged the A&M players had over 17k in "unearned" income. Guess how much the 3 OU players received in "unearned" income some 13 years later? Yep -- 17k (and change). OU had been hit with a major infraction a year earlier and then hit again with one 4 years later. Guess how many years of TV/Postseason bans they got?
91AggieLawyer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Gilbert liked to brag about everything he did and he was bragging about players working for him at a board meeting.

Gilbert also alleged that he and Slocum met in the parking garage at North Park Mall in Dallas. That was pretty quickly debunked. I'm wondering if people didn't take him seriously, but more importantly, if Gilbert did talk to the COI, and I have no information otherwise, he probably lied to keep himself out of the fryer with respect to HUD and possible federal crimes. Yet, the COI probably believed every word he said.
pinche gringo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
And yet some idiots on here still want to add OU to the SEC
Meximan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
99 Luft said:

ColoradoMooseHerd said:

This article is not accurate and probably should not have been written. I think you should actually take it down. There is not new information here, Slocum is repeating what he has always said but there is definitely some incorrect information in the story. Actually his quote about the timing of the announcement is almost exactly what he said in 1993 after the game.

1. The main reason for the severity of the penalty was that we were already on probation from the Jackie Sherrill days. Then we had the Kermit Davis situation in Basketball. Then the football payment issue again. The Death Penalty was discussed, but the NCAA immediately took it off the table because of what it did to SMU. "The Lack of Institutional Control" Claim was not that far off. The compliance department that we had to form to start monitoring all of our actions was very annoying for us athletes but probably necessary.

2. Why was it such a big deal about the players being paid for work not performed, was the fact who paid them. This was not just some players cutting out a little early. Some of these guys did not work at all. I firmly believe that RC had no knowledge at the time that the players were being paid for work not done. He was innocent. It was a Booster that did the damage. And it was not just some rogue boosters paying the players, it was the President of the Aggie Club. Because of the scandal the Aggie Club was renamed The 12th Man Foundation. Warren Gilbert was the guy.

3. Warren Gilbert was on the board of the Aggie Club when we got in trouble under Jackie and was now the President the Aggie Club. The board actually knew about the situation before the allegations officially came out. Gilbert liked to brag about everything he did and he was bragging about players working for him at a board meeting. The problem was, several of the players were already working for another board member and they brought that up in the meeting when he said it. You know who was also at this meeting, John David Crow - the Athletic Director at the time. This is also one of the main reasons he was not the athletic director after this penalty.

4. OU paying of players. Yes OU should have gotten much stiffer penalties and it was a joke the punishment that they did receive.

There is much more to this story too and it either should not be written at all or written correctly. Not sure the need of this story at all at this time. Especially with the inaccurate and missing info.
Accurate or not, I think you missed the overall point.

The NCAA has a long history of fraud. Programs not named Oklahoma, the freaking Longhorns, meat chicken, etc. were treated more severely. Oklahoma should have been given a lack of institutional control finding, and the fact that they didn't is so disgusting, that I don't wanna see the NCAA around our program ever again, infractions or no infractions. They can get bent.

The timing of all those sanctions is highly suspect as well.

I appreciated the ruthless defence that we put up on the Johnny issue. Once again, we have a little bit of success, and the sharks start swimming.

I hope our BMAs have a reserve of oil money set aside to pay a full courtroom of lawyers to beat the s*** out of the NCAA if Jimbo starts doing well. You can bet they'll be coming.

Oh, you know they do. As hard as they fought for Johnny they will throw every last thing they got at the NCAA and countersue next time around. Aggie lawyers will nail the NCAA to the wall.
99 Luft
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Meximan said:

99 Luft said:

ColoradoMooseHerd said:

This article is not accurate and probably should not have been written. I think you should actually take it down. There is not new information here, Slocum is repeating what he has always said but there is definitely some incorrect information in the story. Actually his quote about the timing of the announcement is almost exactly what he said in 1993 after the game.

1. The main reason for the severity of the penalty was that we were already on probation from the Jackie Sherrill days. Then we had the Kermit Davis situation in Basketball. Then the football payment issue again. The Death Penalty was discussed, but the NCAA immediately took it off the table because of what it did to SMU. "The Lack of Institutional Control" Claim was not that far off. The compliance department that we had to form to start monitoring all of our actions was very annoying for us athletes but probably necessary.

2. Why was it such a big deal about the players being paid for work not performed, was the fact who paid them. This was not just some players cutting out a little early. Some of these guys did not work at all. I firmly believe that RC had no knowledge at the time that the players were being paid for work not done. He was innocent. It was a Booster that did the damage. And it was not just some rogue boosters paying the players, it was the President of the Aggie Club. Because of the scandal the Aggie Club was renamed The 12th Man Foundation. Warren Gilbert was the guy.

