Football Articles
The History of College Football Recruiting Cheating- Part 4
Posted by TaylorTRoom on June 9th, 2008 under Football, Recruiting
When a program is caught cheating in recruiting, its fans will often claim that they are just trying to match their rivals’ efforts. “They must be cheating, too,” they argue, “How else could they get all of the recruits they sign?” There is a kernel of truth in that statement. The governing rules limit every school to offering the same package- tuition, books, room, and board. However, it’s a mistake to think that all of these packages are of the same value, and that unpleasant fact is at the root of cheating in recruiting.
Let’s start with the scholarship. Obviously, (the value of the education aside) some degrees are worth more than others. That’s why Stanford gets to charge more for tuition than Chico State, right? This value could also be measured by the difference in expected earnings by graduates of different schools. That creates an obvious inequity right there. What if a player has dreams of a pro career? Higher profile programs provide better launching pads.
Then there are the differences in campus life offerings, locations (beaches vs. cornfields), degree offerings, and any other of the myriad differentiators that all prospective students are aware of. The NCAA’s attempt to level the playing field had unintentionally institutionalized inequities. If the rules were perfectly enforced, some schools would always have more talent available than others. Paying recruits is actually a way of increasing the value of a school’s offer, to make it competitive with others.
Coaches are by nature competitive spirits. To a lesser extent, boosters are as well. They will be aggressive about addressing competitive deficits. That’s what the college football world discovered in the 1950’s, after the rules regulating recruiting were established.
As noted before, the initial intent of the Pacific Coast Conference (PAC-10 precursor) was to forgo athletic scholarships (tuition to the state universities was low already and Stanford had generous financial aid for all) and only allow summer jobs for extra income. Almost immediately, a scandal broke. It was discovered that four of the eight schools (Cal, UCLA, Washington, and USC) had slush funds administered by boosters (with the coaches’ knowledge) or the coaches. These funds would pay players upwards of $40 per month, in cash. The scandal ended the slush funds, but influenced the conference to drop its “holier than thou” attitude and mimic the scholarship programs of the rest of the country. Note- the Washington slush fund scandal happened the season before Royal took over in 1956.
The Big 10 adopted the athletic scholarships policy grudgingly, but paired it with higher academic standards for recruits. Their idea was that if they were going to have to give scholarships, they would by golly give them to scholars. This led to a period in the late 1950’s where the Big 10 went from the country’s toughest conference (the SEC of its day) to being no better than any other. Presumably, before the Big 10 adopted the higher standards, the schools had been enrolling the less intellectually gifted athlete. The league decided to adopt academic standards more in line with its peer conferences, and hasn’t looked back since.
It doesn’t take a huge amount of cynicism to surmise that the PCC was not the only conference with easy cash for players, or the Big 10 the only conference dependent upon the less gifted student. However, there are two necessary components to a recruiting scandal. You need a violator, and you need somebody to turn them in. We’re going to look at both components.
Where do you find violators? You find violators at programs that are trying to get the top talent, and lack the means or skill to do so without cheating. This includes programs in talent-poor states (the geographic distribution of D-1A talent is, like so many other aspect of life, unfair), smaller-profile programs in talent-rich states, programs that have unattractive “images” with talented players, or some combination of the above. The scholarship offers from these programs are perceived to be less valuable than their rivals, so they have to add some economic value to compete in recruiting.
Where do you find somebody to turn them in? That’s a more complex question than it first appears. A rival school that turns in a cheater had better be clean itself, or it runs the risk of being punished too.
That’s why the heavily rumored recruiting bidding wars rarely result in NCAA penalties. If school A and B are both bidding for a star player, and school A wins, school B is too dirty themselves (and probably has too much evidence against it near the surface) to report them.
You also don’t find violations reported in areas where the competitive balance between schools involves a standard set of extra benefits for a player- cars, a certain nominal amount of cash. These “gentlemens’ agreements” would typically be between the member schools of a conference, allowing them to defend the local talent from outside marauders.
