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

[OCBucksFan]

Hey... its only like what? 100ish hours a week for 3 years?

15384 Hours is all that would take, without taxes, 641 days straight!

 

[Dryden]

15384 Hours is all that would take, without taxes, 641 days straight!

Speaking of which (not joking here) the tax evasion charges against the Bush clan will be interesting.

 

[methomps]

Isn't this a violation?


Trojans head coach Pete Carroll, who took reporters' questions as an opportunity to praise his former running back's "impeccable work ethic," said he was unaware the running back was making so much money, adding that he assumed the Hummer limousine in which Bush arrived at practice every day was simply provided by his agent

I don't think its illegal if Reggie only takes it to practice and not anywhere else.

I guess then that neither of us understands. I understand if an athlete is suspended, while still at the university, that that is easy to see as being an "adverse affect". I still do not see how in 2007, saying that you were ineligible for a game in 2005, has that "adverse affect"? Probably because it does not have an adverse affect. If Bush is told tomorrow that he was ineligible for a game in 2005 there is no "adverse affect" towards him, or to put it another way, what would be the adverse affect for him today?

I assume that Bush did something wrong. What needs to be determined is how culpable USC is/was in this. Should they have known? Could they have known? If I were the NCAA, that is what I would be more interested in and that is what I would try to get answered.

On one level, I hope that USC can be determined to have as good control as can be expected and they did nothing wrong. If not, when OSU-USC play next year, we will have to hear the announcers make a 10 second comment about USC issues and then go on for 5 minutes about the OSU issues from the MoC saga .

A ruling that Reggie is ineligible would likely also involve stripping him of statistics from those years and possibly awards. That is where the adverse affect would lie.

Ed Martin gave Chris Webber a "private loan" as well and Michigan got hammered. Nobody is giving anybody a private private loan for that much if they economically challenged. That only works if we are talking about Bush himself. His parents received benefits because of their son...Thats what the rules are against. Any student athlete or parent of a student athlete getting benefits from AGENTS, boosters, or anyone affiliated to the University that a "regular" student athlete could not get.

GMAB Methomps. You know as well as I do that in LA or San diego that you could drive 1/2 a mile or less and go from a great part of town into the ghetto...thats how cities are. Heck I was on Sant Monica Blvd one time and left the ritzy part and drove only a few blocks and there were prostutes and people shooting heroin...That shoots down the same part of town theory in cities that have a million people in their metro area.

If this guy testifies USC is gonna be in big shit and they deserve it. Maybe snoop dog can make a rap about how bad the NCAA is gonna screw them.

Ok, my point was not that Venice is Venice. Your argument that "shouldn't the coaches notice his parents were living it up in LA" loses a bit of steam given that his parents weren't living it up in LA.

The "presumption" should be understood as rebuttable. It's like innocent until proven guilty. That is, of course, one is assumed to have NOT committed a crime until it is shown they did. So, no, actual proof is surely not weaker than a presumption. The presumption is just the starting point, if you will.

This is dead on, and I would only add that simply asking "where is the adverse affect" does not overcome the presumption. It is, in fact, an attempt to flip the presumption, just as saying to a criminal defendant "prove to me you are innocent" flips the presumption of innocence.

 

[3yardsandacloud]

Relax everyone. Take a breath. Count to 10 ... whatever it takes.

I think we all remember how Ohio State was run through the mud because of Maurice Clarett. It's years later and tOSU is still villified around the country even though mountains of evidence (or maybe lack of mountains of evidence) cleared our school and administrators of wrong. Just a kid shooting his mouth off because he believed he was entitled.

Now I'm not happy about the whole thing, but I don't think we should wish the worst for USC simply because we got screwed at the time. Sure I'd like a pound of flesh for the crap we had to endure (and still do endure), but it isn't USC's bill to pay. I'd like to think we of all fans would keep an open mind about the whole situation until solid evidence came to light that either absolved USC of any wrong doing or damned them for the same. I guess the same could be said for Bush.

I certainly can't stop anyone from jumping to conclusions and making judgement calls against USC or Bush, but I'd like to point out that this is EXACTLY what football fans across the country did (and continue to do) during the whole Maurice Clarett saga.

If USC and Bush are clean, then a lot of folks owe them an apology. If they are guilty or corrupt, then throw the book at em. Until then let's not engage in the same behavior that we reviled just a few short years ago.

 

[Dryden]

Relax everyone. Take a breath. Count to 10 ... whatever it takes.

I think we all remember how Ohio State was run through the mud because of Maurice Clarett. It's years later and tOSU is still villified around the country even though mountains of evidence (or maybe lack of mountains of evidence) cleared our school and administrators of wrong. Just a kid shooting his mouth off because he believed he was entitled.

