Valetennis
New User
Anybody know what the issue was on this team? We know they named players in football (Bush) and basketball (mayo).
USC women's tennis to vacate wins
- Thread starter Valetennis
- Start date
killR4hand
New User
LA Times article
Niculescu's 2008 ITA regional doubles title with Amanda Fink vacated.
Niculescu's 2009 Pac 10 doubles title with Fink stripped.
Niculescu's 2009 ITA regional doubles title with Maria Sanchez taken off the record books.
All the wins that Niculescu played in during her USC career have been vacated. USC women's win total for 2007-2009 should officially only be 1 win. USC just won 1 match without Niculescu. The 2009 NCAA 1st round match USC won after kicking Niculescu off the team.
killR4hand
New User
Oops the actual dates are:
Niculescu's 2007 ITA regional doubles title with Amanda Fink.
Niculescu's 2008 Pac 10 doubles title with Fink.
Niculescu's 2008 ITA regional doubles title with Maria Sanchez.
Niculescu's 2007 ITA regional doubles title with Amanda Fink.
Niculescu's 2008 Pac 10 doubles title with Fink.
Niculescu's 2008 ITA regional doubles title with Maria Sanchez.
What source have you used to get that information ?
ttbrowne
Hall of Fame
It's on ESPNU this morning.
West Coast Ace
G.O.A.T.
Google found it:
http://www.victoriaadvocate.com/new...ons-1st-ledela-_-sports-1500-word/?sports&nfl
Small change compared to Bush and Mayo.
bluetrain4
G.O.A.T.
I understand the punishment -- rules are rules.
But, in a way it seems so extreme. At the time, she wasn't technically ineligible and she wasn't using performance enhacning drugs. Basically, what she did didn't cause her to win or lose.
And, vacating wins always seems like an empty proposition, since the individuals she beat and the teams USC beat aren't going to really get a win in retrospect. They're not suddenly going to feel like they've accomplished something.
I get that NCAA sanctions are attempt at "institutional control." Since athletes and coaches move in and out of schools all the time, it would be impossible to actually punish those directly responsible. For example, there is nothing the NCAA can really do to Reggie Bush or Pete Carol directly now that they're gone.
But, I really wish they could just punish the directly responsible parties and not the whole teams. There are always so many innocent people left in the wake of these sorts of ordeals.
But, in a way it seems so extreme. At the time, she wasn't technically ineligible and she wasn't using performance enhacning drugs. Basically, what she did didn't cause her to win or lose.
And, vacating wins always seems like an empty proposition, since the individuals she beat and the teams USC beat aren't going to really get a win in retrospect. They're not suddenly going to feel like they've accomplished something.
I get that NCAA sanctions are attempt at "institutional control." Since athletes and coaches move in and out of schools all the time, it would be impossible to actually punish those directly responsible. For example, there is nothing the NCAA can really do to Reggie Bush or Pete Carol directly now that they're gone.
But, I really wish they could just punish the directly responsible parties and not the whole teams. There are always so many innocent people left in the wake of these sorts of ordeals.
polski
Semi-Pro
Amanda Fink is my cousin, bummer ...
I played with her in a pro-am and thought she was a great kid!
killR4hand
New User
"Vacation of all wins in which the former women’s tennis student-athlete competed while ineligible between November 2006 and May 2009 (self-imposed by the university). The committee also stated this vacation must include participation in any postseason competition, conference tournaments and NCAA championships."
NCAA News
I forgot to mention in 2009 the USC women had an undefeated Pac-10 season and won their 1st ever Pac-10 team championship in women's tennis. Now that lone USC Pac-10 title is wiped off the history books. The title goes to Stanford and Cal who I recall being tied for 2nd that year. USC was supposed to have snapped Stanford's 21 year streak of being Pac 10 champions but I guess that streak is still alive at 23 straight years now since Stanford also won it in 2010. Don't tell FedAce.
JoelDali
Talk Tennis Guru
Coolness ...
To be honest, I have not met her yet as I moved away from Cali around the time she was born. My dad always kept me informed of her success in tennis. He got to watch a big match of her's in Vegas a few years ago.
I'm bummed for this happening to all of the players. Pretty rediculous!
killR4hand
New User
Just some notes.
- The "they" is USC punishing its own team since the sanctions were self imposed.
- Niculescu's violation I believe was originally reported by USC as a secondary offense which got her suspended for 10 matches when she transferred to Idaho. When it was investigated by the NCAA as part of the Bush-Mayo cases the NCAA correctly upgraded the violation to a major offense. This upgrade is what prompted Niculescu's ineligibility and vacation of all her career wins and matches she played in.
- USC can't just blame Niculescu alone for this. The charge in the NCAA investigation regarding women's tennis was "lack of institutional control." The blame for the penalties needs to be shared by both USC and Niculescu.
- Imagine if a starter on the USC men's tennis team had made long distance phone calls on USC's dime. Then the USC men might have had to vacate their 2009 national title.
West Coast Ace
G.O.A.T.
Doesn't matter. And tough sanctions are a deterrent. Athletes can't get any benefits/treatment not available to ALL students.
Why some rich Alum couldn't have just bought a cell phone and handed it to her after a match...