You will see violators turned in when a newcomer tries to use illegal inducements to open up a new recruiting territory. And that’s exactly what we saw in one of the more noteworthy local scandals- the 1955 Texas A&M football recruiting scandal. You had both elements- a coach trying to upgrade the talent on his team, and rivals willing to turn on him.
Let’s dig a little deeper.
Bryant is widely recognized as college football’s greatest (or most successful) coach. Unfortunately, he was admittedly no stranger to buying players. In his 1966 SI series, he admits that boosters probably paid some boys. Obviously, the boosters have to be told by the coaches which boys to pay. Remember, at this time, boosters were allowed to participate in recruiting, and often funded the scholarships given (coaches were weaning them from the latter practices, because boosters kept trying to promote “their” players, annoying coaches to no end).
He needed to buy players because, with no female students admitted by rule, and compulsory ROTC participation, the Aggies were not an attractive option to schoolboy athletes. Also, the state had only one state-wide recruiter at the time- UT. The rest of the state had been carved up locally, with Rice (and the Owls had some good teams) getting Houston, TCU getting FW, SMU getting Dallas, and the rural small towns shared by Baylor and Texas A&M. Texas, as noted in a prior post, recruited the whole state. Bryant had been promised by the Ag boosters that the Ags were a state-wide presence in recruiting, and they were- the school was considered an undesirable option in every corner of the state.
A few years later, the Ags were the single most talented team in the SWC, led by future NFL stars Jack Pardee, John David Crow, Bobby Joe Conrad, and Charlie Krueger. Although it’s unfair to say these players were paid, it is obvious that Bryant brought a significant upgrade in talent to College Station. The other schools took notice, and turned him in for illegal recruiting and benefits for players. Presumably, the other SWC were upset that the Ags were encroaching on their recruiting areas, and paying players to win their commitments in recruiting.
Now, here’s the odd part. They didn’t turn him into the NCAA, although the NCAA had set up a Compliance Committee to deal with such issues.
They turned him into the Southwest Conference, where the other ADs voted to penalize the Ags and not allow them to play in the Cotton Bowl, should they win the SWC in 1956 (they did). Perhaps the conference forum was chosen because it would have more respect for “gentlemen’s agreements” about recruiting territories than the NCAA would.
Obviously, there were some hard feelings on the Aggies’ part (especially after Bryant quit), and from that point on any recruiting violations were reported to the NCAA to deal with.
So, there you have it. A school found itself at a competitive disadvantage in recruiting, and responded by sweetening the offers to the recruits, and expanding its recruiting territory. The aggrieved rivals responded by complaining through a forum that would not investigate them in return (in later years, schools would learn to use the media as a surrogate for making claims). The final act is the punishment of the offending program.
Share This
19 Responses
Leave a Reply
Related Articles
-
9
The History of College Football Recruiting Cheating- Part 10
By TaylorTRoom on July 28th, 2008 -
1
The History of College Football Recruiting Cheating- Part 3
By TaylorTRoom on June 6th, 2008 -
4
The History of College Football Recruiting Cheating- Part 2
By TaylorTRoom on May 31st, 2008 -
5
The History of College Football Recruiting Cheating- Part 6
By TaylorTRoom on July 2nd, 2008 -
36
The History of College Football Recruiting Cheating- Part 8
By TaylorTRoom on July 21st, 2008
Activity
-
Farmer Ted commented on the blog post Recruiting the Trenches ago
Nice job with this – and welcome to the network, on behalf of Better Off Red. See you at the Fantake retreat in Vegas that Sailor Ripley is sponsoring this summer!
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
J Rog commented on the blog post Game Day: Spurs vs. Lakers Open Thread ago
Fell apart in the fourth quarter again. Can’t give up 28 points to close out a game. Spurs, Longhorns….heartache once again.
