Loyalty Unto Death … (How Bad Is It For You)?

By Liberty For Me on November 24th, 2009 at 7:27 pm

Add another Garnett Bar to your graph Monday 28-20

By BIN News Editorial Staff on November 24th, 2009 at 8:14 pm

Our Funding Editor’s Clemson roots grow deep. You see, she knew Mr. Clemson personally, and she once dated Pitchfork Ben Tillman. To this very day every time she visits the S.C. State Fair she walks barefoot through the cow barns and inhales deeply to recall those wonderful days of her youth in Clemson.

Care to predict the final score, sic(k) willie?

By Steve V on November 25th, 2009 at 9:24 am

If the world needed and enema, Clemson is where they would insert the tube.

Directions to Clemson: North until you smell it, West until you step in it.

By CNSYD on November 25th, 2009 at 12:37 pm

Toyota, been to Pearl Harbor lately to celebrate the victory of the country you love so much? While there observe the USS Missouri which is where your favorite country signed the surrender after getting their ass whipped.

Steve V, enemas are used to clean out shit from a system. The last time one was used at Clemson was a year ago to clean out all the gamecock shit that had invaded Clemson. BTW I give birth to gamecocks every morning while sitting on the toilet.

By culture verses agriculture on November 26th, 2009 at 10:45 am

What Clemson needs to focus on is competing in the 21st Century. All y’all care about is football.

You are jealous because you are not the University of South Carolina. Your football locker rooms is dominated with past glories against USC.

If Clemson wants to really compete with USC get a Medical School, Law School, College of Pharmacy and the top ranked international business program.

USC is the major force in this state – Clemson’s Board of Trustees Chairman had to attend USC to get his law degree. USC graduates never need to attend Clemson. We got everything already.

I’ll concede that Clemson has a better football program but that’s all you got ….

By Myles Keogh on November 27th, 2009 at 2:01 pm

Key date here is 1975. Up until 1975 Carolina was closing the gap on the series. Overall Clemson led the series 41-29. Since then Carolina has gone 8-23-1. The reason I post that date is because after Carolina destroyed Clemson 56-20 the Clemson boostes basically said that losing to Carolina was totally unacceptable and would not happen again. It was also when V C Inabit and other boosters who started passing out big dollars and cars to players and recruits to compliment Cheatin’ Charlie Pell and the boosters who had the $50 handshakes. A dirty program through and through.

By myles keogh on November 27th, 2009 at 7:54 pm

Talk about NCAA probation and a serious one? Need proof of a dirty program through and through? Ask the NCAA!

CLEMSON UNIVERSITY PLACED ON NCAA PROBATION

MISSION, KANSAS–Clemson University has been placed on probation for a two-year period by the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s Committee on In-fractions as a result of violations occurring in the conduct of the institution’s intercollegiate football program.

The penalty includes sanctions that will prohibit the university’s football team from participating in any postseason football bowl game following the 1982 and 1983 seasons or from appearing on any live football telecast during the 1983 and 1984 seasons.

In addition, the Committee on Infractions limited the university to 20 initial grants-in-aid for new football recruits (rather than the normal limit of 30) during the 1983-84 and 1984-85 academic years.

Further, as a result of his involvement in the case, the university placed one assistant football coach on probation for a three-year period and will prohibit him from participating in off-campus recruiting activities, accepting off-campus speaking engagements, participating in the university’s summer football camps and from receiving salary increases during that period.

In addition, the university placed a second assistant football coach on probation for two years and will prohibit him from participating in off-campus recruiting activities, participating in the university’s summer football camp and from receiving a salary increase for one year. Also, the university will prohibit four representatives of its athletic interests from participating in recruiting activities on behalf of the institution for at least a two-year period.

“Due to the large number and serious nature of the violations in this case,” said Charles Alan Wright, chair, NCAA Committee on Infractions, “the committee believed that institutional sanctions related to appearances on television and in postseason football bowl games were appropriate. In addition, because the violations indicated a pattern of improper recruiting activities, the committee determined that a two-year limitation on financial aid to new recruits should be imposed to offset any recruiting advantage that was gained improperly by the university.

“Also,” noted Wright, “based on the involvement of two of the university’s present assistant football coaches and four outside athletic representatives in this case, the university took meaningful disciplinary and corrective action against those individuals.

“Accordingly, the committee believes that the actions taken in this case against the university, its coaches and representatives are fully justified and that the overall penalty supports the interest of all NCAA members in maintaining compliance with NCAA legislation.”

In considering the case, the Committee on Infractions found violations of NCAA legislation related to recruiting, extra benefits to student-athletes, ethical conduct and certification of compliance with NCAA legislation.

The following is a complete text of the penalty imposed upon Clemson University and a summary of the violations.

Penalty To Be Imposed Upon Institution

1. Clemson University shall be publicly reprimanded and censured, and placed on probation for a period of two years, effect ive November 21, 1982, it being understood that should any portion of the penalty in this case be set aside for any reason other than by appropriate action of the Association, the penalty shall be reconsidered by the NCAA; further, prior to the expiration of this period of probation, the NCAA shall review the athletic policies and practices of the university.

2. The university’s intercollegiate football team shall end its 1982 and 1983 football seasons with the playing of its last regularly scheduled, in-season contest and the university shall not be eligible to participate in any postseason football competition.

3. During the 1983 and 1984 football seasons, the university’s intercollegiate football team shall not be eligible to appear on any television series or program subject to the administration or control of this Association or any other television programs involving live coverage.

4. During the 1983-84 and 1984-85 academic years, no more than 20 student-athletes in the sport of football shall be recipients of initial, athletically related financial aid (as set forth in 0.1. 600), which has been arranged for or awarded by Clemson University.

5. In accordance with the “show cause” provision of the NCAA penalty structure, the university will take disciplinary and corrective action in regard to:

a. One assistant football coach who will be placed on probation for a three-year period. During that period, he will be prohibited from:
(1) participating in any off-campus recruiting activities;
(2) receiving a salary increase;
(3) participating in the university’s summer football camps or receiving income from the camps, and <
(4) accepting speaking engagements off-campus at booster club functions or at high school sports banquets.

b. A second assistant football coach who will be placed on probation for a two-year period. During the first year of that period, he will be prohibited from:
(1) participating in any off-campus recruiting activities;
(2) receiving a salary increase, and
(3) participating in the university's 1983 summer football camp or receiving income from the camp.

c. Four representatives of the university's athletic interests, which will preclude these individuals from involvement in any activities associated with the recruitment of prospective student-athletes on behalf of the university during the institution's probationary period, and result in any further measures that the university determines to be within its authority to curtail the involvement of each individual in the university's athletic program during the probationary period.

Summary of Violations of NCAA Legislation

1. NCAA Bylaw 1-1-(b) [improper recruiting inducements] –
(a) In December 1980, a former assistant football coach offered to provide a prospective student-athlete a substantial sum of cash and an automobile to sign a letter of intent;
(b) During the fall of 1978, a representative of the university's athletic interests offered to pay the costs for the two sisters of a prospective student-athlete to attend the university;
(c) In 1978, the university awarded a scholarship to a friend of a prospective student-athlete;
(d) During the 1980-81 academic year, representatives of the university's athletic interests directly assisted a prospective student-athlete and his family in paying four telephone bills;
(e) During the 1980-81 academic year, a former assistant football coach and a representative of the university's athletic interests offered to provide the mother of a prospective student-athlete transportation to attend the university's football games during her son's enrollment;
(f) During the summer of 1978, a prospective student-athlete was permitted to attend the university's summer football c amp at no cost to him, and
(g) In January 1978, an assistant football coach offered inducements to a prospective student-athlete to attend the university that included substantial sums of cash to sign conference and national letters of intent, a television set, a wardrobe and six complimentary football tickets for the university's home football contests.

2. NCAA Bylaws 1-l-(b), 1-8-(j) and 1-8-(l) [improper recruiting inducements and entertainment] –
(a) In December 1979, an assistant football coach provided a prospective student-athlete local automobile transportation, a meal and made remarks that were reasonably interpreted by the young man to be an offer of an automobile, clothing and cash, and
(b) In January 1981, a representative of the university's athletic interests offered to provide a prospective student-athlete the use of an automobile, and transportation home during his attendance at the university; further, the representative provided local transportation and a meal to the prospect on this occasion.

