Those of you either resting easy or grumbling in frustration at the thought that the NCAA will never punish so fatted a calf as USC, take note: The common misconception that smaller schools are punished more stringently than the big-name outfits is (you guessed yet?) a misconception.
Why Big Sports Programs Aren’t Necessarily Bigger Targets For The NCAA
[L]ogic states that the NCAA would not hurt programs that generate a lot of revenue. The problem is in football, the NCAA has no TV contract, no advertising revenue, no ticket sales, no direct revenue at all. The NCAA has only an indirect and tangential financial interest in FBS football.But if history is any suggestion, neither will the hammer swing more forcefully Trojans-ward just because they’d be a high-profile get. Any perception of USC being targeted for their status is also erroneous, statistically speaking: It just so happens that major programs are really, really good at being bad.
There have been 114 major infractions cases since 2000. [...] Of the 114 cases, 42 involved Power Six conference schools. So while the big boys only make up less than one quarter of the Division I population, they account for over a third (37%) of the major infractions cases.
If you look at just football and men’s basketball cases, the exact same distribution holds. Since 2000, there have been 80 cases involving either football or men’s basketball in Division I. That’s important as well. The NCAA’s two biggest sports account for 70% of the cases, while the other 31 sports account for just 30%.Read more at the Bylaw Blog, with history and examples and math and everything. (And do take heart, if you’re a Trojans aficionado and given to nervous thinking -- there’s still a better-than-even chance this decision won’t be handed down, appealed, and/or resolved in any of our lifetimes.)
See More:
