• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

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

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
ANALYSIS
Reggie Bush's camp signals willingness to fight on

Recent split from agent Mike Ornstein points to disagreement among Bush's advisors over how to handle allegations he and his family took cash and gifts while he was still playing at USC, sources say.
Halfway through his second season in the NFL, Reggie Bush already ranks among the most recognizable and profitable faces in the league.
For that he owes thanks to Mike Ornstein, the sports marketing agent who guided him to millions of dollars in endorsement contracts for products ranging from sneakers to submarine sandwiches.
Ornstein is also the man Bush fired last week.
"Most athletes hope for a shoe deal and a little something beyond that, but Bush has got it all," one advertising executive said. "I don't know why he would get rid of his agent."
The split suggests something more than a business difference, with numerous sources pointing to a disagreement among Bush's advisors over how to handle allegations that he and his family took cash and gifts while he was still playing at USC.
The principles are not doing much talking but, based on interviews and information gathered over several months, it seems clear that Bush's advisors were split over whether to settle out of court with two would-be San Diego sports marketers who made the allegations.
From the beginning, Bush has denied that he and his family did anything wrong. His tough-talking attorney, David Cornwell, has shown little concern over an NCAA investigation into the matter, focusing instead on a lawsuit that recently arose from the claims.

Entire article: Sign Up
 
Upvote 0
methomps;988650; said:
Subpoena power is the power to compel a person or entity to do something (turn over documents, come appear for an interview, etc). The NCAA is a private association, and thus has no broad power to compel other private people or organizations to do what they say. Now, the NCAA has the power to force its member institutions to do things, but that power is derived from the consent of those organizations who elect to associate with it.

Reggie Bush, Lloyd Lake, and Yahoo! have no association with the NCAA. There is nothing the NCAA can do to compel them to cooperate.

Think of BP as the NCAA. Power-hungry mods and admins can make you comply with our rules, but that power is only derived from your interest in being here. If you choose to walk away and not associate with BP, we have no power to do make you turn over your phone records. We can threaten to ban you, but that is the limit of our power.
Click to expand...

Deety;988651; said:
A subpoena is issued by the legal system to compel someone to appear to give testimony. The NCAA is not part of the legal system and doesn't have that power.

EDIT - Darn you, methomps.
Click to expand...

sandgk;988656; said:
If you are an unwilling witness to a crime and the prosecutors want to know or confirm what you know, then you may likely be the subject of a subpoena.

Basically a subpoena is a a legal instrument by which the authorities may demand that you speak the truth, or suffer a penalty. In fact, that is literally what subpoena means - under penalty.

What flabbergasts those who watch the NCAA from afar is when, what is perceived as the governing body of collegiate athletics, it does not impose penalties on players, coaches, institutions and conferences who refuse to cooperate with NCAA investigations.

What these folks don't understand is that the NCAA is essentially a voluntary house of cards. Which is why the admonishment offered by this article in SI wouldn't really work.

As the investigator quoted in the article notes, most of the time they are able to get the goods they need, in time, without legal authority of a subpoena, or it's business or commercial equivalent.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your explanations guys, but I also have a related question regarding this. If I understand what you are saying correctly, a subponea can only be issued by a government agency. But what of some antitrust cases? I know this is kind of a tangent, but I remember reading something about AMD issuing a subponea to acquire some documents during its antitrust case against Intel a while back. Is antitrust a different categorization for subponeas?
 
Upvote 0
AMD and Intel were in a court case. Thus, within the bounds of the case, as adjudicated by the courts, a subpoenba can be issued. AMD cannot however, without the cover of the case and the courts issue a demand worth any weight to Intel, Microsoft or any other entity.

Where the NCAA falls down is in it's own failure to create immediate penalty toward a school for lack of full disclosure - but that is an entirely different and much lengthier discourse.
 
Upvote 0
ant80;993724; said:
Thank you for your explanations guys, but I also have a related question regarding this. If I understand what you are saying correctly, a subponea can only be issued by a government agency. But what of some antitrust cases? I know this is kind of a tangent, but I remember reading something about AMD issuing a subponea to acquire some documents during its antitrust case against Intel a while back. Is antitrust a different categorization for subponeas?
Click to expand...

In litigation, parties can, to some extent, tap into the power of the court. AMD may be issuing the subpoenas, but it is the backing of the court that gives the subpoenas any power. If you don't answer the subpoena, you answer to the court, not AMD.

Edit: Doh, didn't see sandgk' answer for some reason.
 
Upvote 0
sandgk;993732; said:
AMD and Intel were in a court case. Thus, within the bounds of the case, as adjudicated by the courts, a subpoenba can be issued. AMD cannot however, without the cover of the case and the courts issue a demand worth any weight to Intel, Microsoft or any other entity.

Where the NCAA falls down is in it's own failure to create immediate penalty toward a school for lack of full disclosure - but that is an entirely different and much lengthier discourse.
Click to expand...
methomps;993774; said:
In litigation, parties can, to some extent, tap into the power of the court. AMD may be issuing the subpoenas, but it is the backing of the court that gives the subpoenas any power. If you don't answer the subpoena, you answer to the court, not AMD.

Edit: Doh, didn't see sandgk' answer for some reason.
Click to expand...
In that case, isn't it possible for NCAA to sue either USC or Bush for the documents? What prevents NCAA from doing that? As I understand it, they are the aggrieved party. Incidents such as this may set precedent if not dealt with properly, and they can argue as such. What am I missing?
 
Upvote 0
ant80;994915; said:
In that case, isn't it possible for NCAA to sue either USC or Bush for the documents? What prevents NCAA from doing that? As I understand it, they are the aggrieved party. Incidents such as this may set precedent if not dealt with properly, and they can argue as such. What am I missing?
Click to expand...
Because 1) a lawsuit would set an even worse precedent and 2) the NCAA doesn't have operating cash to be filing lawsuits.

The NCAA is an association of all the 350-some odd member universities to oversee competition and fair-play. NCAA officials are just appointed volunteer members. What you're suggesting - a lawsuit - is effectively stating that the 349 other colleges should sue Southern Cal.

Not going to happen.

The NCAA doesn't 'rule' college athletics in the manner you're thinking. Think of the them as the United Nations. A lot of politics, chest thumping, and hand-wringing, but little ability to actually carry through on anything unless every member is on board, or until a real authority, such as Congress, tells them to do something.
 
Upvote 0
Screw all this UN subterfuge, we all know that methomps is guilty as can be. I don't know what he is guilty of but it is high time he honored our claim that all his recruits are ours.

So, let's just stop pussy-footing around about this.

As Petey's #1 guy, what did you know about this mess methomps? When did you know it? And what possessions do you have that we can attach in our lawsuit?
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top