Reaction to Oregon's Penalties - or lack thereof

By Terry Johnson
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook and/or Google+

It's hard not to be disappointed with the NCAA in this case. Rather than punish Oregon for breaking the rules, the NCAA basically accepted the penalties that UO recommended since the school was "fully cooperat(ive) throughout the entirety of the investigative stage."

Whiskey. Tango. Foxtrot.

Let's be honest, Oregon committed some very serious recruiting violations in this case. As the Committee on Infractions noted in its findings, "the $25,000 paid to recruiting service 1 was more than double the amount the institution paid to the second most costly of the other recruiting services it employed."

Not a bad salary for someone who the committee concluded "lacked national-level experience."

Still not convinced this is a big deal? Consider the following snippet from the today's report:

Committee Member: Okay. Then in February, you have (prospect A) sign a Letter of Intent with the university, and then you have shortly thereafter a $25,000 invoice to the university that is paid (to the recruiting service provider) as part of the contractual relationship for services that ultimately were never provided. Is that a fair assessment? I am just trying to get to the essence of this.

Former head coach: Yes, I understand. The services weren't totally provided in terms of what we should have got.

Translation: the service provider received money for steering recruits to Eugene, not for his contractually agreed upon services.

So what does Oregon get for such an egregious violation of the rules? Three years of probation and the loss of one scholarship in each of the next two seasons.

In other words, it received little more than a slap on the wrist. That's hardly the type of punishment that will make other schools think twice before committing a similar offense in the future.

And make no mistake about it: something like this is bound to happen again. Whether we like it or not (and I don't), the recruiting process is much more competitive than it's ever been before. What's to stop a coach from bending (or breaking) the rules if he knows that the school will get off lightly as long as it cooperates with the NCAA investigation?

Absolutely nothing.

Houston, we have a problem.