Impermissable Icing - Gamecocks?

[DaphneUrquhart]

South Carolina has reported several minor infractions including giving recruits cookies that had "impermissable icing". No photo of the cookies was provided with the report. I can't decide if Inreally want to see those cookies or if I shouldn't even ask!

[appfanz]

My son is a South Carolina grad and was telling us the violations earlier today. What a joke the NCAA is. The rule book must be several inches wide

[77SU]

[Maddog1956]

It's a total misdirection ... and with my other hand... to be continued

[DaphneUrquhart]

Seriously?!?!?! From the sublime to the ridiculous in nothing flat.

[bcoach]

DaphneUrquhart please don't get me wrong. I am not doubting YOU but this is just so hard to believe even for the NCAA.

[asu66]

DaphneUrquhart please don't get me wrong. I am not doubting YOU but this is just so hard to believe even for the NCAA.

Impermissible icing? USC reports 22 minor NCAA violations



From GoGamecocks.com...dated 2 August 2014...

BY PETE IACOBELLI
AP Sports Writer, August 2, 2014


COLUMBIA, S.C. — South Carolina reported 22 infractions of NCAA rules in the past year, seven of those committed by the Gamecocks' football team.

All the violations were classified as secondary, the least serious category of NCAA rules-breaking. The school's report from Aug. 1, 2013 through Thursday was released to The Associated Press through an open records request.

While the football team was only South Carolina program with multiple violations, most were far from anything for coach Steve Spurrier to worry about.

One infraction from last winter involved impermissible iced decorations on a cookie cake given to prospects. Another occurred when the team laid out trophies and jerseys on a table inside the locker room, which is against NCAA rules since trophies aren't generally in locker rooms.

A football violation took place when a prospect attended spring practice and took a picture with a former South Carolina player currently in the NFL. NCAA rules say the coaching staff should not have allowed the prospective player to interact with the former Gamecock.

There was also a violation when a prospect wore a non-personalized jersey onto South Carolina's football field to take a picture to post on Twitter for his commitment announcement to the Gamecocks. That was considered an infraction of Southeastern Conference Commissioner regulations.

The final three football infractions took place when assistant coaches sent impermissible text messages to prospects.

While the school identified which programs committed violations, the names of coaches, athletes and prospects were not part of the report. All but one of the seven football infractions cases was closed without significant penalties.

The harshest penalty came from a July 2013 case of a football assistant wrongly texting a junior prospect. That coach was prevented from calling any prospect for two weeks and the entire coach staff was told not to telephone the prospect involved for 60 days from when rules allowed them to call.

The Gamecocks began football practice on Friday night. They open the season Aug. 28 at home against Texas A&M.

South Carolina athletic staff committed four violations, including one by the compliance department charged with preventing such mistakes. An assistant athletic director for compliance failed to have four walk-ons sign the NCAA drug testing consent form prior to the 14-day grace period.

The forms meeting was cancelled due an ice storm — South Carolina's campus was closed for several days this winter because of harsh weather — and not rescheduled. The athletes were declared ineligible until they completed the paperwork.

Another violation came when the school's marketing staff arranged radio interviews for a former men's basketball player without knowing he was a high school basketball coach. The marketing staff received an educational letter about NCAA rules and no further penalties were handed down.

There was one violation by the women's basketball team, perhaps emblematic of coach Dawn Staley's drive for success. The team didn't take the mandatory day off between the end of the fall semester and winter break. South Carolina made Staley's program take two days off the following week.

It didn't slow down the Gamecocks, though, who won the SEC regular-season title and earned a No. 1 seed in the NCAA tournament.

[bcoach]

DaphneUrquhart please don't get me wrong. I am not doubting YOU but this is just so hard to believe even for the NCAA.

Impermissible icing? USC reports 22 minor NCAA violations



From GoGamecocks.com...dated 2 August 2014...

BY PETE IACOBELLI
AP Sports Writer, August 2, 2014


COLUMBIA, S.C. — South Carolina reported 22 infractions of NCAA rules in the past year, seven of those committed by the Gamecocks' football team.

All the violations were classified as secondary, the least serious category of NCAA rules-breaking. The school's report from Aug. 1, 2013 through Thursday was released to The Associated Press through an open records request.

While the football team was only South Carolina program with multiple violations, most were far from anything for coach Steve Spurrier to worry about.

One infraction from last winter involved impermissible iced decorations on a cookie cake given to prospects. Another occurred when the team laid out trophies and jerseys on a table inside the locker room, which is against NCAA rules since trophies aren't generally in locker rooms.

A football violation took place when a prospect attended spring practice and took a picture with a former South Carolina player currently in the NFL. NCAA rules say the coaching staff should not have allowed the prospective player to interact with the former Gamecock.

There was also a violation when a prospect wore a non-personalized jersey onto South Carolina's football field to take a picture to post on Twitter for his commitment announcement to the Gamecocks. That was considered an infraction of Southeastern Conference Commissioner regulations.

The final three football infractions took place when assistant coaches sent impermissible text messages to prospects.

While the school identified which programs committed violations, the names of coaches, athletes and prospects were not part of the report. All but one of the seven football infractions cases was closed without significant penalties.

The harshest penalty came from a July 2013 case of a football assistant wrongly texting a junior prospect. That coach was prevented from calling any prospect for two weeks and the entire coach staff was told not to telephone the prospect involved for 60 days from when rules allowed them to call.

