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
72,297

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

54,320 Views | 55 Replies | Last: 6 yr ago by MaroonMachine
Agsuffering@bulaw
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

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,...revenue...[number of alumni]...political clout.

tu and ou will never stop hating us! They probably hate even harder now that we are in a better conference.

Yes, we finally have some structural advantages over them.
We must never relinquish them!
That means we only schedule tu when it benefits us, not them.
The rivalry is not a sacred cow. It is a piece of meat to get us what we need!

Whether or not all the details of this story are correct is irrelevant. tu and ou will always use politics, lawsuits, or other shenanigans to try to get an edge. They must be dealt with from a position of strength.
coupland boy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I tend to agree with you except for the fact that it is a good reminder of past unequal treatment.
Nosmo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
coupland boy said:

I tend to agree with you except for the fact that it is a good reminder of past unequal treatment.
My issue with the article is more with major missing details that ColoradoMooseHerd points out. If a person didn't live through the incident or know the details, it reads as though it was no big deal.

At the time, every person I talked to, at the games, was angry that this happened AGAIN! How could this happen since we supposedly were a model for compliance since the JS incident? They weren't complaining about unfair treatment. We (at least me and the folks I talked to) were seriously concerned we may get the death penalty.

I still remember the TV camera on the ground pointed up at the scoreboard. We couldn't be on TV, but the network wanted the feed to see the game status in real time. When I read the article, that's the first image that popped into my mind.

PS: My recollection of the JS incident was, "We got screwed. Everybody does it." My recollection of the RC incident was, "We screwed ourselves. We're stupid."
coupland boy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Yes i guess i felt kinda dumb after posting that. I was fresh out of school at the time and remember it all pretty well. It's
not as if we didn't know people were watching and looking for stuff. In part, my own frustration with our penchant for shooting ourselves in the foot likely goes back to stuff like the Gilbert incident.

I still dislike OU and think there's a different standard and that's not right.

One other thing that this article reminds me of is how much I used to make excuses for our program's inability to get over the hump. We had our chances before and after the Gilbert incident. Did it derail us, even a little, or was the Colorado game in 1995 and, say the Sugar Bowl after 1998 season as good as it was going to get?
Ben There
How long do you want to ignore this user?
S
The miss-information continues in some of these posts. First, there is no one on this board that knows more about this situation than I. I lived it for the better part of two years, saw all the information that came out of the investigation, was in on all the interviews of the players and one interview of Warren Gilbert. I realize this is a no-win situation for me. I brought it up in the first place to shed some light on the young men involved and to clear Texas A&M of wrong doing. As always, there are those that have their own agenda and are not really concerned with the truth. Nothing that I can say will change them so I will not attempt to do so. I would like to add a few responses to what has been said for those interested in the facts. First, to say the the Aggie Club name was changed to 12th Man Foundation because of this incident is ludicrous. Next, I can see where Warren might brag about employing some of the players. I would bet that he did not say he was paying them for not working. He would have had a hard time explaining why the best players got the least amount of money and why the defensive player of the year in the Metroplex, and our number 1 recruit, got fired after three at the suggestion of the head coach.The first time that the director of compliance, along with the Vice President of the University, the AD, and myself asked to visit with Warren, he was cooperative. After that meeting, at the direction of his attorney , he would no longer cooperate. I spoke with his attorney, and pleaded that Warren continue to visit with A&M , as well as the NCAA. He told me that Warren's issues with HUD were bigger than the NCAA and he would no longer talk to A&M, or the NCAA and he didn't. This whole story came out of an investigation by the Dallas Morning News business department into the management of numerous HUD projects across the Metroplex that were being managed by Warren Gilbert. Everyone has their own ideas but I can say that to this day, I really don't know if Warren knew about the players, along with a member of the band, and many of his regular employees leaving work early. It is my opinion that he was relying on his managers to run things, and in some cases, they were lax and let him down. I never knew, or had any conversation with the manager in south Dallas where most of the guys worked. I did receive a call from the manager of the complex in Garland complaining that the player there was not doing acceptable work. I told the manager that if it continued that I recommend firing him. A day later, he did just that. By now, it should be pretty obvious that if we had a scheme to pay players we were all stupid. We would have been paying the worse players the most money and firing, or low playing the best. For the ones on here that say A&M was to blame, you are dead wrong. There is nothing that A&M could have done to prevent this situation. We were held to a standard that was not in place, or practice anywhere in the country at that time. As a side note, I want to add that the comment that this incident was responsible for John David Crow being relieved of his duties as the AD is a total fabrication. He is no longer here to defend himself, but he was a dear friend, and will gladly do it for him. It had nothing to do with him giving up the AD position.