You need to have said 'USC can't blame Niculescu for this'. Forget all of the 'alone' garbage. No-one here should be stupid enough to believe that she made those calls without the express knowledge of the coach. Hell, no-one here should be stupid enough to believe she wasn't told it was perfectly acceptable to make them. No-one should be stupid enough to believe that the other schools don't regularly do it (one reason why UCLA shouldn't be crowing). The only reason to blame the player is so you don't have to sanction and/or remove the coach and director of coaching.
Google found the same article that was originally linked to (that's why I had to ask). What I was referring to was the list of titles and results vacated.
Last edited:
I always love these "everyone does it" statements. First, they are merely statements of prejudice and cynicism, because the people making them don't have first-hand knowledge that everyone is doing it. Second, every time one school breaks rules, every major program gets to share in the guilt according to these kind of statements.
You cannot win. Run a dirty program, and eventually you get caught and blamed for it. Run a clean program, and eventually some other program gets caught, and cynics say that you must be doing it as well and just not getting caught.
Clark,
I'm not sure where you went to school but in my part of the world 'other' and 'everyone' are two entirely separate things. No point in commenting until you can understand and recognise the difference.
OK, tell me how many schools are included in "the other schools REGULARLY do it." You can try to claim you did not say what you obviously said, I guess.
While you are explaining how your statements don't really imply anything, maybe you can explain what you were implying about UCLA here. Nothing? Or do you have some evidence to give us about UCLA tennis?
It is common knowledge that SC pushes the limits on recruiting the top players.
Potential recruits given sideline tickets to SC football games, (on facebook)
potential recruits running around with assistant coaches at national college tournaments. (saw it with my own eyes)
UCLA coach predicting that SC will eventually get into trouble.
Potential recruits given sideline tickets to SC football games, (on facebook)
potential recruits running around with assistant coaches at national college tournaments. (saw it with my own eyes)
UCLA coach predicting that SC will eventually get into trouble.
killR4hand
New User
Not true. USC discovered in a 2009 audit, 3 years later the calls Niculescu made in 2006. USC let it happen 123 times over 3 years and that's why they were charged with lack of institutional control. LOL
Does all of this refer to USC women's team, men's team, or both? Just curious.
anchorsteamer
Rookie
Are you referring to sideline tickets while on the recruiting trip or throughout the year? On a recruiting trip, schools can take you to a game...and that can be anywhere in the stadium. I went on 5 recruiting trips and was on the field for football games for 3 of them...fun (legal) stuff...
If it's tickets given above and beyond that though...which I doubt...then you have a serious problem. Coach Gallian is a stand up guy...I'd trust what he said...I haven't seen any quotes though...
Women's program
Clark,
Sorry to say it but, put down the keyboard and exercise your bloody brain for a change. Honestly, I was under the impression you were an adult but you're carrying on like a teenage girl who doesn't like people saying that her favourite boy band aren't as squeaky clean as she wants to believe. I'm not a suspicious person by nature but your attitude is making me wonder what vested interest is lurking behind all the righteous indignation and deliberate misrepresentation of what I wrote (which even a child can see is not what you claim).
How about you give us all a laugh and say which schools have never been 'creative' in their recruiting.
Lakers4Life
Hall of Fame
Gee haven't USC boosters heard of Magic Jack or Vonage?
Summary: AndrewD has no reply to my specific questions, and still wants to divert attention from what he said, because he cannot support what he said.
With phone calls it may not be clear who is to blame. This is not the same as a direct benefit to a player. There is the possibility that someone told her it was okay, but also possible she discovered it on her own. Could be very likely that she had access to a phone and started using it. As time went on, no one said anything and she got more bold with it. As for no one saying anything over a period of time, not at all a surprise if you know how telecom bills work at the institutional level.
West Coast Ace
G.O.A.T.
Very poor picture of her. She is actually quite attractive. Maybe even a mixed doubles player 10. That's an 8 or better with a serve and a big backhand.
Actually, I also played mixed with her. The USC women's team came to our club for a promo visit and after a quick clinic we played rotating partner sets with them. Truly, a very well mannered, appreciative and fun group of girls. Gabriela couldn't stop smiling the whole time. A very charming young lady.
A very sad situation indeed and a very stupid, petty mistake.
Skype, Vonage, etc......???????
Actually, I also played mixed with her. The USC women's team came to our club for a promo visit and after a quick clinic we played rotating partner sets with them. Truly, a very well mannered, appreciative and fun group of girls. Gabriela couldn't stop smiling the whole time. A very charming young lady.
A very sad situation indeed and a very stupid, petty mistake.
Skype, Vonage, etc......???????
goober
Legend
yeah nothing new USC has been doing these kinds of things for about a century now
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-then-20100619,0,4450391.story
I honestly think that USC got a light punishment. Carroll is as slick as they come. He knew of course where this was all heading under his watch and bolts for NFL. So he makes even more money and leaves USC in a mess.
eeytennis
Semi-Pro
Yes, USC is not the only school that I know of who has offered/given players gifts to get them to come to and stay at the school. Either the school or the boosters, that is. It seems like it's a pretty common practice, how else could the other school compete with the schools that offer their recruits and players gifts for coming to the school? It's unfortunate, but to me, I wouldn't be surprised to find that nearly every D1 school does it, it's just a matter of who can hide it better.
