Mike Williams - Thrown for a loss
Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2004 11:35 pmYour point is well taken; but we're dealing with two different sets of rules - the NFL's and the NCAA's. Unfortunately for Williams, he has lost on both counts.
The NFL eligibility issue (Clarett v. NFL) has already been thoroughly addressed in this forum and others. As for the NCAA eligibility question: Even though Williams did nothing to violate the law, Williams broke NCAA rules on amateurism in two different ways - i) he hired and agent and accepted benefits from that agent; and, ii) he lost his academic eligibility by not passing the requisite number of semester hours (recently changed to 6 hours per semester). While Williams claims that he has documented the return of the money that he had accepted from the agent and other endorsements (allegedly, over $100,000) in his waiver request to the NCAA and he had enrolled in and attended summer school courses to try to get back on track with the academic progress rules, the simple fact is he knew what the rules were (can't sign with an agent/must maintain academic progress) and he broke them. So, the NCAA is taking the position that it can't set the precedent of restoring his eligibility just because things didn't turn out the way he had hoped.
The NCAA press release on the issue said that Williams had the obvious intent of relinquishing his NCAA eligibility, he knew that there was a risk that the Clarett ruling would be appealed by the NFL and that the ruling could be overturned. Even so, he still hired an agent, accepted benefits from that agent, entered into an endorsement agreement and dropped out of school. The NCAA's position was that you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube. You knew what the rules were and you made the conscious decision to break them; so, now you get to bear the consequences of those actions. (You've heard me preach that sermon on other occasions; so I guess I can't go back on that now). They also didn't want to take the chance of someone else down the road trying to do the same thing just because they didn't get drafted high enough or some other similar reason (at least in football). The NCAA took great pains to state that there were two separate eligibility committees that reviewed the issue - academic and loss of amateur status - and that both committees denied the reinstatement request. USC has the opportunity to appeal the decision; but has already said that they considered the matter closed.
Now, with all that said, just because the NCAA decided that this would be the circumstance in which it would stick to the letter of its rules, that doesn't mean that it was the fair thing to do. True, Williams knew the rules, knew that he was taking a risk and made the decision to take his chances anyway; however, he did everything he could to try to "right the wrong" and received little or no credit for that extra effort. Again, I'm a big believer in personal responsibility; but, its just a shame to see a guy that is, by all reports, a class act get the short end just for taking advantage of newly-presented, "newly-legally-available" opportunities that were just as quickly taken away. At the same time, its just fine for Miami frosh Willie Williams to play even though he has an arrest record longer than your arm (or his, for that matter). Sometimes, it just doesn't seem right. By the way, has anyone heard from Maurice Clarett lately?
www.glazerlaw.com
The NFL eligibility issue (Clarett v. NFL) has already been thoroughly addressed in this forum and others. As for the NCAA eligibility question: Even though Williams did nothing to violate the law, Williams broke NCAA rules on amateurism in two different ways - i) he hired and agent and accepted benefits from that agent; and, ii) he lost his academic eligibility by not passing the requisite number of semester hours (recently changed to 6 hours per semester). While Williams claims that he has documented the return of the money that he had accepted from the agent and other endorsements (allegedly, over $100,000) in his waiver request to the NCAA and he had enrolled in and attended summer school courses to try to get back on track with the academic progress rules, the simple fact is he knew what the rules were (can't sign with an agent/must maintain academic progress) and he broke them. So, the NCAA is taking the position that it can't set the precedent of restoring his eligibility just because things didn't turn out the way he had hoped.
The NCAA press release on the issue said that Williams had the obvious intent of relinquishing his NCAA eligibility, he knew that there was a risk that the Clarett ruling would be appealed by the NFL and that the ruling could be overturned. Even so, he still hired an agent, accepted benefits from that agent, entered into an endorsement agreement and dropped out of school. The NCAA's position was that you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube. You knew what the rules were and you made the conscious decision to break them; so, now you get to bear the consequences of those actions. (You've heard me preach that sermon on other occasions; so I guess I can't go back on that now). They also didn't want to take the chance of someone else down the road trying to do the same thing just because they didn't get drafted high enough or some other similar reason (at least in football). The NCAA took great pains to state that there were two separate eligibility committees that reviewed the issue - academic and loss of amateur status - and that both committees denied the reinstatement request. USC has the opportunity to appeal the decision; but has already said that they considered the matter closed.
Now, with all that said, just because the NCAA decided that this would be the circumstance in which it would stick to the letter of its rules, that doesn't mean that it was the fair thing to do. True, Williams knew the rules, knew that he was taking a risk and made the decision to take his chances anyway; however, he did everything he could to try to "right the wrong" and received little or no credit for that extra effort. Again, I'm a big believer in personal responsibility; but, its just a shame to see a guy that is, by all reports, a class act get the short end just for taking advantage of newly-presented, "newly-legally-available" opportunities that were just as quickly taken away. At the same time, its just fine for Miami frosh Willie Williams to play even though he has an arrest record longer than your arm (or his, for that matter). Sometimes, it just doesn't seem right. By the way, has anyone heard from Maurice Clarett lately?
www.glazerlaw.com