For those who wonder why the article in the first place, it was in response to some comments about Greg Hill and his involvement in this incident . Greg, along with the other young men involved in this incident, that remained on the team, have developed into fine men. They made a mistake that cost them ,and Texas A&M, and they paid a price for it. I am proud of the men that they have become. The second reason is that I feel strongly that Texas A&M was treated unfairly. This incident had a very negative, and lasting effect on our program. Our recruiting was adversely affected for several years. Gig em R.C.
roygbell
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Just some educational reading. Lots of Johnny Cochrans on this board. Just blame everyone else for your own sins.

http://articles.latimes.com/1994-01-06/sports/sp-9180_1_college-football
Bottlehead90
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Thanks RC

There is a reason this forum is called the zoo.
coupland boy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
roygbell said:

Just some educational reading. Lots of Johnny Cochrans on this board. Just blame everyone else for your own sins.

http://articles.latimes.com/1994-01-06/sports/sp-9180_1_college-football



You should read Coach Slocum's post above yours. What has never been in doubt in my mind (ever) is that he is an honorable man.

Thanks for posting Coach.
99 Luft
How long do you want to ignore this user?
roygbell said:

Just some educational reading. Lots of Johnny Cochrans on this board. Just blame everyone else for your own sins.

http://articles.latimes.com/1994-01-06/sports/sp-9180_1_college-football

We're not blaming others for our sins.

"The NCAA also found that the university showed a lack of institutional control over its football program by failing to monitor appropriately its jobs program for athletes."

We want equal justice.

OU had the same sins to a much more scandalous degree (Big Red Imports--Congrats to TexAgs) and got a slap on the wrist. As Ben There confirmed, there is no way A&M could have controlled that situation, just like OU.

The yelling and finger pointing is because the NCAA has held no other program in the nation to the same standard as A&M. Not even SMU was held to that same standard (although SMU has a legitimate gripe about equal crimes for equal sanctions).

If the NCAA has decided to move away from a particular form of punishment (Death Penalty and TV Bans), should not the institutions that received that punishment be compensated?
Science Denier
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

We want equal justice.
Equal justice? We failed to monitor our jobs program right after being on probation. Like RIGHT after....and for the same issue - summer jobs program. They considered the death penalty. We got off pretty easy.

Seems we got off easy because it was obvious nothing was coordinated. We just were very sloppy in our monitoring of our jobs program and the kids took advantage of the situation to the detriment of our football program.
LOL OLD
99 Luft
How long do you want to ignore this user?
jblaschke said:

Quote:

We want equal justice.
Equal justice? We failed to monitor our jobs program right after being on probation. Like RIGHT after....and for the same issue - summer jobs program. They considered the death penalty. We got off pretty easy.

Seems we got off easy because it was obvious nothing was coordinated. We just were very sloppy in our monitoring of our jobs program and the kids took advantage of the situation to the detriment of our football program.
1. Read what Ben There posted.

2. April 2006: A Phone Addiction

"The NCAA revealed an investigation into hundreds of improper recruiting phone calls by former basketball coach Kelvin Sampson's staff. Oklahoma escaped major sanctions, as the NCAA found OU guilty of a "failure to monitor," a less severe ruling than "lack of institutional control," which had been recommended by the NCAA's enforcement staff.

"The NCAA backed OU's self-imposed two year probation, but also issued a public reprimand and censure.

THEN, WHILE ON PROBATION:

3. August 2006: Big Red Imports


"Right before the 2006 football season, it was revealed that Rhett Bomar and J.D. Quinn had been kicked off the team. They had been "employed" by car dealership Big Red Imports, and being paid for work they did not perform. They were let go from the team right before the NCAA came down on OU.

"Additional investigations by OU concluded that no additional violations had occurred, even though Adrian Peterson had purchased a vehicle from the dealership before securing financing, driven it for several weeks, and then returned the car. Oklahoma ruled Peterson did not violate rules because the dealership said it was normal business practice."

A Timeline of Oklahoma Cheating

And STILL no lack of institutional control WHILE ON PROBATION????

I am not unreasonable. If you have a reasonable explanation, I will consider it.
Agsuffering@bulaw
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The NCAA was very selective about who it went after and who it did not. We got singled out. And even then, they had to stretch to get us.

We were not an inner-circle member of the club. We were on the verge in 1994. The club circled the wagons, at the behest of members tu and ou.

RC is absolutely right.


But I wish RC had gone farther- dirty politics can destroy any program.

EDIT: I meant RC had gone further with the implication- Now that we understand dirty politics, protecting ourselves from dirty politics going forward must be the first order of business.

I do not mean that we should have resumed cheating like Jackie.
ashley
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I have no doubt that you have considerable knowledge regarding the entire situation. So, please tell us about the mentoring program in the 80's for football recruits.
budah
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ben There said:

The miss-information continues in some of these posts. First, there is no one on this board that knows more about this situation than I. I lived it for the better part of two years.......
Obligatory username checks out
roygbell
How long do you want to ignore this user?
99 Luft said:

roygbell said:

Just some educational reading. Lots of Johnny Cochrans on this board. Just blame everyone else for your own sins.

http://articles.latimes.com/1994-01-06/sports/sp-9180_1_college-football

We're not blaming others for our sins.