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
Farmer Ted commented on the blog post Thoughts on the win in Austin ago
Nice job Hiphop. Very nice to win what is probably the toughest game on the schedule handily, although the Hawks obviously caught UT at a good time.
The Morningstar FT was terrible and hilarious. He said the ball was wet, which clearly means Texas was cheating somehow. Would the second chance off balance leaner
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
J Rog wrote a new blog post: Missed Opportunities: Spurs vs. Lakers Recap ago
Whiskey. Tango. Foxtrot. This game was served up on a silver platter for the Spurs and they managed to fumble it like a Minnesota Viking in the playoffs.
I think perhaps Will Ferrell can describe my emotions on the current state of the Spurs season better than I.
The Spurs hung around for most of the
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
Mister Mike commented on the blog post Did Rick Barnes use a plant last night to distract KU players? ago
I think KU should demand an immediate investigation. Find someone to get to the bottom of this.
I volunteer myself.
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
Trips Right commented on the blog post Top 8 Teams in College Hoops ago
Georgetown?
-
RRR commented on the blog post Thoughts on the win in Austin ago
Good write up, hiphop. I love the versatitility of the Morris twins on defense. Xavier Henry is probably the key to a big run in the tournament. If he starts hitting open looks, the inside game will really open up. Post to post passing is fun to watch.
It’s pretty nice when
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
RRR commented on the blog post Mid-Season Thoughts and OU Pre-Game ago
Thanks Trips. I’m hoping for lots of Willie Warren trying to be Sheron Collins. TMG in sync is the scariest thing to face in Norman. That or we get beat up on the boards which seems to be recurring theme of Texas Tech road games.
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
Blake Stansbery commented on the blog post Recruiting the Trenches 1 minute ago
TP welcome to the network.
I like how you broke this down, and identified which positions history shows a high star ranking has proven to be important. I personally feel that after what all the recruiting sites dub their top players that there is a major falloff. We all love that the recruiting sites bring
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
Art Vandelay commented on the blog post Texas Hoops vs. Kansas: Post-Mortem 2 minutes ago
Groundhog Day said:
February 9th, 2010 at 10:00 am“How can everyone on the team have worse basketball sense than my 5th graders? Honestly? We are the dumbest bunch I have ever seen. We weren’t earlier in the year. Hell, Bradley was smartest player, by far, in any of the summer h.s. games. Now he plays
-
Farmer Ted commented on the blog post Petrino Building Fence Around Arkansas 4 minutes ago
Good stuff JA. But the Huskers call dibs on any dual threat QB named Frazier thankyouverymuch.
-
Hiphopopotamus commented on the blog post Did Rick Barnes use a plant last night to distract KU players? 7 minutes ago
I’m convinced.
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
skymonkeyhorn commented on the blog post Texas Hoops vs. Kansas: Post-Mortem 11 minutes ago
“No, but I became a man in Juarez.”
I bet in your fantasy you were the donkey in the show ? No ?“Eight Dollar drink-and-drowns, and cans that merely say “beer” in Juarez will turn anyone into a man”
That is why Trips was drinking river water by the bridge for too many years. In the -
Darius Pourceau commented on the blog post John Pelphrey’s Unconventional Approach 12 minutes ago
I don’t think we have to win the SEC tourny necessarily. If we make it to the SEC Tourny championship game and have won about 20 games, I would say a tourny bid would look likely. But that is a pretty big task. I know no one cares about the NIT, but that wouldnt be
-
Nordberg commented on the blog post Texas Hoops vs. Kansas: Post-Mortem 18 minutes ago
I like Varez Ward, but he doesn’t seem like the magical missing piece to me. And we’ve got like 15 other guys on scholarship. Losing Varez Ward shouldn’t turn the season into a trainwreck.
