In response to Mike's posting:  I apologize for not posting the information on
Wisconsin's punishment for the Derksen - Macdonald housing situation.  I had
assumed somebody would beat me to the punch and then I forgot about it.
 
It really hasn't gotten much press in Madison.  Apparently, the two players paid
$100/month each for rent.  The NC$$ determined they should have paid closer to
$300.  I assume the NC$$ is saying the Wisconsin booster was giving the athletes
a deal because they were athletes.  I take this decision to mean that at no time
can an athlete pay a rent lower than the fair market value.  This is regardless
of whether the landlord is an official booster.  As far as I can tell, just
about every person in Madison is a fan of the Wisconsin hockey team.  Therefore,
any rent lower than the fair market value could be construed as a deal for
athlete's only.
 
I agree that $100 is too little for monthly ment.  I don't know that $300 is
fair, though.  I have paid rent in Madison for many years and $300 is the most
I've ever paid.  And that was to live in a house.  The total value of missed
rent according to the NC$$ is $200/month/player for 9 months, or $3600.
 
Now on to the punishment:  The NC$$ says that $3600 in missed rent(no recruiting
violation, no eligibility problems) is worthy of foreiting the whole season.
 
Several Issues:
    If Wisconsin's opponents can opt to accept a forfeit for every game of the
season, if all forfeits are accepted, how does one explain that Wisconsin lost
in the first round of the playoffs, advanced to the second round, lost and
advanced, etc.  Bizarre.
 
    Is hockey the only sport that the NC$$ reaches into the past to punish?
(Maine's Tory)  If the Washington Huskies football star Hobert accepted a
$50,000 illegal loan and they were put on probation, how does a $3600
discrepancy in rent warrant a forfeiture of a season?  There seams to be
different standards across the sports spectrum.
 
 
I have not heard a thing whether any forfeits have been accepted.  I am not
defending anything that UW did.  They should have known better.  It seems to me
probation with no NC$$ tournament is more appropriate than retro-punishment.
Maybe the NC$$ saw how bad the Badgers are playing and figured that they aren't
going to the NC$$ tournament so the only punishment that would have any effect
would be going back to the 1992 season.
 
Bob Mayville
Madison, WI