3. NCAA Bylaw 1-1-(b)-(l) [improper recruiting inducements] –
(a) In December 1980, a representative of the university's athletic interests gave a prospective student-athlete a substantial amount of cash in return for his signature on a letter of intent, as well as several other gifts;
(b) In December 1980, a representative of the university's athletic interests arranged for a substantial amount of cash to be given to a prospective student-athlete and provided the young man and his mother other gifts;
(c) During Christmas vacation in the 1977-78 academic year, a former assistant football coach arranged for a prospective student-athlete to receive round-trip airline transportation between a junior college he was attending and his home;
(d) During the 1977-78 academic year, a prospective student-athlete made personal long-distance telephone calls through the use of a former assistant football coach's credit card number;
(e) During the 1980-81 academic year, a former assistant football coach and a representative of the university's athletic interests gave two prospective student-athletes cash;
(f) On numerous occasions during the 1980-81 academic year, a representative of the university's athletic interests gave a prospective student-athlete cash;
(g) In January 1978, a former assistant football coach gave a prospective student-athlete's fiancé cash;
(h) In the fall of 1978, a former assistant football coach gave a prospective student-athlete cash;
(i) A representative of the university's athletic interests paid the cost of numerous long-distant telephone calls made by two prospective student-athletes during December 1980;
(j) In February 1981, the head football coach offered to help find a job for a prospective student-athlete's mother; (k) In the spring and summer of 1979, a former assistant football coach arranged for a prospective student-athlete to receive medical examinations and treatment for an ankle injury at no cost to the young man;
(1) In November or December 1978, a former assistant football coach gave a prospective student-athlete two sweaters;
(m) During January or February 1981, a former assistant football coach mailed a pair of basketball shoes to two prospective student-athletes;
(n) During the 1978-79 academic year, a former assistant football coach gave a prospective student-athlete cash to pay the necessary fee to take a college entrance examination;
(o) In November 1980, an assistant football coach provided a prospective student-athlete several articles of clothing at no cost to the young man;
(p) During December l980~ a representative of the university's athletic interests gave the friend of two prospective student-athletes a briefcase;
(q) In January or February 1981, a representative of the university's athletic interests employed a prospective student-athlete's mother and his sister for one day;
(r) In the fall of 1979, a former assistant football coach gave a white sport shirt to a prospective student-athlete, and
(s) Numerous prospective student-athletes have been provided T-shirts, football jerseys or souvenir photographs during visits to the university's campus.

4. NCAA Bylaw l-8-(g) [improper transportation] –
In January 1978, a former assistant football coach arranged for a prospective student-athlete to receive a prepaid, one-way commercial airline ticket at no cost to the young man to travel to the university.

5. NCAA Constitution 3-1-(g)-(5) [extra benefits to student-athletes] –
(a) In January 1982, a representative of the university's athletic interests cosigned a promissory note to arrange a loan for a student-athlete to finance the purchase of an automobile, and
(b) In April 1980, the head football coach, director of athletics and dean of student affairs arranged for the university to pay the cost of a dental bill on behalf of a student-athlete.

6. NCAA Constitution 3-6-(a) [ethical conduct] –
(a) A former assistant football coach acted contrary to the principles of ethical conduct inasmuch as he did not on all occasions deport himself in accordance with the generally recognized high standards normally associated with the conduct and administration of intercollegiate athletics in that his involvement in the violations set forth in this report demonstrates a knowing and willful effort on his part to operate the university's intercollegiate football program contrary to the requirements and provisions of NCAA legislation, and
(b) In the fall of 1981 and again in late February 1982, an assistant football coach telephoned the father of a prospective student-athlete, which were reasonably interpreted a being request to provide the NCAA false information concerning his son's recruitment by the university.

7. NCAA Constitution 3-6-(a) and Bylaws l-l-(b)-(l), l-8-(i) and 1-8-(j)-(3) [ethical conduct and improper transportation] –
(a) In the fall of the 1980-81 academic year, an assistant football coach provided a prospective student-athlete's father round-trip automobile transportation between his home and the university at the time he accompanied his son on an official paid visit to the university; further, the coach filed a false mileage reimbursement receipt with the university concerning this transportation, and
(b) in November 1980, an assistant football coach gave cash to a prospective student-athlete during his official paid visit to the university for entertainment purposes and later filed a false expense report with the university regarding a meal provided to the young man during this visit.

