Yes, USC ‘cooperated’ when backed into a corner from whence there was no escape. But contrast this ‘cooperation’ with other institutions, like Michigan and UF, that were diligent in monitoring, investigating, and reporting issues to the NCAA themselves. USC did no such thing, at any point, until the NCAA came knocking. There was no interest in digging up the truth and doing things right bc its right. There was only interest in stonewalling and trying to not get caught. You call that cooperation? The difference is clear as day, if you allow yourself to see it.

“The committee also considered the institution’s cooperation in the processing of this case. Cooperation during the infractions process is addressed in Bylaw 19.01.3 – Responsibility to Cooperate, which states in relevant part that, “All representatives of member institutions shall cooperate fully with the NCAA Enforcement Staff, Committee on Infractions, Infractions Appeals Committee and Board of Directors. The enforcement policies and procedures require full and complete disclosure by all institutional representatives of any relevant information requested by the NCAA Enforcement Staff, Committee on Infractions or Infractions Appeals Committee during the course of an inquiry.” Further, NCAA Bylaw 32.1.4 – Cooperative Principle, also addresses institutional responsibility to fully cooperate during infractions investigations, stating, in relevant part, “The cooperative principle imposes an affirmative obligation on each institution to assist the enforcement staff in developing full information, to determine whether a possible violation of NCAA legislation has occurred and the details thereof.” The committee determined that the cooperation exhibited by the institution met its obligation under Bylaws 19.01.3.3 and 32.1.4. The cooperation the institution demonstrated in this case must be weighed against the conduct and failures of the institution and its personnel as set forth in Findings B-1-(b), B-6 and B-7. The committee concluded that in light of the serious nature of the violations and the failure of the institution to detect and/or prevent them, the institution’s cooperation did not warrant relief in the penalties imposed by the committee in this case.”

The paragraph from the NCAA’s report regarding USC’s “middle finger to the NCAA”, posted in its entirety:

“institution and its personnel as set forth in Findings B-1-(b), B-6 and B-7. The committee concluded that in light of the serious nature of the violations and the failure of the institution to detect and/or prevent them, the institution’s cooperation did not warrant relief in the penalties imposed by the committee in this case.”

But let’s not let that get in the way of the a good story about mean old USC, right?

Looking forward to beating you the next two years and beyond.