NCAA punishes USC - Reggie Bush, OJ Mayo, Dwayne Jarrett, Joe McKnight investigation

[BB73]

But what does it matter to Lake whether USC loses games or Bush his Heisman? Is it worth being forced to pay punitive damages and attorney fees to Bush? Lake has two options:

Option A: Give the goods to the NCAA and be sued for several hundred thousand dollars

Option B: Say nothing, settle for some amount with Bush, and walk away.

I can't imagine the NCAA saying, "tell us the truth, and if you get sued because of it, we'll pay the amount for which you're liable", but it may be the only way they ever get their hands on the evidence.

It just seems so wrong that Bush is able to buy himself out of trouble for himself/USC.

 

[sandgk]

The code covers that, too:

? 18895.2. Definitions

(b)(1) "Athlete agent" means any person who, directly or indirectly, recruits or solicits an athlete to enter into any agent contract, endorsement contract, financial services contract, or professional sports services contract, or for compensation procures, offers, promises, attempts, or negotiates to obtain employment for any person with a professional sports team or organization or as a professional athlete.

OK, thanks for clarifying - then the predicate of my response above applies - there is more at stake here than mere dollars and cents.

 

[methomps]

I wonder if a school could be estopped from bringing suit if they encouraged and/or turned a blind agent contact with student athletes. That would be the logical result in most states, but then again, we're talking about California here.

Turning a blind eye to agent contact is an NCAA sin, not a legal violation. Besides, these agents are from San Diego and contacted Bush's family in San Diego.

As for encouraging agent contact, that is flatly against USC's interests ("Come, convince all our star athletes to leave school early!").

That is my point in rebuttal. that the cost to Bush is infinitismally larger than anything he could recoup from lake. How would you like to be known as the man who brought down USC?

Maybe you would (although I doubt at the cost of everything you own), but I've seen nothing to suggest he cares about anything other than money. His lawyer has been quoted as saying this is just about business.

 

[jwinslow]

B.B. he's talking about Lake.

Turning a blind eye to agent contact is an NCAA sin, not a legal violation. Besides, these agents are from San Diego and contacted Bush's family in San Diego.

All of this was done via phone/email? They were not involved at USC at all?

Bush told us his family did not have much money, and fell behind in their rent payments. If they don't have money, you'd think USC might notice when Reggie was able to live life about 25-50k richer per year.

As for encouraging agent contact, that is flatly against USC's interests ("Come, convince all our star athletes to leave school early!").

They may not have wished to facilitate the agent contacts, but Petey's open & bigshot fraternizing led to some potential agent representation in the past.

 

[buckiprof]

Cal.Bus. & Prof.Code Section 18897.8
(a) Any professional athlete, or any student athlete, or any elementary or secondary school, college, university, or other educational institution, or any league, conference, association, or federation of the preceding educational institutions, or any other person may bring a civil action for recovery of damages from an athlete agent, if that professional athlete, that student athlete, that institution, any member of that league, conference, association, or federation, or that other person is adversely affected by the acts of the athlete agent or of the athlete agent's representative or employee in violation of this chapter. A student athlete is presumed to be adversely affected by the acts of an athlete agent, representative or employee in violation of this chapter if, because of those acts, the student athlete is suspended or disqualified from participation in one or more interscholastic or intercollegiate sports events by or pursuant to the rules of a state or national federation or association for the promotion and regulation of interscholastic or intercollegiate sports, or suffers financial damage, or suffers both suspension or disqualification and financial damage. An educational institution is presumed to be adversely affected by the acts of an athlete agent or of an athlete agent's representative or employee in violation of this chapter if, because of those acts, the educational institution, or one or more student athletes admitted to or enrolled in the educational institution, is suspended or disqualified from participation in one or more interscholastic or intercollegiate athletic events by or pursuant to the rules of a state or national federation or association for the promotion and regulation of interscholastic or intercollegiate sports, or suffers financial damage, or suffers both suspension or disqualification and financial damage.

(b) A plaintiff that prevails in a civil action brought under this section may recover actual damages, or fifty thousand dollars ($50,000), whichever is higher; punitive damages; court costs; and reasonable attorney's fees. An athlete agent found liable under this section also shall forfeit any right of repayment for anything of benefit or value provided to a student athlete, and shall refund any consideration paid to that athlete agent by or on behalf of the student athlete.


(c) It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this section to encourage enforcement of this chapter through private civil actions.

I don't have a dog in this fight directly (USC, Bush, etc.), so my interst in this has been marginal. If USC/Bush did wrong, there should be a price to pay, period.

So you have to help me here Thomps with the above, first with Bush suing. How can Bush bring a civil suit? How is he adversely affected? He can't be suspended or disqualified (2 items stipulated as presuming adversely affected)? How could USC bring a suit since Bush cannot be suspended or disqualified?

 

[methomps]

All of this was done via phone/email? They were not involved at USC at all?

Bush's family lived in San Diego. Michaels lived in San Diego. I don't know where Lake was incarcerated at the time, but it was nowhere near USC's campus.

Bush told us his family did not have much money, and fell behind in their rent payments. If they don't have money, you'd think USC might notice when Reggie was able to live life about 25-50k richer per year.

What would USC notice?

They may not have wished to facilitate the agent contacts, but Petey's open & bigshot fraternizing led to some potential agent representation in the past.

Pete Carroll reached out to the NFLPA to get them to regulate agent contact with college athletes. And again, NCAA sin is not legal sin.

