Because If You’re Second Best, Why Bother?

Pondering the latest round of violations in the USC football program, involving the trading of shoes, one has to wonder when that proverbial other shoe is going to drop on the mighty Trojans that results in the appropriate probation. Within the last year alone, three players were caught taking money from an agent, numerous others received automatic A’s in a bogus class that they neither attended nor took tests in but remarkably had completed exams supplied to them. Another lied to NCAA investigators when questioned about the class.

Can anyone really be that surprised when the very same head coach who was the one who caused USC to be put on probation in the ‘80s is back? What other school would bring back such a coach?

JIM SCHWEITZER

Brea

*

John Robinson may not be much of a football coach, but the off-field events of the last three years show that he is having a profound effect on the integrity of his “student-athletes.”

As an example, the words of Brian Kelly display the meaning of honesty at USC under Robinson. The young ethicist, when questioned on whether he knew that trading school property for store credit was illegal, offered the following proof of ignorance as his defense: “I didn’t know it was a violation. If I had, I wouldn’t have given them my name, phone number and address. . . .”

If spoken by anyone but a Trojan, I would think it is a joke.

TIM McOSKER

Los Angeles

*

As a UCLA graduate and staunch Bruin fan, the sullied honor of USC football players is something I always enjoy hearing about. So it was with great joy that I read the article about USC’s latest NCAA violation (“Four Trojans Suspended for Trading In Free Shoes,” Oct. 1). I anticipated some horrific incident that supported my most vicious stereotypes about my lifelong rival.

However, hearing that four players were suspended for trading in their Nike-donated shoes for better models did not quench my blood lust. In fact, it struck me as absurd.

I understand that the “extra-benefits” rule these kids broke exists for a good reason; it presumably prevents them from receiving extra benefits like a new Mercedes. But why does the almighty NCAA decide that some types of extra benefits are legitimate while others are a sin? Who decides that one pair of shoes from Nike is absolutely fine to receive as a gift, while another pair is worthy of a single-game suspension?

JEFFREY SHORE

Los Angeles