USC’s change probably won’t help appeal

USC’s athletic program has a new lineup from the one that produced enough rules violations to prompt major penalties from the NCAA.

Football coach Pete Carroll is gone. Heisman Trophy-winning tailback Reggie Bush and his position coach, Todd McNair, are too. So is men’s basketball coach Tim Floyd and his star guard, O.J. Mayo.

And on Tuesday, Mike Garrett joined the list.

Max Nikias announced that his first move as incoming university president would be to replace the longtime athletic director with former Trojans quarterback Pat Haden.

The change comes as the university is preparing a case to be heard by the NCAA Infractions Appeals Committee, which USC hopes will lessen penalties that were levied against the football team in June after a four-year investigation.

Nikias also unveiled plans to beef up an area the NCAA slammed in its report on USC: the school’s compliance office, which has oversight that the university’s sports programs are operating within college rules.

USC plans to have a compliance office staff of nine by the end of next month, which would be among the nation’s largest such departments. The NCAA, in its infractions report, found that while the violations were occurring USC’s office had either one or two officers monitoring all of the Trojans’ programs.

But will these fixes help USC’s appeal? Probably not. Why? Because they can’t be included in its case.

“They can’t look at any new information,” NCAA spokeswoman Stacy Osburn said. “So what is in front of the appeals committee is going to be what was in front of the Committee on Infractions.”

The infractions committee heard the NCAA’s case against USC over three days in February, and decided on a two-year postseason ban, reducing 30 scholarships over three years, 14 vacated wins and four years’ probation.

Not long after, USC requested the appeals committee “overturn certain findings” and reduce other penalties. Specifically, USC aimed to cut in half the bowl ban and scholarship losses.

Because the changes to USC’s compliance office will take place after the fact, they mark a statement move for Nikias, who takes over as university president on Aug. 3, said Michael Buckner, a Florida-based attorney and private investigator who has worked through multiple NCAA appeals cases.

“I think it’s smart for him to do this,” Buckner said. “I think it’s one of the best things USC has done during this investigation.”

Had Carroll, who left on his own in January to coach the NFL’s Seattle Seahawks, McNair and Garrett all been gone by the time USC filed its response to the NCAA’s Notice of Allegations in December, would things have been different?

“We will never know,” Buckner said. “However, it would have provided evidence to the Committee on Infractions that USC finally got it, that they were finally serious about the investigation and the allegations, and that they were serious about making changes.”

Recent history suggests USC’s chances on appeal aren’t very good anyway.

In January 2008, the NCAA changed a bylaw so that an appeal will be granted only if the school shows “the penalty is excessive such that it constitutes an abuse of discretion” by the infractions committee. Only one in 11 appeals has been successful since that change in language.

Buckner, a USC alumnus, represented Alabama State, the only school that was successful on an appeal since the bylaw was changed. He said USC’s loss of scholarships is the only penalty that might be overturned.

In a news release announcing its appeal, USC called the penalties “too severe” and “inconsistent with precedent.” Alabama received similar penalties in 2002, when Crimson Tide boosters were found to be paying players. The program received five years’ probation, a two-year bowl ban, and the loss of 21 scholarships over three seasons.

USC’s football violation involved Bush and his family members receiving extra benefits from would-be sports agents.

baxter.holmes@latimes.com