NCAA ruling leaves USC disappointed, determined

If the NCAA has found USC guilty and has denied the appeal, then the only logical step is to strip them of the championship. Reggie Bush has already given back the Heisman trophy. They were already banned from post season play and had lost some scholarships. In my opinion, it is time for the NCAA to move on to something else like giving college atheletes a stipend.

USC temporarily changed its motto Thursday to "move on."
That was the prevailing sentiment in and around Heritage Hall after the NCAA's denial of the school's appeal became official.

But it isn't that simple. The football program still must deal with that decision's consequences, which include a postseason ban for 2011; 30 lost scholarships over three years, starting in 2012; and the prospect of any senior on the roster transferring without having to sit out a season.
"We have been operating with these sanctions for a year now and have felt their effects on multiple fronts," USC coach Lane Kiffin said. "We will continue to execute the plan we have in place to make the most of the hand with which we have been dealt."

One thing is certain about the immediate future: USC will not sue the NCAA despite disagreeing with its decision.

"Believe me, the university has considered all the alternatives," USC athletic director Pat Haden said. "We are not going to do that."

Still, Haden and university president C.L. Max Nikias expressed frustration over the process by which the NCAA enforces its rules and handles appeals.

USC sought to have its postseason ban and scholarship reductions halved by arguing that the penalties were excessive and that the NCAA's Committee on Infractions (COI) abused its discretion. The school based much of its appeal on precedents, citing numerous other schools that received lesser sanctions for what USC argued were equal or worse violations.

Those arguments proved unsuccessful, as the Infractions Appeals Committee (IAC) unilaterally rejected USC's claims. The IAC did consider prior cases but stated in its report that the COI is allowed to use latitude to determine penalties on a case-by-case basis.

Read more at source