PFT: Bush Had Agreement With New Era? (1 Viewer)

[JAA]

The mortgage on a house like this is something in the neighborhood of $5,000+ per month, so I would expect the "rent" to be a bit more than that per month (i.e., $6000).  And that does not include the cost of the utilities.  Granted I don't live in SoCal, but that seems like a lott of cash for a teacher and a corrections officer.  If not, i gotta move out to SoCal and become a corrections officer.

In most places in CA right now, rents are significantly lower than mortgage payments, as low as 50% of the mortgage in some cases.

Funny you mention that, I did just hear that for the firs time in recent history it is cheaper to rent in CA that buy. If the rent was well within the norm for the area, sure he can be found innocent. However, still way to many coicedences here.

 

[CalBear]

I understand that sentiment, but I do not see how that plays a role in how houses, single family homes are rented for 50% of a mortgage payment.

On the East Coast, from what I have gleaned from others in the biz, most people who buy a house as an investment, mortgage the thing for 15 years and rent it out to cover that payment.

Now depending on when the property was purchased and what that purchased price was, that could impact the mortgage payment and ultimately what is needed in return for rent...

But a brand new house, built and then rented/leased - that's got to be a decent monthly payment for the person renting when compared to other similiar properties in the market place.

The rental market is more elastic than the purchasing market; if occupancy rates are low, the house sits empty until the rent gets reduced enough. Here's an example, a 4BR hilltop rental in Spring Valley available for $1875; the mortgage on Michael Michael's $750K house is likely double that.

 

[Wilbur Wood]

Not saying Reggie is innocent, but a couple of comments:

#1 This country is in the midst of a wild "speculative bubble" in real estate values. This is best evidenced by examining the ratio of "house values" to "rent values". These ratios are at record highs and in the view of many are not sustainable. Rent levels are well below related mortgage levels in most areas of the country that have experienced real estate appreciation over the past decade.

#2 Is the more "interesting issue". Hypothetically, say that a "Marketing Company" starts "courting" the parents of a college star. The athlete is not brought into the "loop" of any of these arrangements. In fact, a guy like Bush has had folks chasing after him on a 24/7 basis for 2 years. As long as he himself doesn't accept "cash" , " cars", etc, he assumes that he's kept himself "clean". Is it reasonable to expect that such a player while at college would reasonably "audit" (and most of these guys aren't business majors) every type of car lease, house lease, etc that their parents have independently entered into? My answer is NO. I do not know (or really terribly care) as to the official NCAA position in this area. Kansas University offered Danny Manning's dad a job to help entice Danny to go to KU. I don't know how explicit New Era was with Mr and Mrs Bush, but if they were smart they would have employed the right level of "vagueness" or lack of "linkage" between the house lease and Reggie. Using someone else's math on an earlier post, let's say that the mortgage payment on this house was $5,000/month and let's that at least some rental levels in this market would support a 50% lease factor ($2,500 per month). Could the Bush's afford $2,500 per month? I don't know. Let's say that they were given a sweetheart deal of $1,500 a month without Reggie knowing the particulars. Over 1 year that's a total of a whopping $12,000 (~ the cost of 3 West Coast business trips for east coast marketeer to pursue a hot "west coast" property).

I'm not saying that the fact pattern is exactly like I've layed out in #2 above, but it could be and if New Era was "smart" about it it probably is pretty close. Unless there is a lot more to this story than above, this should not be a major NCAA transgression (did USC even know?, should USC "audit" every job offer or transaction entered into by every athletes parents to assure "arms length" dealings?)

For someone to say that the character flaws inherent in this type of situation are similar to the baggage that a Randy Moss, Chris Henry, Onterrio Smith brought into the NFL is ludicrous.

 

[Family Matters]

The mortgage on a house like this is something in the neighborhood of $5,000+ per month, so I would expect the "rent" to be a bit more than that per month (i.e., $6000).  And that does not include the cost of the utilities.  Granted I don't live in SoCal, but that seems like a lott of cash for a teacher and a corrections officer.  If not, i gotta move out to SoCal and become a corrections officer.