8. NCAA Constitution 3-l-(g)-(5) and 3-4-(a) [extra benefits and improper financial aid] –
(a) In September 1980, following one of the university's scheduled intercollegiate football contests, a representative of the university's athletic interests gave a student-athlete cash, and
(b) On three separate occasions during the fall of the 1979-80 academic year, representatives of the university's athletic interests gave a student-athlete cash as a reward for being selected "specialty team player of the week."

9. NCAA Bylaws 1-1-(b)-(l) and l-8-(d) [recruiting inducements and improper campus visits] –
(a) During the 1980-81 academic year, a prospective student-athlete was provided four official paid visits to the university's campus;
(b) In December 1980, a representative of the university's athletic interests paid the costs for a prospective student-athlete to be lodged for three nights at a motel and provided the young man cash, two meals and the use of a rental automobile, and
(c) In July 1980, two prospective student-athletes attended the university's summer football camp for one day at no cost to either young man.

10. NCAA Bylaw l-8-(d) [improper campus visits] –
(a) During the 1980-81 academic year, one prospective student-athlete was provided two official paid visits to the university's campus, another was provided three visits and a third was provided two visits;
(b) During the 1978-79 academic year, one prospective student-athlete was provided three expense-paid visits to the university's campus and another was provided two visits, and (c) During the 1976-77 academic year, a prospective student-athlete was provided several visits to the university's campus.

11. NCAA Bylaws 1-8-(j) and l-8-(l) [improper transportation and entertainment] –
Between 1977 and 1981, four prospective student-athletes were provided local transportation and meals by an assistant football coach or a representative of the university's athletic interests.

12. NCAA Bylaws l-8-(i)-(5) and l-8-(j) [improper entertainment] –
In the fall of 1977, a former assistant football coach arranged for a friend of a prospective student-athlete to receive meals, lodging and entertainment during the young man's official paid visit.

13. NCAA Bylaws l-8-(i) [improper transportation] –
In December 1977, an assistant football coach provided the mother of a prospective student-athlete one-way automobile transportation from her home to the university's campus and the coach arranged for a student trainer to transport her home at the conclusion of the visit.

14. NCAA Constitution 3-l-(g)-(5) and Bylaw l-8-(j) [extra benefits and improper transportation] –
During his employment in the university's summer football camp in 1980, an assistant football coach provided local automobile transportation and a meal to approximately 10 prospective student-athletes; further, following the camp, the coach arranged for two student-athletes to utilize his automobile to travel home for a visit while also providing five prospective student-athletes transportation home.

15. NCAA Bylaw l-8-(j) [improper transportation] –
(a) In the fall of 1979, an assistant football coach provided round-trip automobile transportation for a friend of a prospective student-athlete to accompany the prospect on his official paid visit to the university;
(b) In the summer of 1981, an assistant football coach and a high school coach arranged for a prospective student athlete to be provided automobile transportation to attend the university's summer football camp;
(c) During the summer of 1980, a prospective student-athlete was provided automobile transportation following his attendance at the university's summer football camp;
(d) On three occasions during the 1980-81 academic year, a representative of the university's athletic interests entertained a prospective student-athlete for a meal, and
(e) During the 1980-81 academic year, four prospective student-athletes were provided improper automobile transportation by representatives of the university's athletic interests.

16. NCAA Bylaws l-8-(j)-(2) and 1-8-(j)-(4) [improper transportation] –
(a) In January 1981, an assistant football coach permitted a student-athlete to use his automobile to transport a prospective student-athlete during his official paid visit to the university;
(b) In December 1980, a former assist-ant football coach permitted two prospective student-athletes to use his personal automobile during their official paid visits to the university, and
(c) In November 1979, an assistant football coach provided his automobile to a student hostess in order to transport a prospective student-athlete during his official paid visit.

17. NCAA Bylaw 1-8-(c) [improper use of funds] –
In October 1980, a representative of the university's athletic interests gave a student hostess cash for her gasoline expenses to transport a prospective student-athlete from his home to the university's campus.

18. NCAA Bylaws 1-5-(b) and l-8-(m) [improper funds] –
In July 1980, an assistant football coach gave cash to a high school assistant football coach to reimburse the coach for expenses incurre d while transporting two prospective student-athletes to the university's summer football camp.

