SEC Coverage

The NCAA's board of directors is proposing to give the organization more power to sanction programs along the lines of Mark Emmert's special hammering of Penn State. The idea appears to be to pave the cowpath, so to speak. Specifically, the proposed powers include four-year postseason bans, negating the revenue that punished teams bring in during their punishment period, and holding head coaches personally responsible where applicable. The proposal won't be voted on until October. It would also expand the Committee on Infractions from 10 to 24 members and make it so that instead of there being two tiers of infractions (secondary and major), there would be four instead.

Several news outlets are reporting that the NCAA is investigating two street agents, Will Lyles and Baron Flenory, in connection with over $28,000 that the University of Oregon paid the two of them for "recruiting packages." Here's where you can catch up on all the latest details, but Oregon itself is not under investigation just yet. Why do we care in SEC land? 1. It sheds more light on the NCAA's ongoing fight against agents. 2. Both teams in last year's national title game are now going through recruiting scandals. 3. ESPN's sources are saying that the NCAA is looking into Lyles' relationship with fellow street agent Sean Nelson from Thibodaux, Louisiana. He's a player in the investigations into Auburn's recruiting practices, and he was involved with Oregon RB Lache Seastrunk, who attended Auburn's infamous Big Cat Weekend.

Mike Slive spoke to FanHouse about the Newton ruling today. He didn't receive the final set of facts agreed upon by the NCAA and Auburn until Monday, so that explains the timing somewhat. He also gives three reasons why he didn't rule Newton in violation of the SEC's bylaw, mostly relating to the rule's intent and precedent. Slive also says that he will work to get the loophole in the NCAA rules closed that allows for no real punishment to come from this case based on the facts as known now.

Linked here is Travis Haney's Twitter feed, as he is working like a mad man to find out what's going on in Columbia. The NCAA told the school a final ruling on all the players in trouble would come by 5:00 PM, but that deadline sailed by without any firm word. Go read his stuff for up-to-the-second details. Apparently the NCAA gave Georgia that 5:00 deadline for final word on A.J. Green but again, it missed that with nary a peep. It's not as big a deal for UGA or Alabama (still waiting on Marcell Dareus) because they don't play until Saturday. The Gamecocks? Kick off is in, oh, 45 minutes or so. UPDATE The latest word is that all but Chris Culliver and Jarriel King will play. King is involved with the Whitney Hotel mess; Culliver is out for some non-hotel, non-agent related reason. Weslye Saunders, as you'll remember, was already suspended for lying to coaches and hasn't been set to play tonight for weeks. UPDATE 2 South Carolina has confirmed. Only King and Culliver will miss tonight's game of those who had been in question.

The NCAA's Academic Progress Rate data from 2008-09 was released today, and here's a link to the searchable web form. Of all BCS programs, only Colorado lost scholarships (2 each on football and basketball).

No one is releasing anything (Isn't this what freedom of information acts are for?), but apparently Bryce Brown is ineligible. All we really have to go on is this quote from Tennessee associate athletic director of compliance Brad Bertani: "Everything has been determined. Now we're just focusing on getting him eligible. There is no investigation ongoing right now." No one would need to focus on getting him eligible if he was already eligible. If the NCAA drags its feet on this at all, I expect some seriously angry folks in the Volunteer state.

This is the dumbest thing in college football not to come out of Lane Kiffin's mouth in a long time. The problem with excessive celebration penalties in college football isn't that they're too lenient -- it's that they're too strict. Essentially, a player who takes the burst of emotion after a big play too far is penalized the same as a player who attempts to hurt his opponent by grabbing his opponent's face mask and jerking it to the ground or by making a horse-collar tackle. That's absurd and just a touch short of morally bankrupt. Now, the same people who brought us that brilliant idea want to make the excessive celebration foul even more stringent by enforcing in some cases as a live-ball foul? Really?!? Excessive celebration should be a five- or maybe ten-yard flag. It should always be a dead-ball penalty. And the people involved in making the rules should really consider the virtues of allowing kids to play football instead of trying to turn the game into a tea party with shoulder pads.