Barnes’ “we’re going to fix it” quotes are starting to remind me of Greg Davis talking about fixing the running game. If
-
Mister Mike commented on the blog post Thoughts on the win in Austin 18 minutes ago
Don’t follow basketball as much as you guys do here, but I did watch that game last night. Using my extensive experience in analyzing the sport (next to none) the game felt like it had that “Big Game” feel to it, but somehow it just didn’t turn out that way. Kind of…lackluster?
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
Nordberg commented on the blog post Texas Hoops vs. Kansas: Post-Mortem 27 minutes ago
How much is Mark Few making? Hell, make a run at Izzo. We can do that kind of shit now.
Trips that Barnes quote is infuriating, considering that our entire fanbase has been saying that exact same line for months. Has he been hoping this whole time that they’d turn into Augustin and Gibson?
-
Trips Right commented on the blog post Texas Hoops vs. Kansas: Post-Mortem 30 minutes ago
No, but I became a man in Juarez.
-
Mister Mike commented on the blog post Carl Pelini Remains Red 38 minutes ago
Personally, I think it’s going to be a long time, if ever, before Carl considers leaving. Him and Bo share some kind of vulcan mind-meld when it comes to the defense. He knows exactly what Bo wants and what he expects and he gets that shit done. I’m glad NU awarded him
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
Trips Right commented on the blog post Texas Hoops vs. Kansas: Post-Mortem 38 minutes ago
EP, Gillispie is a helluva coach but he’s a horrible representation for any marquee program.
-
Trips Right commented on the blog post Texas Hoops vs. Kansas: Post-Mortem 38 minutes ago
EP, Gillispie is a helluva coach but he’s a horrible representative of any marquee program.
-
skymonkeyhorn commented on the blog post Texas Hoops vs. Kansas: Post-Mortem 39 minutes ago
Yeah but El Paso / West Texas are known for unknown phenomena , like the lights , strange things happen out in the desert.
Gilly may be a UFO flier for all we know.
Look at Trips he is kind of strange with his fantasy on trim and stripper poles, sometimes I think that Trips -
Hiphopopotamus wrote a new blog post: Thoughts on the win in Austin 39 minutes ago
We weren’t overly impressive, and at the same time, it may have been this team’s most impressive win. The game didn’t have much rhythm. We never shot it well. In fact, our two best guys can’t be much worse from the field. But damned if we didn’t guard them – especially in that first half.
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
Farmer Ted wrote a new blog post: Carl Pelini Remains Red 41 minutes ago
We all know that Carl Pelini is a popular guy, and now we’ve learned that Tennessee recently courted him to fill their DC vacancy. Carl said no:
“We’re on the verge of something great at Nebraska,” Pelini said. “I love working with Bo. That’s all I’m going to say about it.”
Fortunately for Husker fans, Carl isSHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
Trips Right commented on the blog post Texas Hoops vs. Kansas: Post-Mortem 45 minutes ago
Patrick, no this is hilarious (From Chip Brown):
And Barnes finally admitted after Monday night’s 80-68 loss to No. 1 Kansas that he can no longer have guards Justin Mason and Dogus Balbay on the floor together.
“We just can’t, otherwise it’s five on three,” Barnes said.
-
Mister Mike commented on the blog post ”Bo Made Me Cry.” 47 minutes ago
The problem Ted is that Bo doesn’t like to give anyone the appearance that he’s not in control of the program. For some reason, he feels that the flow of information to the recruiting sites and services is far too much, and he’s seeking to try and control that. There’s a reason why
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
Trips Right commented on the blog post Did Rick Barnes use a plant last night to distract KU players? 54 minutes ago
Wholesome goodness. Thanks for posting.
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
HenryJames commented on the blog post Another night, another would-be hero 56 minutes ago
I think Kiper has Okung too high at number five. He’s a right tackle in the NFL, and no one will take a RT that high.
-
skymonkeyhorn commented on the blog post Texas Hoops vs. Kansas: Post-Mortem 1 hour ago
Basketball is a simple game of passing,dribbling,catching,shooting and denying the other team from scoring. Simple yet played by chess masters that know what they have (known quantities) in players,chemistry, and heart (will to win).