"The NCAA also found that the university showed a lack of institutional control over its football program by failing to monitor appropriately its jobs program for athletes."

We want equal justice.

OU had the same sins to a much more scandalous degree (Big Red Imports--Congrats to TexAgs) and got a slap on the wrist. As Ben There confirmed, there is no way A&M could have controlled that situation, just like OU.

The yelling and finger pointing is because the NCAA has held no other program in the nation to the same standard as A&M. Not even SMU was held to that same standard (although SMU has a legitimate gripe about equal crimes for equal sanctions).

If the NCAA has decided to move away from a particular form of punishment (Death Penalty and TV Bans), should not the institutions that received that punishment be compensated?


That is all ok. However, half of the posts are blasting David Boren. Boren might have been the Chair of the NCAA committee on infractions, but he sure didn't bring the A&M issue himself. He wasn't an investigator and he sure didn't go out and dig any dirt up on A&M. For the folks on this board to do that is ridiculous. And it is pointing at others for your own sins.

On a separate issue, you all act like everyone is after A&M. There is a post above about OU and UT hating A&M. I don't know any OU fan that hates A&M. I think you all are just paranoid on this issue. I The truth is that up until the late 90s the DMN did their best to dig up dirt on OU. That is the fact. Also on the deal with Bomar and Reid OU handed the NCAA every thing they had on that deal. We cut Bomar and Reid along with the other walkon player in short order.

I think the reason A&M hates OU is the same reason osu hates OU.




Science Denier
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
99 Luft said:

jblaschke said:

Quote:

We want equal justice.
Equal justice? We failed to monitor our jobs program right after being on probation. Like RIGHT after....and for the same issue - summer jobs program. They considered the death penalty. We got off pretty easy.

Seems we got off easy because it was obvious nothing was coordinated. We just were very sloppy in our monitoring of our jobs program and the kids took advantage of the situation to the detriment of our football program.
1. Read what Ben There posted.

2. April 2006: A Phone Addiction

"The NCAA revealed an investigation into hundreds of improper recruiting phone calls by former basketball coach Kelvin Sampson's staff. Oklahoma escaped major sanctions, as the NCAA found OU guilty of a "failure to monitor," a less severe ruling than "lack of institutional control," which had been recommended by the NCAA's enforcement staff.

"The NCAA backed OU's self-imposed two year probation, but also issued a public reprimand and censure.

THEN, WHILE ON PROBATION:

3. August 2006: Big Red Imports


"Right before the 2006 football season, it was revealed that Rhett Bomar and J.D. Quinn had been kicked off the team. They had been "employed" by car dealership Big Red Imports, and being paid for work they did not perform. They were let go from the team right before the NCAA came down on OU.

"Additional investigations by OU concluded that no additional violations had occurred, even though Adrian Peterson had purchased a vehicle from the dealership before securing financing, driven it for several weeks, and then returned the car. Oklahoma ruled Peterson did not violate rules because the dealership said it was normal business practice."

A Timeline of Oklahoma Cheating

And STILL no lack of institutional control WHILE ON PROBATION????

I am not unreasonable. If you have a reasonable explanation, I will consider it.
in your example, OU basketball's program was on probation while the football program was caught. In our case, our FOOTBALL program was guilty of both incidences. As a side note, our basketball program was also on probation in 1991. Not 100% sure, but I believe they don't hammer as hard if it's two separate programs.

Plus, a phone scam is much different from Big Red Motors. Our problems were both specifically with our summer jobs program, which showed we didn't clean it up properly the first time.
LOL OLD
fasthorse05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aeon, sorry bout that. If I sounded like I know the man, I do, but only as an acquaintance. I was 11 years old when Bellard hired him. My Dad was class of '54, and i had just started going to games in 1971, when I was 9.

To me, from the POV of an 11 year old, the players and the coaches were my heroes. My Mom and Dad were pretty good friends with him, but I was the tag along son, along with my sister ('82). So, I was a little partial to Coach Slocum, and I often heard others refer to him as Slocs.

I apologize for sounding too familiar. I just thought he did the best he could under the circumstances, and then Brown, Saban, and Stoops came along. Oh well, as the saying goes, "life is what happens when your making other plans". Warren Gilbert kind of threw a huge wrench in Coach Slocum's success after 1994...
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.
champagnepapi
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Slocs
AgAtAllTimes
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
My mom took great exception to this occurrence. Plus she didnt like Boren in the first place. She wrote a long letter to this scumbag in the end accusing him of being a pig and citing many reasons why throughout the body of the letter.
TheFirebird
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Those uniforms tho.
MaroonMachine
How long do you want to ignore this user?
That wasn't the 94 cotton bowl. That was the 91 season, and that cotton bowl was played in 92.
Refresh
Page 2 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.