Thursday, August 21, 2008

Twilight in Tallahassee?

I have to admit I haven't been following the travails of Florida State football closely. But my friend - let's call him Jimbo’s Outclause - has. According to Jimbo, FSU might be in a enormous amount of trouble.

From my friend -

"It appears as though the NCAA is close to issuing its penalty report on the Indiana infractions; after just issuing the penalty report to New Mexico on its infractions. From what I can tell from the New Mexico penalty report, this is not a good year to be in front of the infraction committee. For those who don’t know, New Mexico’s infractions were similar to FSU, albeit on a lesser scale. The New Mexico football staff attempted to “help” 4 or 5 students (or prospective students) and the loss was 5 scholarships per year for 3 years. That means no more than 20 new scholarships in any given year and no more than 80 existing scholarships in any given year during the period. If you equate New Mexico’s punishment to what has been reported from FSU, the penalty to FSU could be staggering. Remember FSU’s 2nd report (the 1st was laughed at) indicated that there were upwards of 60 student-athletes involved and since FSU has decided they are immune from the Sunshine Laws (RELEASE THE DOCUMENTS) no one is sure if the NCAA’s Notice of Allegations (NOA) found more. Although…….

It has been implied by people that attended the recent FSU booster meeting in Orlando that the NOA includes a charge of lack of institutional control (LOIC), which is the great accelerator of NCAA penalties. A charge of LOIC, if true, would clarify the statements made by Col. Spetman at this booster meeting that the loss of football scholarships would be between 2-10 football scholarships per year and that everyone needs to prepare themselves for the fact that the NCAA might make an example of them.

To help understand the magnitude of what it would mean to lose 10 scholarships per year for 3 years check this out:

2008 – FSU has 80 players on scholarship with 17 seniors. Typical annual attrition is 3-5 players a year and just to be nice I will say they lose only 3 years that are not seniors on an annual basis.

Since the penalty is 10, FSU can only sign 15 players, so 80 less the 20 (17+3) = 60 + 15 signees = 75

2009 – 75 players on scholarship with 20 seniors plus 3 lost from attrition.

FSU can only sign 15, so 75 less 23 (20+3) = 52 + 15 signees = 67

2010 – 67 players on scholarship with 13 seniors plus 3 lost from attrition.

FSU can only sign 15, so 67 less 16 (13+3) = 51 + 15 signees = 66

Although the penalty would end, in this example after the 2010 season, they are still bound by the 25 signees per year rule. I believe the 2011 team would have in the neighborhood of 28 seniors, so if you add in attrition of 3, FSU would lose 31 players. 66 – 31 = 35 + 25 = 60. They wouldn’t be able to get back to 85 players on scholarship until after the 2012 season. "

Florida State is certainly acting as if it has something to hide here. We shall see soon enough.


Unknown said...

FWIW, I've requested a copy of the NCAA's letter... no answer yet. My feelings about the NCAA aside, bad stuff went on with the academics, and that's not right. Scholarship losses will be deserved.

Mergz said...


I assure you that, as a past "victim" of the NCAA, I am not taking great joy in the 'Noles problems, other than it may benefit us in recruiting. In fact, I agree with EDSBS's take that in order to appreciate a rival, you have to fear them at least a bit, and FSU being non-competitive will ruin that.

As for the Sunshine request, good luck with that.

Unknown said...

Thanks Mergz... hey at least I'll have 25 yard line seats on the shady side of the stadium if this keeps up... ha!