Maybe they are also an unknown phenomena to the stubborn, mad,lusting minds of entrenched coaches that are playing the games -
uthookem commented on the blog post 2011 Texas Football Recruiting 1 hour, 14 minutes ago
I consider this thread incomplete until a picture of Barney Frank is added.
Stuck in MN said:
June 9th, 2008 at 7:12 pm
Well done. I’m really enjoying this series.
I’d never thought of the freakonomics angle of cheating but it makes perfect sense. I guess if you were in a lab and trying to make a perfect test tube cheating scenario you would have a school with an undesirable degree in an undesirable location that has alums with an inferiority complex, low morals, and lots of oil money. You might also include a big red auto dealership or an affinity for collies, but those are probably optional.
TaylorTRoom said:
June 10th, 2008 at 3:44 am
1. I’ve got a rough idea in my head where this is going, and I think I have to devote a full post to OU’s history. There’s just too much there. Ditto for SMU.
2. The George Smith fiasco at TAMU deserves a full post as well, but that might also be the place to mention the two probations at UT in the early ’80s, since the two programs had such different reactions.
3. Bear Bryant is interesting. He only shows up in the NCAA infraction database once, in 1964 for recruiting a player from another college team (the TAMU probation was a SWC probation, not NCAA). However, his coaching tree is full of violators (Sherrill, Stallings, Williamson, Dye).
4. This is probably as good of a place as any to note the single dumbest violation ever- TAMU in 1966 was put on NCAA probation for cutting non-performing players from the squad and canceling their scholarships. This was stupid because it was unnecessary. Coaches cut college players all of the time, but either let them keep their scholarships or make them so miserable that they quit (not advocating that, just pointing it out). What in the world got into Stallings to make him act out that way? Did he really believe all that propaganda about Junction?
TaylorTRoom said:
June 10th, 2008 at 3:44 am
Oh, and thanks for the kind comments.
Austin180 said:
June 10th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
I too am really enjoying this series. Thanks.
TxTower said:
June 10th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Enjoy this also but is this the 4th part of a 50 part series? – cause OU has to take up at least half of it and you haven’t even gotten to the Bud Wilkinson era yet.
srr50 said:
June 10th, 2008 at 7:05 pm
“Now, here’s the odd part. They didn’t turn him into the NCAA, although the NCAA had set up a Compliance Committee to deal with such issues.”
They turned them into the SWC because there was no National Letter of Intent. There were just conference LOI’s.
The NCAA compliance Committee was seen as having little power, and the conferences policed themselves.
THe SWC helped bring about a National LOI in the mid 60’s.
TaylorTRoom said:
June 11th, 2008 at 3:40 am
That’s another reason, srr, and one I hadn’t considered. I do know that the NCAA Compliance committee started taking actions in the mid and late ’50s, particularly with the PCC scandal.
I think the NCAA discovered in 1952 that making punishments decisions in the convention at large would not work (the “Sinful Seven” going totally unpunished), and needed an independent committee to do the work.
NateHeupel said:
June 12th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
I’d never thought of the freakonomics angle of cheating but it makes perfect sense. I guess if you were in a lab and trying to make a perfect test tube cheating scenario…
For my beloved OU circa 1950:
you would have a school with an undesirable degree: check
in an undesirable location: check
that has alums with an inferiority complex: CHECK
low morals: NEGATIVE…especially in light of the Klan-esque attitude prevalent in Austin until the 70’s.
lots of oil money: compared to UT, are you kidding?
big red auto dealership: check
TaylorTRoom said:
June 12th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Nate, in my next post I’m going to quote Time magazine on why OU stopped integrating after Gauntt for a few years.
