As the NCAA Committee on Infractions decides USC’s punishment, will it continue its recent trend of “vacating” victories as its primary form of penalty? The idea behind vacating wins is that it punishes those involved in the infractions (i.e. Reggie Bush) instead of hurting athletes like Matt Barkley who were not around during the violations.
Sounds logical. Alabama lost 21 victories between 2005-07 for using ineligible athletes as the penalty for major violations. But the Bush case received much more publicity than Alabama. So the question is whether vacating records would be enough? It’s considered a progressive form of punishment, so will the NCAA “go regressive” when it decides USC’s case? That’s the key question right now.