In most places in CA right now, rents are significantly lower than mortgage payments, as low as 50% of the mortgage in some cases.

IOW-it's a bigger benefit to allow them to rent at below morgage rate cost than to help them but it. Better cash flow for the family. I would love a deal like that. Pay half of what it costs to buy the home. That's pretty sweet IMO.Edit: its also less paper trail because no loan is involved.

 

[Family Matters]

...

The point is that Bush was complicit in accepting compensation from a promoter when he knew it was wrong.  As an NFL GM, that makes him someone I'd be very leery of.  Eventually he'll may try to screw me & my team over if this is his mindset - that the rules don't apply to him, that he places his own well being above that of the team and will engage in behavior he knows to be wrong to further his own ends.

I'd much rather deal with a college kid busted for pot during his sophomore year than to take a risk on a kid who did what Bush allegedly did, if in fact I knew it to be true.

As an NFL GM, I'd think that probably made him fit in with at least 50% of the other players already on my NFL team. Only difference would be, he got caught.Or is it just cynicism on my part to believe that a lot of the starters at major programs have received something from a booster that if known would in fact violate NCAA rules? Maybe not something major like a car or house, but a "job" where they don't earn their wages, or $50 in an envelope after a good game?

I'm not condoning those actions by Bush or others when I say that. Just saying I can't imagine such actions being viewed as unusual by an NFL GM. The only change would be the fact he was caught, and the resulting PR implications and possible distraction to my team.

You'r eprobably right. In reality this is a bigger political media deal than anything we really care about. Last year ESPN went all out against Tressel and Ohio State over Clarrett. ESPN manufactured stories to make a story that proved to be baseless. At least this time they have something real and tangiable.Also, where is this different than former basketball coach Jim O'Brien giving $6000 to a student that wasn't even NCAA eligable? The program got smacked pretty good for that. In USC's case Bush and his family recieved preferencial treatment in this case. That should be cause for more concern than the O'Brien case.

Add this to the stories of the USC alum that owns the high profile restaurant and is treating recruits to some benefits and you begin to realize they tak quite a few liberties that don't exactly comply with NCAA rules.

But, you'd be hard pressed to find a school/booster that doesn't do something similar.

 

[T Man]

Not saying Reggie is innocent, but a couple of comments:

#1 This country is in the midst of a wild "speculative bubble" in real estate values. This is best evidenced by examining the ratio of "house values" to "rent values". These ratios are at record highs and in the view of many are not sustainable. Rent levels are well below related mortgage levels in most areas of the country that have experienced real estate appreciation over the past decade.

#2 Is the more "interesting issue". Hypothetically, say that a "Marketing Company" starts "courting" the parents of a college star. The athlete is not brought into the "loop" of any of these arrangements. In fact, a guy like Bush has had folks chasing after him on a 24/7 basis for 2 years. As long as he himself doesn't accept "cash" , " cars", etc, he assumes that he's kept himself "clean". Is it reasonable to expect that such a player while at college would reasonably "audit" (and most of these guys aren't business majors) every type of car lease, house lease, etc that their parents have independently entered into? My answer is NO. I do not know (or really terribly care) as to the official NCAA position in this area. Kansas University offered Danny Manning's dad a job to help entice Danny to go to KU. I don't know how explicit New Era was with Mr and Mrs Bush, but if they were smart they would have employed the right level of "vagueness" or lack of "linkage" between the house lease and Reggie. Using someone else's math on an earlier post, let's say that the mortgage payment on this house was $5,000/month and let's that at least some rental levels in this market would support a 50% lease factor ($2,500 per month). Could the Bush's afford $2,500 per month? I don't know. Let's say that they were given a sweetheart deal of $1,500 a month without Reggie knowing the particulars. Over 1 year that's a total of a whopping $12,000 (~ the cost of 3 West Coast business trips for east coast marketeer to pursue a hot "west coast" property).

