Thought-Provoking Mail Re. USC Sanctions

Breaking The Rules: USC Edition

I came across this reader submission to Ted Miller's Mailbag today regarding the sanctions leveled against USC:

Mike from Sacramento writes: In discussing the vacating of USC's 2004 national championship you state, "everyone knows that USC walked away from the 2004 season as the consensus national champion, at least in terms of the football part of football. Nothing it did wrong -- by any measure -- gave it a competitive advantage." You are being disingenuous when you state that USC's violations were off the field and didn't impact its success on the field. The constant presence of agents and runners around the program on top of the well-known fact that blue chip players could essentially operate with impunity as they compromise their amateur status, directly impacted how they performed on the field. This information has been whispered about for nearly a decade on the recruiting trail and it is well-known in NFL locker rooms. This conduct directly leads to recruiting success. By any measure, USC stockpiled talent through its recruiting which was the main reason for its run. So, yes the violations of USC directly impacted their success on the field.I get that you disagree with the NCAA's rulings but your attempts, at every opportunity, to color the violations of USC as anything but plain old cheating does a disservice to your readers.