19. NCAA Constitution 3-l-(g)-(5) and Bylaws l-l-(b)-(l), l-8-(j)-(2) and 1-8-(j)-(3) [improper entertainment] –
(a) During the 1980-81 and 1981-82 academic years, the university's football coaching staff entertained prospective and enrolled student-athletes off campus at a restaurant located outside of Clemson, South Carolina, or a community contiguous thereto, and
(b) During the 1980-81 academic year, individuals who were not enrolled in the university served as hosts for prospective student-athletes on their official paid visits to the university.

20. NCAA Bylaw l-6-(a) [tryout] –
In the fall of 1979, a prospective student-athlete was timed running the 40-yard dash by a former assistant football coach.

21. NCAA Bylaw 1-l-(b)-(2) [improper employment] –
(a) In December 1978, a former assistant football coach arranged for a prospective student-athlete to be employed by a representative of the university's athletic interests prior to the completion of the young man's senior year in high school, and (b) In the summer of 1980, two prospective student-athletes were employed by a representative of the university's athletic interests in order to assist the young men in paying the costs to attend the Clemson football camp.

22. NCAA Bylaw 5-6-(d)-(4) [certification of compliance with NCAA legislation] –
With full knowledge at the time that certain practices of the university's intercollegiate football program were not in compliance with NCAA legislation, certain individuals (i.e., two assistant football coaches in 1978, two in 1979, two in 1980 and two in 1981) attested on statements filed with the chief executive officer of the university that they had reported their knowledge of and involvement in any violation of NCAA legislation involving the university.

23. NCAA Bylaws l-2-(a)-(2) and l-2-(a)-(4) [recruiting contact] –
In September 1981, an assistant football coach contacted a prospective student-athlete for recruiting purposes at the young man's high school outside the permissible period for in-person recruiting contacts.

24. NCAA Bylaw 1-2-(a)-(3) [recruiting contact] –
(a) In the spring of 1979, an assistant football coach personally contacted a prospective student-athlete in person, off campus prior to the completion of the young man's junior year in high school, and
(b) On two occasions in the spring of 1977, a former assistant football coach personally contacted a prospective student-athlete off campus for recruiting purposes prior to the completion of the young man's junior year in high school.

25. NCAA Bylaw l-2-(a)-(l) [recruiting contacts] –
(a) During the 1977-78 academic year, a prospective student-athlete was contacted in person, off campus for recruiting purposes on more than three occasions by members of the football coaching staff; <
(b) During the 1978-79 academic year, three prospective student-athletes were contacted in person, off campus for recruiting purposes on more than three occasions by members of the football coaching staff and representatives of the university's athletic interests;
(c) During the summer of 1979 and during the fall of the 1979-80 academic year, two prospective student-athletes were contacted in person, off campus for recruiting purposes on more than three occasions by members of the football coaching staff and representatives of the university's athletic interests, and
(d) During the 1980-81 academic year, four prospective student-athletes or their relatives were contacted in person, off campus for recruiting purposes on more than three occasions by members of the football coaching staff and representatives of the university's athletic interests.

By myles keogh on November 29th, 2009 at 6:36 pm

Your calling my reading skills into question? LOL. Why don’t you point out to me where I referenced in my original post a reference to “the last 12 years.” I didn’t. I said your program is “dirty through and through.” You conveniently inferred the last 12 years as if that somehow erases the crap that was going on up there beginning 35 years ago. As for not naming names in the NCAA report like Pell and Inabit that is also a piss poor argument. The report doesn’t name specific coaches either but references “coach(es).” Also since when does naming specific individuals involved with the Clemson probation invalidate the facts of what happened? Are you saying that just because they are dead the facts are no longer valid? That is like saying just because Nixon is dead he is no longer involved with the Watergate break ins. Finally as far as Carolina’s probation goes they happened but they pale in comparison to the crap that was going on up there under Pell and Ford with the help of boosters like Inabit. In Carolina’s case players were not receiving cash or cars. The same can’t be said of Clemson and the above proves it. Looks like your the one letting the facts get in the way.

By lee ivester on December 4th, 2009 at 2:19 pm

As a Clemson fan, I have to admire this man’s loyalty. Too bad he didn’t live to see his Gamecocks whip the Tigers last week.