Reggie Bush

[huskerpony]

Everyone needs to try and catch a re-airing of the Bryant Gumball Real Sports from this week. A really lame thing about drinking at NFL games, followed by the Reggie Bush saga. It's HBO, I'm sure it will be on 40 times this week.

Sounds like it's real. Also sounds like it was primarily run through his step-father. This family issue is an all too real problem that I unfortunately have a lot of personal experience with. If the NCAA has any balls, they should bring the hammer down on USC. (As SMU fans, no one should have much argument with that.) I know that boosters and agents are in a totally different ballpark, and in no way am I suggesting that USC should lose anything close to losing their program--Pete Carroll obviously has little to no fault in this--but this is happening all over the country, and this is the one story that is active in the news and has actual evidence.

As tired as I am of USC, I actually don't dislike them that much and really respect Pete Carroll. However, I see no better solution to this than cracking down on the dynasty (even minorly) to put the fear of god into coaching staffs around the country. It won't stop it, but it will curb it to some extent. A huge education/family outreach program probably needs to be instituted by the NCAA as well.

Bush should definitely lose his heisman, even if just as an example.

[Junior]

I agree with you 100%.

But it will never happen

[smu diamond m]

I agree with you 100%.

But it will never happen

Especially since all the boosters of the cheating schools sit back and go,"we would never cheat, go catch the cheaters!" What a coinidence that those schools are the NCAA money makers...

Not that everyone didnt know that.

[Walter Sobchak]

Bush should definitely lose his heisman, even if just as an example.

Wouldn't that be up to the Heisman committee of the Downtown Athletic Club to decide? If so, what do people think they'd do? Give it to the 2nd-place vote getter (Vince Young)? Vacate the trophy for 2004?

Personally, I don't think they'd ever strip it. If they did, they'd have to take Leinart's from 2003, too.

[J.T.supporta]

Bush should definitely lose his heisman, even if just as an example.

Wouldn't that be up to the Heisman committee of the Downtown Athletic Club to decide? If so, what do people think they'd do? Give it to the 2nd-place vote getter (Vince Young)? Vacate the trophy for 2004?

Personally, I don't think they'd ever strip it. If they did, they'd have to take Leinart's from 2003, too.

why would they have to take ML too?

[EastStang]

I'd love to see USC get hammered for this. But they won't. Instead the NCAA will punish Utah for calling itself the Utes.

[Junior]

If they did, they'd have to take Leinart's from 2003, too.

why? leinart and his family didn't take any money?

[Walter Sobchak]

Bush should definitely lose his heisman, even if just as an example.

Wouldn't that be up to the Heisman committee of the Downtown Athletic Club to decide? If so, what do people think they'd do? Give it to the 2nd-place vote getter (Vince Young)? Vacate the trophy for 2004?

Personally, I don't think they'd ever strip it. If they did, they'd have to take Leinart's from 2003, too.

why would they have to take ML too?

Bush was the team MVP that year, with over 2,300 all-purpose yards. Leinart's good, but I doubt he ends up with the Heisman w/o Bush's contributions and the attention Bush received (I know, I know...TWSS).

If Leinart was found to have put up those stats with the help of an ineligible player, I think they'd have to look at whether he should keep the trophy. It isn't fair to Leinart, but having a national title and an undefeated season taken away isn't fair to the other 84 guys who weren't ineligible either.

[Stallion]

It will not happen because under NCAA rules the school may not be responsible for the conduct of such third parties. The NCAA wants no part in tying and making universities responsible for the actions of agents and third parties who are not representatives of the universities. Its a Pandora's Box best left unopened. You would see some big lawsuits against the NCAA too which they would probably lose if they could not establish the third parties were representatives of the university under basic agency law. The NCAA rule book would have to be completely re-written too.

[J.T.supporta]

Bush should definitely lose his heisman, even if just as an example.

Wouldn't that be up to the Heisman committee of the Downtown Athletic Club to decide? If so, what do people think they'd do? Give it to the 2nd-place vote getter (Vince Young)? Vacate the trophy for 2004?

Personally, I don't think they'd ever strip it. If they did, they'd have to take Leinart's from 2003, too.

why would they have to take ML too?

Bush was the team MVP that year, with over 2,300 all-purpose yards. Leinart's good, but I doubt he ends up with the Heisman w/o Bush's contributions and the attention Bush received (I know, I know...TWSS).

If Leinart was found to have put up those stats with the help of an ineligible player, I think they'd have to look at whether he should keep the trophy. It isn't fair to Leinart, but having a national title and an undefeated season taken away isn't fair to the other 84 guys who weren't ineligible either.

thanks for the opinion but thats all "what ifs" and they wouldnt take away MLs stiff arm....sorry but that wont happen

[D1Football]

Not sure why USC should be punished for under the table dealings between Bush and the bridge to the NFL.

Normally schools get in trouble for money/perks to high school kids to play for their college. Bush was enrolled with USC way before he became a hot NFL commodity.

[huskerpony]

As the person who started this thread, let me say, I am definitely torn. I doubt that USC or Carroll were involved in any way. Most likely scenario, they heard speculation, but couldn't prove it. It's almost identical to what happened with Lawrence Phillips (the agent part, not beating his girlfriend.) With LP, they just never had any solid evidence.

I honestly don't know what the solution is. Do you punish a program that is relatively innocent? Or do you allow a really bad situation to continue? (In my opinion, what is happening with these kids and the agents is way worse than boosters giving money to the players, but it just makes it really difficult to know who to crack down on.) Making an example out of USC would send a message to coaches that they need to be on top of their players trying to prevent stuff like this.

I really don't think that would be fair to USC, but this is a big problem. It involves the players, agents preying on them before they have any idea what they are getting themselves into, their families are often highly involved and on the take, and there is no easy solution. The NCAA really needs to work on an outreach program to these players that teaches them how to deal with future representation.

[Samurai Stang]

I honestly don't know what the solution is. Do you punish a program that is relatively innocent?

Yes, you do. The program is always responsible and your call for its innocence is incorrect. If the program is not always responsible, could not all alumni go about spending millions of yen? Whether or not the coaching staff is aware of any payments that are made, the fact remains that their players are being paid. It is the responsibility of the coaching staff and the athletic department to prevent such occurrences from happening, and to excuse this lack of duty is to invite disaster.

[huskerpony]

I honestly don't know what the solution is. Do you punish a program that is relatively innocent?

Yes, you do. The program is always responsible and your call for its innocence is incorrect. If the program is not always responsible, could not all alumni go about spending millions of yen? Whether or not the coaching staff is aware of any payments that are made, the fact remains that their players are being paid. It is the responsibility of the coaching staff and the athletic department to prevent such occurrences from happening, and to excuse this lack of duty is to invite disaster.

I find it hard to disagree with that, which was basically my point in the first place. I personally think the NCAA needs to grow a pair and take some action here.

I also am aware from personal experience that the program leaders can't always prove that this is occurring, despite their best efforts. It is a really hard call for a coach to take a 20 year old kid's livelihood away from him just because they are "pretty sure" he's got an agent. Hence the difficulty of the situation.

[Big Hoss]

Wouldn't some of this type of stuff be alleviated just a bit if a college athlete were allowed to make some kind of money during his time in school? The fact that they aren't even allowed to have jobs during the school year coupled with the fact that some of these kids come from very poor backgrounds helps to create situations where a young, impressionable kid is easily swayed to make a bad decision.

I realize some of this stuff goes way beyond that, but the rules and regs need to be updated a bit.