Indirect defense of USC...via Vols fansite?

I've set up a Google news screener, catching any news on USC, and it caught one from GoVolsXtra, centered on looking at what sort of punishment Tennessee could expect from the NCAA COI.  And of course, no current violations review can go forward without first examining what the NCAA did with USC, which this article did.

The appeals committee's recent decision with the University of Southern California football program to uphold a slew of severe penalties, which included massive scholarship reductions and a two-year postseason ban, did just what [Florida-based lawyer Michael] Buckner predicted. A number of prominent national columnists slammed the NCAA for blatantly "sending a message" at the Trojans' expense, while USC president C. L. Max Nikias said he was concerned that "the historical value of case precedent and the right to fair process in the NCAA adjudicative process" had been "substantially eroded."


"They want to give these committees wide discretion," Buckner said. "It allows them to basically treat the one university differently from another. I don't think that's fair."

It is incomprehensible how the NCAA could possibly state, without equivocation, that no past case could be used in the future, with regards to meting out punishment. First, the NCAA is giving members of the COI, unimpeded abilities to rely on personal bias.  Second, it risks groupthink, particularly if members of that group come from the same background, and are on a genial relationship with one another.

Now, having looked closely at the notice of allegation sent to Tennessee, and going through the decisions (original and the appeal) sent to USC, you will notice that the NCAA COI makes several mistakes and misstates its own rules and falsely assumes facts that are contradicted by its own evidence.  In some cases, these mistakes have little consequence, but in other cases, it breaks the defending institution's ability to receive fair justice, by the NCAA's own bylaws.

So what's the point?

What's the point of following the rules, when you know that the rules aren't followed by the very people who publish them, that you equally risk getting off lightly as you do getting punished severely?

I don't know what the point of the NCAA COI is, anymore.  It gave a bunch of Ohio State players the chance to play in the Sugar Bowl despite being ruled immediately ineligible; it decided that shopping a player around in itself wasn't a violation; and it determined that one player's family possibly getting cash, was worth 30 scholarships for USC.  This new system only encourages individuals and schools to take MORE risks.