NateHeupel said:
June 13th, 2008 at 7:27 am
Good reading: LINK
TaylorTRoom said:
June 13th, 2008 at 9:18 am
Nate, I’ve read his book, “Breaking the Ice”, and it is a very fair account of a tragic time. Don’t make the mistake a lot of Sooners do of assuming Oklahoma football were necessarily angels in this deal.
Give Wilkinson credit for integrating in the ’50s. Note also that the Big 6 conference had been integrated for awhile already. Also note that he stopped integrating, and why.
Also, in your article, did you note the comments about the Arkansas 1965 football staff, and how cruel it could be? You do know who were assistants on that staff, don’t you?
SeeingRed said:
June 13th, 2008 at 12:38 pm
Barry Switzer cheated on a sperm test.
Lowery said:
June 13th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Very interesting and enjoyable read. I particularly like the regional aspect that you mentioned.
Funny thing about that if you want to get in the way-back machine with me for a minute.
Picture my room at the fraternity house at Alabama 95ish. I know that it was some time after lunch because I was in a fog that only week old hunch punch, and Mrs Ps burgers can induce.
On the tv, Dan Patrick is talking about “Tractor Trailer”’s suburban up at Michigan, and what an affront it is. As I gaze to my right, out the window, I can see Dwayne Rudd finishing up a nice detailing job on both his new jeep, and his new mustang. He was a really good linebacker and stuff.
AggieGunnerFan said:
June 24th, 2008 at 8:48 am
Very interesting series on the subject. Hopefully, you are planning on more because the SMU scandal would be great.
Sarge said:
July 20th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
Please keep going, this is very interesting stuff. Some I have heard before, most in new.
More please!
ed said:
July 12th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Interesting subject and some great information. Some questions/comments:
1. I wonder — why choose Bear Bryant and Texas A&M as your only detailed example? The SMU and TCU play-for-pay issues in the 1980s are much more relevant in time and detail.
2. I think it’s unfair to say A&M was not attractive to prospective recruits in 1955 because it was an all male school with required ROTC. Those might be negatives today; they were a lot less significant 50-plus years ago.
3. It is inaccurate to say the state was “carved up” regionally. In fact, TCU prospered by recruiting mega talent from East and West Texas — far from the Fort Worth area. Jess Neely and his Rice staff covered major portions of the state with their recruiting. Of course SMU, TCU and Rice got a larger percentage of players from their hometowns; Texas does the same thing today with the Austin area. This is not “carving up” the state, thus leaving the small towns to A&M and Baylor. Texas A&M got a lot of small-town athletes (and students as a whole); it was THE place to study agriculture, and many of those students were from rural towns. That’s where farms and ranches are.
4. As pointed out in one of the comments, it was the norm at the time for the conference to clean up its problems and mete out punishment. It wasn’t until ADs and faculty reps decided to distance themselved from the lawyering and judging of their members that conferences kicked those things to higher authority (the NCAA).
5. I won’t even get into the “worth of degrees.” I’ve known geniuses from Texas A&I and Texas-El Paso (not picking on anybody here), and dunces from UT and Harvard (or here).
TaylorTRoom said:
July 12th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
Thanks for reading, Ed. I wrote about TAMU and Bryant because my research indicates that TAMU may have been paying players in the ’50s, but not really that much worse than many competitors (such as SMU). Why did the conference turn on them? I suspect it was due to a sense that they “didn’t know their place” when they were recruiting other areas. 50 years later, TAMU is understood to be a state-wide recruiter and would not attract the same scorn from their peers.
As for TAMU’s appeal in the ’50s, you have to remember that we are not talking about the appeal to dedicated future academics, or agriculturists, but to star HS football player, which is a different thing altogether.
Plano Jeff said:
July 13th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
Excellent reading. If you do take on OU, the OSU people had a great chart a few years back chronicling the OU scandals. It is hillarious and I can’t find it on the web to save my life, but I’d bet an Okie State fan would send you one.
ponderos said:
July 13th, 2009 at 7:20 pm
I bet an Okie State fan did it in crayon, too.