I'm not saying that the fact pattern is exactly like I've layed out in #2 above, but it could be and if New Era was "smart" about it it probably is pretty close. Unless there is a lot more to this story than above, this should not be a major NCAA transgression (did USC even know?, should USC "audit" every job offer or transaction entered into by every athletes parents to assure "arms length" dealings?)

For someone to say that the character flaws inherent in this type of situation are similar to the baggage that a Randy Moss, Chris Henry, Onterrio Smith brought into the NFL is ludicrous.

I understand your point, but it omits 3 major factors:1. THe Griffins wrote their name in the wet cement while the house was being built. Not too many "renters" do this.

2. THe articles mention that Winston Justice also had a deal with New Era (2 Trojans)

3. The NCAA does care about agent benefits to family members. THe "I didn't know card" Reggie is playing is irrelevant, even if true. To hold otherwise would open the NCAA up for agents giving parents and extended benefits to family members legally - the end around the rule.

REgardless, I think it does not affect Bush's status and is a non-issue as to him. IT is an issue to USC.

 

[T Man]

...

The point is that Bush was complicit in accepting compensation from a promoter when he knew it was wrong.  As an NFL GM, that makes him someone I'd be very leery of.  Eventually he'll may try to screw me & my team over if this is his mindset - that the rules don't apply to him, that he places his own well being above that of the team and will engage in behavior he knows to be wrong to further his own ends.

I'd much rather deal with a college kid busted for pot during his sophomore year than to take a risk on a kid who did what Bush allegedly did, if in fact I knew it to be true.

As an NFL GM, I'd think that probably made him fit in with at least 50% of the other players already on my NFL team. Only difference would be, he got caught.Or is it just cynicism on my part to believe that a lot of the starters at major programs have received something from a booster that if known would in fact violate NCAA rules? Maybe not something major like a car or house, but a "job" where they don't earn their wages, or $50 in an envelope after a good game?

I'm not condoning those actions by Bush or others when I say that. Just saying I can't imagine such actions being viewed as unusual by an NFL GM. The only change would be the fact he was caught, and the resulting PR implications and possible distraction to my team.

You'r eprobably right. In reality this is a bigger political media deal than anything we really care about. Last year ESPN went all out against Tressel and Ohio State over Clarrett. ESPN manufactured stories to make a story that proved to be baseless. At least this time they have something real and tangiable.Also, where is this different than former basketball coach Jim O'Brien giving $6000 to a student that wasn't even NCAA eligable? The program got smacked pretty good for that. In USC's case Bush and his family recieved preferencial treatment in this case. That should be cause for more concern than the O'Brien case.

Add this to the stories of the USC alum that owns the high profile restaurant and is treating recruits to some benefits and you begin to realize they tak quite a few liberties that don't exactly comply with NCAA rules.

But, you'd be hard pressed to find a school/booster that doesn't do something similar.

Yeah, but this is USC

 

[Wilbur Wood]

Not saying Reggie is innocent, but a couple of comments:

#1  This country is in the midst of a wild "speculative bubble" in real estate values. This is best evidenced by examining the ratio of  "house values" to "rent values".  These ratios are at record highs and in the view of many are not sustainable.  Rent levels are well below related mortgage levels in most areas of the country that have experienced real estate appreciation over the past decade.

#2  Is the more "interesting issue".  Hypothetically, say that a "Marketing Company" starts "courting" the parents of a college star.  The athlete is not brought into the "loop" of any of these arrangements.  In fact, a guy like Bush has had folks chasing after him on a 24/7 basis for 2 years.  As long as he himself doesn't accept "cash" , " cars", etc, he assumes that he's kept himself "clean".  Is it reasonable to expect that such a player while at college would reasonably "audit" (and most of these guys aren't business majors) every type of car lease, house lease, etc that their parents have independently entered into?  My answer is NO.  I do not know (or really terribly care) as to the official NCAA position in this area.  Kansas University offered Danny Manning's dad a job to help entice Danny to go to KU.  I don't know how explicit New Era was with Mr and Mrs Bush, but if they were smart they would have employed the right level of "vagueness" or lack of "linkage" between the house lease and Reggie.  Using someone else's math on an earlier post, let's say that the mortgage payment on this house was $5,000/month and let's that at least some rental levels in this market would support a 50% lease factor ($2,500 per month).  Could the Bush's afford $2,500 per month?  I don't know.  Let's say that they were given a sweetheart deal of $1,500 a month without Reggie knowing the particulars.  Over 1 year that's a total of a whopping $12,000 (~ the cost of 3 West Coast business trips for east coast marketeer to pursue a hot "west coast" property).