3. Warren Gilbert was on the board of the Aggie Club when we got in trouble under Jackie and was now the President the Aggie Club. The board actually knew about the situation before the allegations officially came out. Gilbert liked to brag about everything he did and he was bragging about players working for him at a board meeting. The problem was, several of the players were already working for another board member and they brought that up in the meeting when he said it. You know who was also at this meeting, John David Crow - the Athletic Director at the time. This is also one of the main reasons he was not the athletic director after this penalty.

4. OU paying of players. Yes OU should have gotten much stiffer penalties and it was a joke the punishment that they did receive.

There is much more to this story too and it either should not be written at all or written correctly. Not sure the need of this story at all at this time. Especially with the inaccurate and missing info.
Accurate or not, I think you missed the overall point.

The NCAA has a long history of fraud. Programs not named Oklahoma, the freaking Longhorns, meat chicken, etc. were treated more severely. Oklahoma should have been given a lack of institutional control finding, and the fact that they didn't is so disgusting, that I don't wanna see the NCAA around our program ever again, infractions or no infractions. They can get bent.

The timing of all those sanctions is highly suspect as well.

I appreciated the ruthless defence that we put up on the Johnny issue. Once again, we have a little bit of success, and the sharks start swimming.

I hope our BMAs have a reserve of oil money set aside to pay a full courtroom of lawyers to beat the s*** out of the NCAA if Jimbo starts doing well. You can bet they'll be coming.

Oh, you know they do. As hard as they fought for Johnny they will throw every last thing they got at the NCAA and countersue next time around. Aggie lawyers will nail the NCAA to the wall.
GOOD!!!! Bury those thugs.

For that past several decades, the NCAA has been nothing more than the instrument of the "Blue Bloods" in suppressing the brand/prowess of their main competitors. Jerry Tarkanian drove the nail in on this point when he said, "the NCAA was so mad at Kentucky they gave Cleveland State two more years of probation."

I hope the NCAA never come snooping around again, but I am glad to know they will again feel the full measure of BMA wrath a la Johnny.
ColoradoMooseHerd
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You are correct. I was talking about the fumble portion
Houstonag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I remember this like yesterday. Yes, the NCAA had it in for TAMU. Do not beat the sips for you will pay. OU the same. The other transgressions prior to this were small and Boren used it as an excuse. The Sips and the Land Thieves are local programs that have been treated with special privileges by the NCAA. Boren was totally dishonest and corrupt. Looking at the basic facts of some kids not showing up to work and getting paid due to sloppy job site accounting is easy to fix. The penalty was horrendous and Boren knew it.
BVAg85
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
When all the stuff with Jackie Sherrill was going on, tu was caught too. But, even though this wasn't the first time they had been caught, they were put on "probation" but with no sanctions. The SWC was always a farce. No one could compete with Texas once college football took off in this country. The state gave all its money to one program, the Longhorns. Other schools could not compete consistently unless there were shady things going on. Texas was in a no lose situation for a good part of the century. Yet sips want to brag about their history while ignoring all of this.
joefix93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Boren, as detailed in this article, has had the "inverse-Midas touch" to every thing he's ever been involved with. My family still lives in Norman, and when I visit, he comes up frequently in conversations in relation to how he has allowed almost unbridled commercial development on University property that doesn't generate property tax revenue for the city, since it technically belongs to OU (but still requires city utility infrastructure). What he did with the associated revenue is a mystery. Now OU is trying to get the City of Norman to pay for lion's share of a new basketball arena.

Just an FYI for those who are bashing Boren; even the people who are "supposed to like him" hate his guts.
txag72
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
And none of this even begins to talk about SWC/Big 12 officiating. Hence, no Arkansas, no Nebraska, no Colorado, no Missouri, no A&M.
txag72
dixichkn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

I hope our BMAs have a reserve of oil money set aside to pay a full courtroom of lawyers to beat the s*** out of the NCAA if Jimbo starts doing well. You can bet they'll be coming.
If we start getting to 10 wins/season on the reg? You're damn skippy they will.

Interesting read.
FriscoKid
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
SlackerAg said:

Bookmark this article the next time the OU to the SEC discussions start.
Nosmo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

There is much more to this story too and it either should not be written at all or written correctly. Not sure the need of this story at all at this time. Especially with the inaccurate and missing info.
Totally agree.

At that time, I worked with a guy that went to A&M with Gilbert. He said, from his personal experience with Gilbert in college, he was not surprised at all. My co-worker bled Aggie football, and he despised Gilbert.

I don't think (at least I want to believe) there was any wrongdoing by RC, but there was by A&M.

I have been a season ticket holder since 1985, and still angry today that "we" did something so stupid. Especially so close to the JS problems.

And yes OU, tu, and the elites may have gotten away with crap, but that doesn't excuse what "we" did.

I think the article was ill advised. Let it go. It just brought back bad memories for me.
arontc09
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I think we are in a different bracket than we used to be. By moving to the SEC, we will have sidestepped a lot of the hate of neighboring schools, and we are now among the very top in AD revenue (and this based on the end of the Sumlin era). We are the big boys now. Our growing alumni base has a lot to do with that. And with growing revenues and a growing alumni base comes increased political clout.
Page 1 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.