 

[buck e]

Turning a blind eye to agent contact is an NCAA sin, not a legal violation. Besides, these agents are from San Diego and contacted Bush's family in San Diego.

If members of the USC staff knew or should have known of any wrongdoing on the part of Bush and this Lake guy and didn't report it or failed to exercise due diligence, USC could very easily be precluded from later on saying they were damaged four to five years after it SHOULD have been dealt with. I'm not saying that is what happened, but if it did, I don't see how USC prevails in a lawsuit. Does USC really want to go under that microscope? Because its absolutely a valid defense that Lake could raise.

 

[jwinslow]

Bush's family lived in San Diego. Michaels lived in San Diego. I don't know where Lake was incarcerated at the time, but it was nowhere near USC's campus.

Is Yahoo talking about different people here? Are these those who already went silent? I have trouble keeping these slimeballs separate, is Lake not affiliated with New Era?
Yahoo
LOS ANGELES – The would-be agents who provided the house, the money for the tricked-out car, the luxury hotel rooms and the tens of thousands in cash used to roll right into the Southern California locker room after the game, right past security, to meet and greet the triumphant Trojans.

Obviously this is not verified, but if this is the type of thing Lake is offering to the NCAA (if he's not paid off first), then it seems to suggest this was well within USC's view.

LOS ANGELES – The would-be agents who provided the house, the money for the tricked-out car, the luxury hotel rooms and the tens of thousands in cash used to roll right into the Southern California locker room after the game, right past security, to meet and greet the triumphant Trojans.

The car listed above?

Pete Carroll reached out to the NFLPA to get them to regulate agent contact with college athletes. And again, NCAA sin is not legal sin.

Did he do that in 01? Or when his open culture released pandora's box? That's what I was arguing, that they opened the box... not that they wanted what transpired. I understand that sin difference, I am more debating this from an NCAA ethical standpoint.

 

[methomps]

If members of the USC staff knew or should have known of any wrongdoing on the part of Bush and this Lake guy and didn't report it or failed to exercise due diligence, USC could very easily be precluded from later on saying they were damaged four to five years after it SHOULD have been dealt with. I'm not saying that is what happened, but if it did, I don't see how USC prevails in a lawsuit. Does USC really want to go under that microscope? Because its absolutely a valid defense that Lake could raise.

Valid defense according to who? Again, just because the NCAA holds an institution to a certain standard doesn't mean the law does. And again, where is the evidence that USC knew or should've known?

I don't have a dog in this fight directly (USC, Bush, etc.), so my interst in this has been marginal. If USC/Bush did wrong, there should be a price to pay, period.

So you have to help me here Thomps with the above, first with Bush suing. How can Bush bring a civil suit? How is he adversely affected? He can't be suspended or disqualified (2 items stipulated as presuming adversely affected)? How could USC bring a suit since Bush cannot be suspended or disqualified?

If Bush is found to have received compensation from Lake, the NCAA would rule him ineligible from the point he first took the benefits. Ineligible and disqualified are synonymous.

 

[buckiprof]

If Bush is found to have received compensation from Lake, the NCAA would rule him ineligible from the point he first took the benefits. Ineligible and disqualified are synonymous.

I guess I kinda assumed that, but how does that adversely affect Bush now?

 

[OCBucksFan]

I guess I kinda assumed that, but how does that adversely affect Bush now?

I am kind of curious about this too, I mean does he care that much what happens to USC? He probably could have put this to rest with a suitcase full of cash last year yet he's just ignored the problem.

 

[Jaxbuck]

If Bush is found to have received compensation from Lake, the NCAA would rule him ineligible from the point he first took the benefits. Ineligible and disqualified are synonymous.

We should start a Vbet to see if CW gets his first big win via NCAA infractions penalties(USC 2005) or actually beats someone good on the field.

 

[methomps]

I guess I kinda assumed that, but how does that adversely affect Bush now?

The statute provides that an athlete is presumed to be adversely affected if that happens. He wouldn't have to show any other proof.

 

[buck e]

Valid defense according to who? Again, just because the NCAA holds an institution to a certain standard doesn't mean the law does. And again, where is the evidence that USC knew or should've known?

Note the part of my post where I wrote: I'm not saying that is what happened, but if it did, I don't see how USC prevails in a lawsuit.

Oh, and perhaps a legal definition will help explain what I am talking about:

Unclean Hands One of the maxims of equity embodying the principle that a party seeking redress in a court of equity (equitable relief) must not have done any dishonest or unethical act in the transaction upon which he or she maintains the action in equity, since a court of conscience will not grant relief to one guilty of unconscionable conduct, i.e., to one with "unclean hands." See 171 A. 738, 749. Compare clean hands. McClintock, Handbook of the Principles of Equity ?26 (2d ed. 1948).

Translate: IF the stories are true about agents having free and open access to players in the locker room, and the staff knew or should have known players were receiving improper benefits from someone like Lake and turned a blind eye to it, they will have a hard time prevailing against Lake years later under the statute you cited (no matter how one-sided it is written). Again, I said IF that is what happened.

 

[buckiprof]

The statute provides that an athlete is presumed to be adversely affected if that happens. He wouldn't have to show any other proof.

I get that, but again how does that adversely affect Bush now? I really don't think that saying, "I was disqualified from playing/suspended from playing all those games back in 2005." is adversely affecting Bush in 2007, a 2nd year professional who has no eligibility left.