I'm not saying that the fact pattern is exactly like I've layed out in #2 above, but it could be and if New Era was "smart" about it it probably is pretty close.  Unless there is a lot more to this story than above, this should not be a major NCAA transgression (did USC even know?,  should USC "audit" every job offer or transaction entered into by every athletes parents to assure "arms length" dealings?)

For someone to say that the character flaws inherent in this type of situation are similar to the baggage that a Randy Moss, Chris Henry, Onterrio Smith brought into the NFL is ludicrous.

I understand your point, but it omits 3 major factors:1. THe Griffins wrote their name in the wet cement while the house was being built. Not too many "renters" do this.

2. THe articles mention that Winston Justice also had a deal with New Era (2 Trojans)

3. The NCAA does care about agent benefits to family members. THe "I didn't know card" Reggie is playing is irrelevant, even if true. To hold otherwise would open the NCAA up for agents giving parents and extended benefits to family members legally - the end around the rule.

REgardless, I think it does not affect Bush's status and is a non-issue as to him. IT is an issue to USC.

I hear you but:#1 Name in cement is a non-factor (IMO). Perhaps the parents were envisioning their soon-to-be status to own places like that house outright. Who knows? Who Cares?

#2 Don't know any of the specifics in the Winston Justice case. Again New Era is a corporation. It is not in their interest (long-term) to go blatantly "over the line". Just says that New Era was targetting high profile USC players. Okay.

#3 This is the essence of the matter. My point is that "Benefits" can be very gray. Is Danny Manning's dad getting a job that pays him $50,000 a year more than his prior year, plus attractive relocation benefits constitute "Benefits"? A local BMW dealer structures a "creative car lease" with back-end loaded payments affords low income parent opportunity to drive "hot wheels" a year before the arrival of the official Gravy Train -- Are these "Benefits" or "Probability-Based underwriting" on the part of the car dealer. Similar type of deals within the confines of a house lease. I DO NOT KNOW THE FACTS. My point is that New Era is a company that presumably would attempt to structure this type of transaction in a manner that would somewhat careful. There may be much more to this story, but what I've seen to date could have been implemented close to the manner that I'd described in which case it would boil down a "pi$$ing match" over "Benefits. Much different than cold hard cash in Reggie's pocket.

 

[GregR_2]

...

The point is that Bush was complicit in accepting compensation from a promoter when he knew it was wrong. As an NFL GM, that makes him someone I'd be very leery of. Eventually he'll may try to screw me & my team over if this is his mindset - that the rules don't apply to him, that he places his own well being above that of the team and will engage in behavior he knows to be wrong to further his own ends.

I'd much rather deal with a college kid busted for pot during his sophomore year than to take a risk on a kid who did what Bush allegedly did, if in fact I knew it to be true.

As an NFL GM, I'd think that probably made him fit in with at least 50% of the other players already on my NFL team. Only difference would be, he got caught.Or is it just cynicism on my part to believe that a lot of the starters at major programs have received something from a booster that if known would in fact violate NCAA rules? Maybe not something major like a car or house, but a "job" where they don't earn their wages, or $50 in an envelope after a good game?

I'm not condoning those actions by Bush or others when I say that. Just saying I can't imagine such actions being viewed as unusual by an NFL GM. The only change would be the fact he was caught, and the resulting PR implications and possible distraction to my team.