Now I'm not happy about the whole thing, but I don't think we should wish the worst for USC simply because we got screwed at the time. Sure I'd like a pound of flesh for the crap we had to endure (and still do endure), but it isn't USC's bill to pay. I'd like to think we of all fans would keep an open mind about the whole situation until solid evidence came to light that either absolved USC of any wrong doing or damned them for the same. I guess the same could be said for Bush.

Such a buzz kill ...

Step aside, 3yards, we're going after USC and there isn't anything you can do to stop us!!!

 

[Steve19]

Methomps, we can make this discussion on BP go away. Just send us all your recruits and that'll be it. It is within your power to use your influence, as Petey's #1 guy, to make this all go away.

On the other hand, we don't get much of a chance to apply mob justice around here anymore

 

[3yardsandacloud]

Such a buzz kill ...

Step aside, 3yards, we're going after USC and there isn't anything you can do to stop us!!!

OK, but if you even THINK about pelting USC with full cans of beer as they run/walk for cover, then I will be forced to scream "fuck California" ... or something to that effect.

 

[jwinslow]

Steve, that seems a little extreme. Let's just trade cheerleaders for the next decade.

 

[buckiprof]

A ruling that Reggie is ineligible would likely also involve stripping him of statistics from those years and possibly awards. That is where the adverse affect would lie.

Assuming that it does strip him of statistics and awards (while I don't believe that would actually happen), I guess that now, in 2007, that would allow the NO Saints to renegotiate his contract for a smaller amount and recoup signing bonus money? That is the only way I see an adverse affect to him now. Now going forward when his contract with Saints is up, if his market value has declined solely because stats and awrds were stripped, then maybe there is an adverse affect, however, I tend to think NFL GM's would probably determine his market value based upon his performance in the NFL.

Not an issue IMO and not a leg for Bush to stand on, if guilty. If guilty (and USC innocent) it really is too bad that there is no way to punish the truly guilty party. And yes, that is 100% Ty Willingham's fault!

 

[sandgk]

Steve, that seems a little extreme. Let's just trade cheerleaders for the next decade.

Song Girls in Sweater Vests?

:osu:

 

[methomps]

Methomps, we can make this discussion on BP go away. Just send us all your recruits and that'll be it. It is within your power to use your influence, as Petey's #1 guy, to make this all go away.

On the other hand, we don't get much of a chance to apply mob justice around here anymore

No go on the recruits, what about national championships? We can give you the 2001 NC.

Assuming that it does strip him of statistics and awards (while I don't believe that would actually happen), I guess that now, in 2007, that would allow the NO Saints to renegotiate his contract for a smaller amount and recoup signing bonus money? That is the only way I see an adverse affect to him now. Now going forward when his contract with Saints is up, if his market value has declined solely because stats and awrds were stripped, then maybe there is an adverse affect, however, I tend to think NFL GM's would probably determine his market value based upon his performance in the NFL.

Not an issue IMO and not a leg for Bush to stand on, if guilty. If guilty (and USC innocent) it really is too bad that there is no way to punish the truly guilty party. And yes, that is 100% Ty Willingham's fault!

Losing statistics and awards is arguably an adverse affect, in itself. Losing the Heisman would undoubtably be an adverse affect. It doesn't have to just be monetary.

 

[brutus2002]

LA/San Diego does it really matter...you know exactly what I'm talking about. I could give a shit less where the Bush Family lived. All I know is that USC should get f'in death penalty.

 

[sandgk]

LA/San Diego does it really matter...you know exactly what I'm talking about. I could give a shit less where the Bush Family lived. All I know is that USC should get f'in death penalty.

Gee, little over the top there?

If Lake gave to Bush Sr. and Reggie his fast and athletic son, that is one thing.

If USC did know, or should have known about it, that is quite a different matter.

In the first instance USC gets pounded for the sins of one it's own.

In the second instance they get pounded to a greater degree.

In neither instance do they get the death penalty - nor would they deserve it.

 

[bkochmc]

LA/San Diego does it really matter...you know exactly what I'm talking about. I could give a shit less where the Bush Family lived. All I know is that USC should get f'in death penalty.

I sense some hostility from you in this thread... you may want to take these off:



One would think that after the Clarett fiasco Buckeye fans would not rush to accuse an athlete/team of wrongdoing... I guess my assumptions were incorrect.

 

[lvbuckeye]

They would sue for violation of the several provisions of the Calfiornia Business and Professional Code, including:

Section 18897.6 No athlete agent or athlete agent's representative or employee shall, directly or indirectly, offer or provide money or any other thing of benefit or value to a student athlete.


California law provides the following:

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.

that is well and good, but i'm pretty sure that the $280,000 in extra benefits he provided them trumps all that.