The Gamecocks began football practice on Friday night. They open the season Aug. 28 at home against Texas A&M.

South Carolina athletic staff committed four violations, including one by the compliance department charged with preventing such mistakes. An assistant athletic director for compliance failed to have four walk-ons sign the NCAA drug testing consent form prior to the 14-day grace period.

The forms meeting was cancelled due an ice storm — South Carolina's campus was closed for several days this winter because of harsh weather — and not rescheduled. The athletes were declared ineligible until they completed the paperwork.

Another violation came when the school's marketing staff arranged radio interviews for a former men's basketball player without knowing he was a high school basketball coach. The marketing staff received an educational letter about NCAA rules and no further penalties were handed down.

There was one violation by the women's basketball team, perhaps emblematic of coach Dawn Staley's drive for success. The team didn't take the mandatory day off between the end of the fall semester and winter break. South Carolina made Staley's program take two days off the following week.

It didn't slow down the Gamecocks, though, who won the SEC regular-season title and earned a No. 1 seed in the NCAA tournament.

Can't have a trophy in the locker room and you can't give a kid a cookie. This is what the NCAA is worried about today. Even in black and white ( or in this case red and blue ) it is just so hard to believe that the NCAA is just so out of touch with reality.
Thanks 66 for opening my eyes to this so very sad truth.

[DaphneUrquhart]

DaphneUrquhart please don't get me wrong. I am not doubting YOU but this is just so hard to believe even for the NCAA.

C'mon, bcoach, you know I wouldn't give you false info. I did check before I posted.

You are absolutely correct; the NCAA is straining out gnats and swallowing camels. Can't you see all the "big guys" sitting around conference tables wondering what tiny things they can report? That way, when they're caught at the big stuff, they can say, "See, we reported EVERYTHING (insert icing and trophies) we knew about. We had no idea THAT (insert blatant infraction) was happening!"

[bcoach]

DaphneUrquhart please don't get me wrong. I am not doubting YOU but this is just so hard to believe even for the NCAA.

C'mon, bcoach, you know I wouldn't give you false info. I did check before I posted.

You are absolutely correct; the NCAA is straining out gnats and swallowing camels. Can't you see all the "big guys" sitting around conference tables wondering what tiny things they can report? That way, when they're caught at the big stuff, they can say, "See, we reported EVERYTHING (insert icing and trophies) we knew about. We had no idea THAT (insert blatant infraction) was happening!"

No NO I would never doubt you but you have to admit the cookie deal is about a foot and a half past stupid.

[AppGrad78]

I know it's popular to bash the NCAA, and I'll admit to some frustration with the organization from time to time, but the NCAA is all that prevents the rich schools from simply overwhelming the mostly smaller schools and conferences that prefer more austere, sensible athletic programs. We all know that Steve Spurrier would buy an entire bakery for each of his recruiting targets if the rules allowed. If it means micromanaging the icing on a cookie, then that's the unfortunate world that people like Mike Slive, Jim Delaney and John Swofford have created for us.

[huskie3]

DaphneUrquhart please don't get me wrong. I am not doubting YOU but this is just so hard to believe even for the NCAA.

C'mon, bcoach, you know I wouldn't give you false info. I did check before I posted.

You are absolutely correct; the NCAA is straining out gnats and swallowing camels. Can't you see all the "big guys" sitting around conference tables wondering what tiny things they can report? That way, when they're caught at the big stuff, they can say, "See, we reported EVERYTHING (insert icing and trophies) we knew about. We had no idea THAT (insert blatant infraction) was happening!"

No NO I would never doubt you but you have to admit the cookie deal is about a foot and a half past stupid.

That is why the rule was changed/relaxed this spring. Used to you could give athlete sub sandwich as a snack but could not give chips, it would be a meal. Now it it is ok.

[bcoach]

DaphneUrquhart please don't get me wrong. I am not doubting YOU but this is just so hard to believe even for the NCAA.

C'mon, bcoach, you know I wouldn't give you false info. I did check before I posted.

You are absolutely correct; the NCAA is straining out gnats and swallowing camels. Can't you see all the "big guys" sitting around conference tables wondering what tiny things they can report? That way, when they're caught at the big stuff, they can say, "See, we reported EVERYTHING (insert icing and trophies) we knew about. We had no idea THAT (insert blatant infraction) was happening!"

No NO I would never doubt you but you have to admit the cookie deal is about a foot and a half past stupid.

That is why the rule was changed/relaxed this spring. Used to you could give athlete sub sandwich as a snack but could not give chips, it would be a meal. Now it it is ok.

Well that is a relief as they need their chips but is it still a violation if you include a pickle?

[huskie3]

As I understand it they can feed them whatever whenever, started August 1. Two schools I am familiar with are offering unlimited meals in certain dining halls.

[DaphneUrquhart]

http://espn.go.com/college-football/sto ... -violation

Whew! They're off the hook for the icing!

[CVAPP]

It was a well planned and properly executed publicity stunt.

[WVAPPeer]

It was a well planned and properly executed publicity stunt.

I don't know CVAPP - personally I would do NOTHING - whether a stunt or not - to attract the attention of the NCAA - with those guys you never know

[Maddog1956]

It was a well planned and properly executed publicity stunt.

That was my point, it's better to provide TMI then one or two items that might actually have some meat to them. Can you imagine how much the NCAA has to look at if every college sends in a list of 30 - 50 items.