You'r eprobably right. In reality this is a bigger political media deal than anything we really care about. Last year ESPN went all out against Tressel and Ohio State over Clarrett. ESPN manufactured stories to make a story that proved to be baseless. At least this time they have something real and tangiable.Also, where is this different than former basketball coach Jim O'Brien giving $6000 to a student that wasn't even NCAA eligable? The program got smacked pretty good for that. In USC's case Bush and his family recieved preferencial treatment in this case. That should be cause for more concern than the O'Brien case.

Add this to the stories of the USC alum that owns the high profile restaurant and is treating recruits to some benefits and you begin to realize they tak quite a few liberties that don't exactly comply with NCAA rules.

But, you'd be hard pressed to find a school/booster that doesn't do something similar.

Yeah, but this is USC

Wondering just how much of that belief might be my cynicism, I posted at a site that I frequent where several users we've known for years are known to be former Div I asst basketball coaches and scouts.So far the feedback is that it isn't just me being cynical. One person formerly associated with a major program in Florida listed a variety of violations he was aware of in both football and basketball, ranging from players normally having papers written for them by others, to perks for players, prospects and prospect's coaches ranging from minor things, to outright cash payments, to even hiring of prostitutes for them.

Confirmation of which doesn't necessarily make me feel better. :( That it's probably rampant doesn't make Bush having done it right. But it probably confirms that for an NFL GM, hearing about such violations probably isn't out of the ordinary... the having to deal with the public nature of this one would be the biggest stickler.

 

[T Man]

...

The point is that Bush was complicit in accepting compensation from a promoter when he knew it was wrong.  As an NFL GM, that makes him someone I'd be very leery of.  Eventually he'll may try to screw me & my team over if this is his mindset - that the rules don't apply to him, that he places his own well being above that of the team and will engage in behavior he knows to be wrong to further his own ends.

I'd much rather deal with a college kid busted for pot during his sophomore year than to take a risk on a kid who did what Bush allegedly did, if in fact I knew it to be true.

As an NFL GM, I'd think that probably made him fit in with at least 50% of the other players already on my NFL team. Only difference would be, he got caught.Or is it just cynicism on my part to believe that a lot of the starters at major programs have received something from a booster that if known would in fact violate NCAA rules? Maybe not something major like a car or house, but a "job" where they don't earn their wages, or $50 in an envelope after a good game?

I'm not condoning those actions by Bush or others when I say that. Just saying I can't imagine such actions being viewed as unusual by an NFL GM. The only change would be the fact he was caught, and the resulting PR implications and possible distraction to my team.

You'r eprobably right. In reality this is a bigger political media deal than anything we really care about. Last year ESPN went all out against Tressel and Ohio State over Clarrett. ESPN manufactured stories to make a story that proved to be baseless. At least this time they have something real and tangiable.Also, where is this different than former basketball coach Jim O'Brien giving $6000 to a student that wasn't even NCAA eligable? The program got smacked pretty good for that. In USC's case Bush and his family recieved preferencial treatment in this case. That should be cause for more concern than the O'Brien case.

Add this to the stories of the USC alum that owns the high profile restaurant and is treating recruits to some benefits and you begin to realize they tak quite a few liberties that don't exactly comply with NCAA rules.

But, you'd be hard pressed to find a school/booster that doesn't do something similar.

Yeah, but this is USC

Wondering just how much of that belief might be my cynicism, I posted at a site that I frequent where several users we've known for years are known to be former Div I asst basketball coaches and scouts.So far the feedback is that it isn't just me being cynical. One person formerly associated with a major program in Florida listed a variety of violations he was aware of in both football and basketball, ranging from players normally having papers written for them by others, to perks for players, prospects and prospect's coaches ranging from minor things, to outright cash payments, to even hiring of prostitutes for them.

Confirmation of which doesn't necessarily make me feel better. :( That it's probably rampant doesn't make Bush having done it right. But it probably confirms that for an NFL GM, hearing about such violations probably isn't out of the ordinary... the having to deal with the public nature of this one would be the biggest stickler.

No sense in dragging the University of Tennessee into the equation.